Hey, BHG,
While I'm bothering you, what do you think of this new branch on the Schools category tree, Category:Schools by type by country? Could be useful or redundant, I'm not sure. It's difficult with any "by country" new category system as there are so many countries that then need to be looked at and categorized. Liz Read! Talk! 17:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Lamao kucch bhi :( Mr. Intelligent disrespect 1000 ( talk) 09:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)huh
Hi, You have improved one or two of my articles in the past, this one has fallen foul of the deletionists: /info/en/?search=Draft:The_Sankey_Family_Photography_Collection Is there any chance of improving it or even releasing it into article space? There are a lot of Sankey photographs already on Wikipedia and it would be good to show the origins of them. Peterrivington ( talk) 20:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
fallen foul of the deletionistsare a very good way to lose my attention. They usually mean that the creator is annoyed that WP:GNG applies to their work, as it does to everyone else's.
Hello BrownHairedGirl, I haven't made any edits on this page. Kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinvidia ( talk • contribs) 10:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
That's fine BrownHairedGirl. I saw the ping on the page making reference to the non existent categories I added as well and I want to thank you for that (I'm not sure I thanked you earlier for the corrections made). Have a wonderful day. Kinvidia ( talk) 14:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
enough already -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Please do not reverse a correct collaboration. Check out the discussion session to which I presented the sources of the information and also check out the source linked to the changed information. The player in question gave an interview to the local newspaper telling his story and telling which neighborhood in the city he was born and raised in. There is no official document linked to the article, being that, therefore, the most reliable source. The source is in Portuguese, but I believe that in 2021 this will no longer be a problem in the virtual world, Google itself translates the article. [1]. -- Alex Cambraia ( talk) 17:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl. Thanks for your help...
LewisEisen ( talk) 19:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi thanks for noticing and correcting the live categories at my draft of Joseph Beecham. I am normally very careful about making [[:Categories and not [[Categories: - I think I've only done it once or twice in 12 years. I really should get on and finish the article. That makes me your April Fool for this year. Best wishes, > MinorProphet ( talk) 20:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl. I saw the edits that you made on my sandbox and I appreciate them, but since I submitted the Margaret G. Hays from my second sandbox, I just made the changes you suggested on that page. Thank you for the suggestion. Sometimes the end is only the beginning... ( talk) 17:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello!
Thank you for your suggestions! I modified the draft. I hope that everything is fine now. Please let us know whether other sections of our article on the Digital Markets Act should be improved.
Ana.Rusu.97 (
talk)
21:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
delete-redirect
userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. Done Thank you
Thanks for
your suggestion to comment out categories on my draft page
Spncrinc (
talk)
23:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Just had a quick glance at your user page: I also have my own collection of gems. PS Thinking about the mythical Grainne, I remember reading Rosemary Sutcliffe's The High Deeds of Finn MacCool (published only a few years after JFK was shot), and although many have kissed the Cloch na Blarnan I once (having been gifted at my birth with the silver tongue) made my way to Cnoc na Teamhrach and kissed the Lia Fáil instead. And here I am on WP... MinorProphet ( talk) 23:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for catching that. I normally mask the category for my draft pages till they go live, but I seem to have missed that in haste. Mea culpa. Thank you. Appreciate it. Arunram ( talk) 07:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, thanks for your help... I am a total noob on Wikipedia (I'm sure you know this already) I dont even know if this is the right way to discuss with you, but sick is life... So as I said thanks for the help, 2 things how did you even see my draft, I thought it was saved to my profile as a work in progress... nothing to hide as such, but mind blown... point and you knew this was coming right I didn't really understand your instruction and did you make the edit? Because it doesnt look any different to what you advised. As I say it's just a draft that I'm working on, I don't know anyone could see it but you help is most welcome. Hope I havent posted this message in the wrong place. Guess I will find out Nick M Rivers ( talk) 22:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
[[Category:]]
, this automatically and by default creates a live link to your draft article in one or more category lists in Wikipedia mainspace. For example, if your draft has the entry [[Category:1825 births]]
, clicking 'Publish' will make a link to the live list
Category:1825 births.:
immediately preceding the category, such as [[:Category:1825 births]]
: this temporarily prevents your draft appearing in the mainspace lists and makes it look and behave like an ordinary Wikilink. If there is no colon, the underlying software also creates a behind-the-scenes list of something like "User Drafts linking to Category pages" (I don't actually know). See
WP:USERNOCAT.IF [user draft] OR IF [sandbox] THEN LINK=NO]
, (I might be wrong) but it has been like this for something like twelve years. I don't know why. Anyway, if and when your article goes live in mainspace, just delete the initial colon for each category, make an edit summary like "Making categories live" and click 'Publish' again. Your approved mainspace article will now be linked to the live list of all people born in 1825. This may happen 'automatically' anyway, depending on which process you choose to submit your draft.
MinorProphet (
talk)
08:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)@MinorProphet Thank you makes absolute sense, I just jumped right in and got started by copying and pasting an already live page into my Sandbox, so as you mention the categories would have been live. The work around is cool too, I will need to update them to be relevant to the piece anyway but hadnt realised there significance, which you explain above :-) Thanks again
Hey, My Question is Why is your User Page section Administration ship Cut off Muhammad Furqan Butt ( talk) 16:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Why did you specify {{DEFAULTSORT:Law by year}}
with
this edit? Someone just
changed that to {{DEFAULTSORT:Flagicon}}
but I don't understand why the Flagicon template would specify any default sort. –
wbm1058 (
talk)
18:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, BHG,
I can't figure out how Category:Category got on Institutes of technology in Ireland or how to remove it. There are no recent edits to the page and I don't see how it appeared or a way to remove it. Ideas? Liz Read! Talk! 17:58, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Hey BHG, always great to see your continuing good work. I wanted to let you know I plan to nominate the Category:Cultural infrastructure . . . category structure for deletion in the next couple of days; will post the discussion link in this thread once the nom is up and the cats are tagged (rather than hitting your talk with every individual notice). Wanted to let you know in advance as a courtesy so the nom did not take you by surprise. Will leave further discussion to the nom, and look forward to your contribution there. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 21:56, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Category:Members of the Parliament of England (pre-1707) by parliament has been nominated for splitting. 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. Furicorn ( talk) 21:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Category:Alopoglossidae has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, again, BHG,
One thing that has bothered me over the years is that if an editor labels a category a "Tracking Category" or puts an Empty Category tag on a category, it's basically hands off. It's left alone and doesn't seem to be subject to deletion even if it is empty, it is no longer serving its original purpose or is just no longer useful. And when I went to look for policy to support these tags, when a category is labeled a Tracking Category or when an Empty Category tag is appropriate, I can't find anything. A couple years ago, I did a search for how many categories are labeled as Empty Categories and I think it was 20,000. Of course, I think we have millions of categories so that is just a drop in a bucket but it shouldn't just be a free pass when we have procedures to deal with categories.
This issue came up today because an editor created a new Tracking Category which I'm sure no one else knows about and I went looking to see what the policy is surrounding them. Thoughts? Liz Read! Talk! 01:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Evening fellow project member, we have reached a consensus that the section Members of Parliament for every local constituency needs to list out the successes. To do this, we will form a comma-separated list (adding <br> if more than 3 successful elections in a row, so as to make a taller table line for any re-elected MP(s). i.e. always to show the elections, not the first election gain that person was voted in at. Since 1885 at least.
Could you let me know, clicking on this part of my talk page if you could help by doing the Seats in any given county (or counties)? - Adam37 Talk 18:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
If so, ⇒ INSERT: (if you'd like to keep this page as a tab open, to assist with doing a fairly old but current seat) ALL/ANY APPLICABLE OF:-
[after 1st two table technical (coding lines) left intact]...
! Elected/re-elected ! colspan="2" | Member ! Party |- | [[1885 United Kingdom general election|1885]] '''[add comma and paste from choices below/own copying and pasting based on results table, including BY-ELECTION WIN OF SAME PERSON, not new line like below, if re-elected]''' | [[1886 United Kingdom general election|1886]] | [[1892 United Kingdom general election|1892]] | [[1895 United Kingdom general election|1895]], [[1900 United Kingdom general election|1900]], [[1906 United Kingdom general election|1906]], <br>[[January 1910 United Kingdom general election|Jan 1910]], [[December 1910 United Kingdom general election|Dec 1910]] | [[1918 United Kingdom general election|1918]] | [[1922 United Kingdom general election|1922]] | [[1923 United Kingdom general election|1923]] | [[1924 United Kingdom general election|1924]] | [[1929 United Kingdom general election|1929]] | [[1931 United Kingdom general election|1931]] | [[1935 United Kingdom general election|1935]] | [[1945 United Kingdom general election|1945]] | [[1950 United Kingdom general election|1950]] | [[1951 United Kingdom general election|1951]] | [[1955 United Kingdom general election|1955]] | [[1957 United Kingdom general election|1957]] | [[1964 United Kingdom general election|1964]] | [[1966 United Kingdom general election|1966]] | [[1970 United Kingdom general election|1970]] | [[February 1974 United Kingdom general election|Feb. 1974]] | [[October 1974 United Kingdom general election|Oct. 1974]] | [[1979 United Kingdom general election|1979]] | [[1983 United Kingdom general election|1983]] | [[1987 United Kingdom general election|1987]] | [[1992 United Kingdom general election|1992]] | [[1997 United Kingdom general election|1997]] | [[2001 United Kingdom general election|2001]] | [[2005 United Kingdom general election|2005]] | [[2010 United Kingdom general election|2010]] |[[2015 United Kingdom general election|2015]], [[2017 United Kingdom general election|2017]], [[2019 United Kingdom general election|2019]]
At the very least our FTTP democracy thanks you for your very time in reading this.- Adam37 Talk 18:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Just apologise for your delay in Chessrat's point followed by his table and/or my same-time roughly point about it being a great solution and demolishing the concerns/points for the status quo. If you don't want to then just accept you have equally caused a lot of time and thought to be spent on something which looked like a done deal. In any court of opinion.- Adam37 Talk 20:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm currently in the process of working to implement some wikiproject mergers and accidentally made some duplicate categories for one thing due to a capitalization error in the original categories. Could you please move the categories listed at Category:Flood_articles_by_quality to have "Flood" instead of "flood"? Also, the Category:Flood articles by importance (lower case "flood" categories) for importance are empty since I changed/fixed the parameter. Sorry about that. Noah Talk 12:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hiya, I would appreciate some advice on making this draft page acceptable for publication - I saw you've edited a few Nursing Journal pages, so thought you might have some good insights? Tannim101 ( talk) 21:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello Brown Haired Girl,
Two years ago, you posted an article on John Archibald Mills. He was an MP in the Alberta legislature. I have no edits for you, just a thank you. I’m sure my grandfather would be quite flattered.
Beeronysus Beeronysus ( talk) 02:32, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm currently in the process of working to implement some wikiproject mergers and accidentally made some duplicate categories for one thing due to a capitalization error in the original categories. Could you please move the categories listed at Category:Flood_articles_by_quality to have "Flood" instead of "flood"? Also, the Category:Flood articles by importance (lower case "flood" categories) for importance are empty since I changed/fixed the parameter. Sorry about that. Noah Talk 12:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hiya, I would appreciate some advice on making this draft page acceptable for publication - I saw you've edited a few Nursing Journal pages, so thought you might have some good insights? Tannim101 ( talk) 21:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello Brown Haired Girl,
Two years ago, you posted an article on John Archibald Mills. He was an MP in the Alberta legislature. I have no edits for you, just a thank you. I’m sure my grandfather would be quite flattered.
Beeronysus Beeronysus ( talk) 02:32, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi There! Thanks for your heads up that I'd left the category tags in place on my user sandbox page User:Thedwan/sandbox. I was working on my first new article creation recently - Alex McKinnon Cup - and I forgot to wipe the Sandbox page afterwards. :) Thedwan ( talk) 10:32, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I have created a Draft Article: Draft:Bugha and don't worry it has Reference from Forbes, The New York Times, Arab News, Wall Street Journal, BBC , CNN, ESPN, and many more and i would like if you check it out and hopefully approve it Unnecessary Invention ( talk) 11:50, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Ok :)) Unnecessary Invention ( talk) 17:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Having an intention to write an article concerning teaching English pronunciation, methinks, it seems to be exceedingly important to know tha authors of the most popular SBs in your country. I think, these are Ann Baker "Tree or three", "Ship or sheep"; English Pronunciation in Use ; Get rid of your accent; O'Connor and Fletcher "Sounds English Am I right? Is it possible to study it without a good instructor? Роман Сергеевич Сидоров ( talk) 10:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that - someone userfied it for me at my request after they'd speedy-deleted it, and I haven't got round to doing anything with it yet! Pam D 20:29, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
When will you ?? Travis Damian Houle ( talk) 06:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Category:Indian Institute of Technology Madras people has been nominated for 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. Oculi ( talk) 10:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl. Thanks for the suggestion on JoshMortonMusic Sandbox. Are you available to write wikipedia pages for payment? I need help, I'm kinda lost
Pretty please with a cherry on top. -JoshMortonMusic JoshMortonMusic ( talk) 03:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I wish you well in all that do. JoshMortonMusic ( talk) 12:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, BHG,
I was surprised to see this category pop up on the Daily Empty Category list so I have placed what I think are appropriate categories in it but it's odd, there is a priest category for Northern Ireland but only a bishops category for the Republic of Ireland. Since you know both categories and Ireland very well, I thought I'd ask you to double-check and see if this was emptied out-of-process. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Liz and JJMC89. There is an editor who does a lot of categorisation in that area, and has a long history of out-of-process category emptying etc, and another who is prolific but has not great judgement, so this happens not infrequently. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 07:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
a sweet gift for a sweet person
U.J (
talk)
18:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello! As a longtime and extremely frequent reader (if not exactly much of an editor) of Wikipedia perusing an unrelated topic, I stumbled across the existence of something called ArbCom and became quite curious as to how this body operates, and fascinated by the workings and history of that body. Rather inexplicably becoming more and more absorbed, I've spent much of the last 72 hours reading through several of the cases they have ruled on in the last several years, as well as surrounding materials such as RfA requests and the FRAMGATE saga. I say this only to provide an explanation as to why a user with only a single 12-year-old edit knows or cares about this; it is because I read the Portals case and some surrounding materials during this process, discovered that you remain a highly active contributor, and have a question for you.
So far as I can tell, the last thing that happened connected to those events was in October 2020 with a second RfA page in which you are renominated, with an accompanying Arbcom motion lifting your topic bans for that second RfA. However, the RfA itself seems to have been abandoned.
In a statement after the close of Portals, you expressed great discomfort regarding certain findings of fact which you felt would be a permanent stain on your record. As someone who is approximately as uninvolved with all this as it is possible to be and literally only knows about you because of that Arbcom case, I think the stain is not quite so bad as you thought, then or now. What matters more, I would say, is that despite having the both the stated intention and ample justification for abandoning this project, you did not do so at any point. The fact that you are still actively helping 15 months later speaks both to your extraordinary dedication to the project and to your subsequent ability to abide by a ruling with which you clearly strongly disagreed (otherwise you would probably be blocked, rather than actively editing). For most (perhaps even all) of the other participants in the cases I read, I have been less impressed with their subsequent record.
As I said at the start, I am not really an editor here, but I most certainly am a frequent reader, and it's in my interest that the high quality of content here is maintained. My sense is that you probably have nearly as good as case for reinstatement after an ArbCom desysop as it is possible to have from a "subsequent activity" standpoint, so my question is...whatever happened to your second RfA, and have you any interest in going back to it?
ShashakiroSH ( talk) 20:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Women in Red | May 2021, Volume 7, Issue 5, Numbers 184, 188, 197, 198
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 21:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Thank you for your correction/suggestion. - /info/en/?search=User:Gladiator-Citizen/sandbox - never done that well with Categories - I do not understand your correction, but I appreciate it, and will follow it for other categories. Could you direct me to a precise reference which I could study and would help me understand. Much thanks again. Gladiator-Citizen ( talk) 23:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
[[Categories:
towards the end, it places a link to your sandbox/draft article into a live listing on Wikipedia, such as (just for example)
Category:British artists. As far as I know, this is a failing of Wikipedia's underlying software rather than anything you have done. WP is complex, and telling new editors about this small problem hasn't been adequately addressed. Since the content of sandboxes, drafts etc. hasn't yet been approved for main article space, and 'we' don't want ordinary users of WP thinking that your sandbox is has been fully approved, placing a :
before the category e.g. [[:Category:British artists]]
simply prevents this happening. If and when your article goes live, all you you need to do is remove the initial colon, and your article will be part of the behind-the-scenes listings of all articles referring (if only in part) to British artists. You could try using {{
Draft categories}} but it seems like piling on another level of incomprehension to me. See also
Help:Category and
Preparing drafts. Best of luck.
MinorProphet (
talk)
02:18, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Thank you so much @MinorProphet - very much appreciate your time and information - I will keep trying to understand - I am now quite exhausted from finishing the article but my energy will come back! 118.127.122.147 ( talk) 09:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for the edits on my wiki article! Much appreciated. Eemakagoma ( talk) 16:56, 1 May 2021 (UTC) |
Help in getting this draft Verified. /info/en/?search=Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood The Subject is a professional Asian football confederation, B licensed Coach and has good search results. Darzubair ( talk) 11:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Songs written by Mahmoud Darwish has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Richhoncho ( talk) 17:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Apologies, forgot about these when I pasted text about Sonia Bassey back into my sandbox (in case the page was suddenly deleted). I will try to remember about inactivating these commands in future.-- MerielGJones ( talk) 08:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Ambassadors of China to Eswatini has been nominated for 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. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Paco Paco songs has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Richhoncho ( talk) 23:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Articles containing Luo (Kenya and Tanzania)-language text indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Interface administrator changes
oversight
will be renamed to suppress
. This is for
technical reasons. You can comment at
T112147 if you have objections.Hi. I noticed that you were adding templates to articles which are linked from the templates. One such example is: . In this case, this article is a generic term and the addition of the template does not make sense, despite the article being linked from the template. What are your thoughts? -- DaxServer ( talk) 16:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello again! Could you add the templates to Navboxes if present, like here :) -- DaxServer ( talk) 10:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Would you kindly add template {{Portalbar|India|Aviation}}
to Airports and related topics in India related articles? This would be helpful, that is of course if AWB has automation for it. Else, I would try to do it. If possible "Topics of x" template is helpful. One example is
Dabolim Airport. Thanks for your much help :)
-- DaxServer (
talk)
18:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
I usually use {{userpage blanked|reason=and the draft content has been moved to [[]] per [[WP:FAKEARTICLE]]}}
as might provide slightly more information. Just letting you know in case you didn't know about the template; your practice is probably fine as well. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (
talk)
18:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I just edited Nicola Sturgeon, and lo and behold, the previous edit was by you! Thank you for sticking around on Wikipedia even after what the ArbCom did to you, and I hope all of us appreciate that nothing on Wikipedia really matters. :) Egroeg5 ( talk) 20:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi BHG, I notice you created Category:Wales AMs 2021–, though since 2020 the elected members have been known as Members of the Senedd, or MSs. Maybe it will be quicker to change if you can request a speedy rename, as the creator, to Category:Wales MSs 2021–. Diolch/Thanks. Sionk ( talk) 01:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Time to remove the tags? Srnec ( talk) 23:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
BHG,
Would it be possible for you to create a Newspaper Establishments and Newspaper disestablishments templates something along the lines of Companies established in the year/disestablished in the year? I ask you because I know you have done template work around WP and that you recently did work on or created Newspaper establishment categories. I've created two myself and spent time filling some of those already created. Thanks in advance for any help. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I hope you are doing fine.
Since you were the last person to edit the wiki page for IndiGo, I wanted to let you know that the airline is planning to induct four Airbus A321P2F. The airline is expecting to receive its first A321 freighter by June of 2021 and start its freighter operations soon after that. I would highly appreciate it if you add/direct this to a person who can add this into the fleet section of the airline's Wikipedia page. (I would have done it by myself however I don't know how to do it and am just figuring out Wikipedia's editing side :sweat-smile:)
Source for this: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/pandemic-effect-indigo-to-induct-freighters-in-its-fleet/articleshow/82183050.cms
Thank you and good day! -- Hari.shreyas08 ( talk) 07:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
BHG,
I've noticed you added 'Companies established in year' to these pages. There is only one problem. These categories are already categorized entertainment companies established in. So that's overcategorization since Entertainment companies is a subcategory of Companies. I'm kind of lukewarm towards mass media being subcategorized entertainment. Before I have over 150 redlights popping up on your page as I revert the companies established you added, I'd like your thoughts on this. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello BHG. You've been on a spree and now there are over 120 articles in the Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations. It is going to take some time to empty the cat so if you can hold off on adding anymore tags for a bit it will give the few of us who work on them a chance to catch up. You see it only takes a second to add the tag but it can take several minutes (or longer in some cases) to format the refs. Add to that the fact that other editors will be adding articles to the cat as well and I'm not sure how many days it will take to get to all of these. Anything you can do will be appreciated. MarnetteD| Talk 00:52, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@ MarnetteD, I have been thinking some more about this, and want to run my thoughts past you.
AFAIK, all other cleanup tags are added simply when there is a problem that needs to be cleaned up. Sometimes the issue is resolved promptly and the tag is removed promptly, and sometimes the problem remain unfixed for years.
That may mean that few pages are tagged, or it may mean lots of pages have the tag. What drives the tagging is simply whether editors identify a problem, so the number of currently-tagged pages is simply a measure of the balance between the problem being identified and the problem being resolved.
For example, {{ Citation needed}} is on over 400,000 pages in Category:All articles with unsourced statements. Many other tags have similarly large backlogs, while some are cleared more thoroughly, e.g. Category:Unreferenced BLPs, where the backlog is not too horrible.
I can't see any reason to treat {{ Cleanup bare URLs}} any differently. I have scanned Template:Cleanup bare URLs and Template talk:Cleanup bare URLs, and I don't see any guidance to hold back from tagging, or even any discussion suggesting restraint.
So my inclination now is to finish my AWB run, and tag the more than 1,000 pages identified in my AWB run, and currently awaiting tagging.
However I am conscious of all your good work filling the refs, and I don't want to discourage you by swamping your in-tray. So it occurred to me that I could hold off until the end of the month, and then tag them all on 31 May. That would leave a backlog in Category:Articles with bare URLs for citations from May 2021, but thereafter Category:Articles with bare URLs for citations from June 2021 would include only the latest additions. I hope that would be a win-win solution for everyone.
How does that sound to you? I would also welcome input from anyone else watching this talk page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 12:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
it is not a tiny change), then sadly I can only conclude that you are being perverse.
I'd like to seek your help in making my first FL here. I've already did it on Urdu Wikipedia but please share your ideas about List of students of Mahmud Hasan Deobandi. Might be out of our topic arena, but "advises" would be helpful because you're "Brown Haired Girl". Thanks. ─ The Aafī (talk) 01:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Dear BrownHairedGirl. Thank you for your recent attention to the articles Henry Dillon, 13th Viscount Dillon, Alexander Stewart (1746–1831), and Frederick Stewart, 4th Marquess of Londonderry. Your replacements of Member of Parliament with Member of Parliament (United Kingdom) are clearly improving the articles. However, why did you replace <br> with <br /> at the same occasion? HTML5 prefers <br>, as I understand it. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 11:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
<br>
tags is because the unclosed tags breaks some syntax highlighters, which makes it harder for editors to maintain the wiki markup.very few people still use that old highlighter? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
very few people still use that old highlighter... so I will assume that there is no evidence, just an assumption. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St John Brodrick, 1st Earl of Midleton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
Apologies for the regional list succession box on Maree Todd, I had seen someone else use them but without a predecesssor and successor to denote it was a regional list, but I do acknowledge that having it like that is not especially useful. -- ScottishNardualElf ( talk) 17:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Christopher, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 20:30, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
I have no further interest in any opinion of yours that involves me. Your communication with me, about me, whether pinging me or not, will cease, please. This includes any talk page, broadly construed. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 22:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
For the record, some links, so that they end up in my archive:
Note that this is for my records. It is not an invitation to Timtrent to post here again. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs)
BHG, I have had quite enough.
Please do not interact with me again. No pings, no replies, no messages, no answers, nothing, on any part of Wikipedia including talk pages, project pages, and the like.
Regards, doktorb words deeds 04:04, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Since everyone seems to be communicating their preferences regarding your interactions with them, I thought I'd join the fun. I haven't interacted with you much, but I'd welcome more interaction. The couple times I've run into you, you've always been on the right side of the argument, in my view. Some people just get angry when they're arguing against someone who is right most of the time. Cheers. —ScottyWong— 06:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, @ Scottywong and Sluzzelin: both for your support and for expressing it in a way that made me grin. We need to keep communicating with people we disagree with, and to distinguish clearly between disagreement and hostility/rudeness. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 12:18, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey, BHG,
You were the last editor to this category page and it popped up on the nightly Empty Category List. It says it's a maintenance category but it doesn't have an Empty Category tag on it so I'm not sure if it is really utilized much. As far as I know, Wikipedia bots correct any double redirects that exist. So, do you think it should be tagged as a perennially empty category or tag it CSD C1? Thanks in advance for offering your opinion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Women in Red | June 2021, Volume 7, Issue 6, Numbers 184, 188, 196, 199, 200, 201
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 18:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Why are you moving references back into headings? Per the MOS references do not belong in headings. I was moving them out of the heading and to the below the tables for that section. RJFJR ( talk) 22:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Irish theologians has been nominated for merging. 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. Rathfelder ( talk) 09:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have (hopefully) cleaned up the bare URL's on the article 2017 Cardiff Council election. Any chance you can tale a quick look and let me know if i have got it right? Thanks Benawu2 ( talk) 08:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey, it was actually me that removed the comapct table. It was a year ago, but I forgot. I left edit comments when I did it, but maybe I wasn't clear enough? All the constituency pages should have the same format, so I think you should reverse your reversal of my reversal to keep consistency. Happy to discuss though. -- Gharbhain ( talk) 11:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey BrownHairedGirl, I just saw that you placed a "bare url" template on the Leszek Borysiewicz article, suggesting there should be full citations. As I'm looking at the article, only 2 out 20 sources seem bare URLs. The other ones are citations. Rather than simply removing, I wanted to ask you on your thoughts first. Thank you. 2A02:1205:34E0:C0A0:C18:9DDB:194B:AABF ( talk) 18:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
To Beowrnhairedgirl You've added a header link re: bare urls! to John Francon Williams wiki page, Instead of adding the link, I'm unsure why you didn't just correct the links yourself? I thought the whole idea of Wikipedia was for people to assist one another with building pages of historical knowledge? By adding a link, off which I personally am not familiar with - I probably speak for many subscribers here - the message comes across in quite a threatening manner. Subscribers can willingly add knowledge and links to determine the knowledge is correct, but all subscribers are not technical wizards. If you are a wizard, perhaps it might be helpful to assist by using that knowledge. I'm sorry to sound a little perturbed, but I've noticed a lot of people delete, add headings, jumble paragraphs up, on wiki pages for no apparent reason, that becomes a little tiresome after a while. Only yesterday I noticed a subscriber deleted a 'Born in' category from a wiki page for no apparent reason, when the person the page is about was clearly 'born in' that region. Please help by correcting whatever the 'bare urls are ... or at least show how a subscriber does this procedure. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenseaocean ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
The bare urls template currently puts them in Category:Articles needing cleanup. This makes it impossible to find the articles that are put into cleanup for other reasons. Do you think it would be worth proposing that the categories be changed? (Perhaps to a sub category of cleanup?)
I take an interest in articles needing cleanup, but I'm not as interested in bare-urls other than getting in my way when looking for cleanup. I never bothered to proposing a change to the categorizing previously, but there are nearly 2000 articles added this month and since yester day it was less than 300 probably over 1500 are for bare urls.
Also, for those article titles "<year> <place> by-election" that have http://www.leighrayment.com/commons.htm as the only reference. Do you think they should be tagged as needing additional references?
Sorry about not responding faster to your previous message. RJFJR ( talk) 22:40, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
@ RJFJR, back to the issues you raised above. I will reply separately to them, to facilitate threaded discussion.
First, please note that your decision not to link the categories and templates you were referring to makes replying a bit more onerous. Please use links, as requested in the big editnotice shown above when you edit this page.
You write bare urls template currently puts them in Category:Articles needing cleanup. This makes it impossible to find the articles that are put into cleanup for other reasons. Do you think it would be worth proposing that the categories be changed? (Perhaps to a sub category of cleanup?)
{{
Cleanup bare URLs}} does not put anything in
Category:Articles needing cleanup; it puts them in [[:Category:Articles needing cleanup from <month year>]]. See e.g.
Francis Bryan, in
Category:Articles needing cleanup from May 2021 ... which has a header message This category combines all articles needing cleanup from May 2021 (2021-05) to enable us to work through the backlog more systematically
. So it's a catch-all category, which combines all the articles given any cleanup tag in that month.
Those who want to work on a specific issue can go to Category:Clean-up categories from May 2021, which has a subcat for each specific issue. So why remove any one cleanup tag from this part of dual system? I don't get why you would want to do that. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
@
RJFJR: you wrote for those article titles "<year> <place> by-election" that have
http://www.leighrayment.com/commons.htm as the only reference. Do you think they should be tagged as needing additional references?
I assume that refers to articles such 1874 Wigtown Burghs by-election, which you edited yesterday, then reverted. [24]
(Note that after our encounter yesterday, I did another AWB run to fix all the by-election articles with bare URL links to Rayment, using {{
Rayment-hc}}
instead of
http://www.leighrayment.com/commons.htm. See
these 502 edits).
Basically, my view is that those are mostly a set of abysmal sub-stubs whose failings are so deep that they could be tagged with a multitude of tags. There are several hundred such sub-stubs on Westminster by-elections, mostly created in a flurry by a small set of editors. They are basically pointless, because they simply restate the facts contained in lists: constituency name, name and party of outgoing MP and new MP.
Yes, a decent article can be written on nearly any by-election. (see e.g. my own efforts at inter alia 1869 Blackburn by-election, 1943 St Albans by-election, and 1919 St Albans by-election, plus many examples of fine work done by others). But these sub-stubs don't even try to add any value beyond the lists, and seem to be inadequately verified even for the few facts they assert.
As far as I can see, the cited references are often bogus in that in most cases it seems to me to improbable that the editors who created these page actually consulted the cited sources, which are nearly always one or both of FWS Craig's election results and/or Rayment. Here's why:
So I am fairly sure that these are kinda bogus refs: a mention of sources which would probably confirm roughly the facts asserted, but which are very unlikely to have actually been consulted. To my mind, that's no way to use sources ... but last time I tried to challenge an editor who was misusing citations in that way (about a decade ago), there was a shitstorm. I haven't the stomach for doing that again.
However, I don't think that a tag forest is needed for these sub-stubs. I would like something stronger than plain "stub", but until the community will accept a {{ abysmally-constructed-sub-stub-which-serves-no-purpose}}, I think that a stub tag is sufficient.
Anyway, I look fwd to hearing your thoughts in response. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Bougainvillean priests has been nominated for merging to ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Papua New Guinean priests. 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. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you help me in getting this Draft Published. The subject is a professional football coach from india. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood Dar zubair 07:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
click here to leave a new message for BrownHairedGirl | ||
BrownHairedGirl's archives | ||
---|---|---|
|
Hey, BHG,
While I'm bothering you, what do you think of this new branch on the Schools category tree, Category:Schools by type by country? Could be useful or redundant, I'm not sure. It's difficult with any "by country" new category system as there are so many countries that then need to be looked at and categorized. Liz Read! Talk! 17:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Lamao kucch bhi :( Mr. Intelligent disrespect 1000 ( talk) 09:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)huh
Hi, You have improved one or two of my articles in the past, this one has fallen foul of the deletionists: /info/en/?search=Draft:The_Sankey_Family_Photography_Collection Is there any chance of improving it or even releasing it into article space? There are a lot of Sankey photographs already on Wikipedia and it would be good to show the origins of them. Peterrivington ( talk) 20:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
fallen foul of the deletionistsare a very good way to lose my attention. They usually mean that the creator is annoyed that WP:GNG applies to their work, as it does to everyone else's.
Hello BrownHairedGirl, I haven't made any edits on this page. Kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinvidia ( talk • contribs) 10:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
That's fine BrownHairedGirl. I saw the ping on the page making reference to the non existent categories I added as well and I want to thank you for that (I'm not sure I thanked you earlier for the corrections made). Have a wonderful day. Kinvidia ( talk) 14:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
enough already -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Please do not reverse a correct collaboration. Check out the discussion session to which I presented the sources of the information and also check out the source linked to the changed information. The player in question gave an interview to the local newspaper telling his story and telling which neighborhood in the city he was born and raised in. There is no official document linked to the article, being that, therefore, the most reliable source. The source is in Portuguese, but I believe that in 2021 this will no longer be a problem in the virtual world, Google itself translates the article. [1]. -- Alex Cambraia ( talk) 17:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl. Thanks for your help...
LewisEisen ( talk) 19:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi thanks for noticing and correcting the live categories at my draft of Joseph Beecham. I am normally very careful about making [[:Categories and not [[Categories: - I think I've only done it once or twice in 12 years. I really should get on and finish the article. That makes me your April Fool for this year. Best wishes, > MinorProphet ( talk) 20:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl. I saw the edits that you made on my sandbox and I appreciate them, but since I submitted the Margaret G. Hays from my second sandbox, I just made the changes you suggested on that page. Thank you for the suggestion. Sometimes the end is only the beginning... ( talk) 17:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello!
Thank you for your suggestions! I modified the draft. I hope that everything is fine now. Please let us know whether other sections of our article on the Digital Markets Act should be improved.
Ana.Rusu.97 (
talk)
21:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
delete-redirect
userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. Done Thank you
Thanks for
your suggestion to comment out categories on my draft page
Spncrinc (
talk)
23:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Just had a quick glance at your user page: I also have my own collection of gems. PS Thinking about the mythical Grainne, I remember reading Rosemary Sutcliffe's The High Deeds of Finn MacCool (published only a few years after JFK was shot), and although many have kissed the Cloch na Blarnan I once (having been gifted at my birth with the silver tongue) made my way to Cnoc na Teamhrach and kissed the Lia Fáil instead. And here I am on WP... MinorProphet ( talk) 23:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for catching that. I normally mask the category for my draft pages till they go live, but I seem to have missed that in haste. Mea culpa. Thank you. Appreciate it. Arunram ( talk) 07:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, thanks for your help... I am a total noob on Wikipedia (I'm sure you know this already) I dont even know if this is the right way to discuss with you, but sick is life... So as I said thanks for the help, 2 things how did you even see my draft, I thought it was saved to my profile as a work in progress... nothing to hide as such, but mind blown... point and you knew this was coming right I didn't really understand your instruction and did you make the edit? Because it doesnt look any different to what you advised. As I say it's just a draft that I'm working on, I don't know anyone could see it but you help is most welcome. Hope I havent posted this message in the wrong place. Guess I will find out Nick M Rivers ( talk) 22:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
[[Category:]]
, this automatically and by default creates a live link to your draft article in one or more category lists in Wikipedia mainspace. For example, if your draft has the entry [[Category:1825 births]]
, clicking 'Publish' will make a link to the live list
Category:1825 births.:
immediately preceding the category, such as [[:Category:1825 births]]
: this temporarily prevents your draft appearing in the mainspace lists and makes it look and behave like an ordinary Wikilink. If there is no colon, the underlying software also creates a behind-the-scenes list of something like "User Drafts linking to Category pages" (I don't actually know). See
WP:USERNOCAT.IF [user draft] OR IF [sandbox] THEN LINK=NO]
, (I might be wrong) but it has been like this for something like twelve years. I don't know why. Anyway, if and when your article goes live in mainspace, just delete the initial colon for each category, make an edit summary like "Making categories live" and click 'Publish' again. Your approved mainspace article will now be linked to the live list of all people born in 1825. This may happen 'automatically' anyway, depending on which process you choose to submit your draft.
MinorProphet (
talk)
08:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)@MinorProphet Thank you makes absolute sense, I just jumped right in and got started by copying and pasting an already live page into my Sandbox, so as you mention the categories would have been live. The work around is cool too, I will need to update them to be relevant to the piece anyway but hadnt realised there significance, which you explain above :-) Thanks again
Hey, My Question is Why is your User Page section Administration ship Cut off Muhammad Furqan Butt ( talk) 16:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Why did you specify {{DEFAULTSORT:Law by year}}
with
this edit? Someone just
changed that to {{DEFAULTSORT:Flagicon}}
but I don't understand why the Flagicon template would specify any default sort. –
wbm1058 (
talk)
18:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, BHG,
I can't figure out how Category:Category got on Institutes of technology in Ireland or how to remove it. There are no recent edits to the page and I don't see how it appeared or a way to remove it. Ideas? Liz Read! Talk! 17:58, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Hey BHG, always great to see your continuing good work. I wanted to let you know I plan to nominate the Category:Cultural infrastructure . . . category structure for deletion in the next couple of days; will post the discussion link in this thread once the nom is up and the cats are tagged (rather than hitting your talk with every individual notice). Wanted to let you know in advance as a courtesy so the nom did not take you by surprise. Will leave further discussion to the nom, and look forward to your contribution there. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 21:56, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Category:Members of the Parliament of England (pre-1707) by parliament has been nominated for splitting. 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. Furicorn ( talk) 21:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Category:Alopoglossidae has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, again, BHG,
One thing that has bothered me over the years is that if an editor labels a category a "Tracking Category" or puts an Empty Category tag on a category, it's basically hands off. It's left alone and doesn't seem to be subject to deletion even if it is empty, it is no longer serving its original purpose or is just no longer useful. And when I went to look for policy to support these tags, when a category is labeled a Tracking Category or when an Empty Category tag is appropriate, I can't find anything. A couple years ago, I did a search for how many categories are labeled as Empty Categories and I think it was 20,000. Of course, I think we have millions of categories so that is just a drop in a bucket but it shouldn't just be a free pass when we have procedures to deal with categories.
This issue came up today because an editor created a new Tracking Category which I'm sure no one else knows about and I went looking to see what the policy is surrounding them. Thoughts? Liz Read! Talk! 01:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Evening fellow project member, we have reached a consensus that the section Members of Parliament for every local constituency needs to list out the successes. To do this, we will form a comma-separated list (adding <br> if more than 3 successful elections in a row, so as to make a taller table line for any re-elected MP(s). i.e. always to show the elections, not the first election gain that person was voted in at. Since 1885 at least.
Could you let me know, clicking on this part of my talk page if you could help by doing the Seats in any given county (or counties)? - Adam37 Talk 18:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
If so, ⇒ INSERT: (if you'd like to keep this page as a tab open, to assist with doing a fairly old but current seat) ALL/ANY APPLICABLE OF:-
[after 1st two table technical (coding lines) left intact]...
! Elected/re-elected ! colspan="2" | Member ! Party |- | [[1885 United Kingdom general election|1885]] '''[add comma and paste from choices below/own copying and pasting based on results table, including BY-ELECTION WIN OF SAME PERSON, not new line like below, if re-elected]''' | [[1886 United Kingdom general election|1886]] | [[1892 United Kingdom general election|1892]] | [[1895 United Kingdom general election|1895]], [[1900 United Kingdom general election|1900]], [[1906 United Kingdom general election|1906]], <br>[[January 1910 United Kingdom general election|Jan 1910]], [[December 1910 United Kingdom general election|Dec 1910]] | [[1918 United Kingdom general election|1918]] | [[1922 United Kingdom general election|1922]] | [[1923 United Kingdom general election|1923]] | [[1924 United Kingdom general election|1924]] | [[1929 United Kingdom general election|1929]] | [[1931 United Kingdom general election|1931]] | [[1935 United Kingdom general election|1935]] | [[1945 United Kingdom general election|1945]] | [[1950 United Kingdom general election|1950]] | [[1951 United Kingdom general election|1951]] | [[1955 United Kingdom general election|1955]] | [[1957 United Kingdom general election|1957]] | [[1964 United Kingdom general election|1964]] | [[1966 United Kingdom general election|1966]] | [[1970 United Kingdom general election|1970]] | [[February 1974 United Kingdom general election|Feb. 1974]] | [[October 1974 United Kingdom general election|Oct. 1974]] | [[1979 United Kingdom general election|1979]] | [[1983 United Kingdom general election|1983]] | [[1987 United Kingdom general election|1987]] | [[1992 United Kingdom general election|1992]] | [[1997 United Kingdom general election|1997]] | [[2001 United Kingdom general election|2001]] | [[2005 United Kingdom general election|2005]] | [[2010 United Kingdom general election|2010]] |[[2015 United Kingdom general election|2015]], [[2017 United Kingdom general election|2017]], [[2019 United Kingdom general election|2019]]
At the very least our FTTP democracy thanks you for your very time in reading this.- Adam37 Talk 18:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Just apologise for your delay in Chessrat's point followed by his table and/or my same-time roughly point about it being a great solution and demolishing the concerns/points for the status quo. If you don't want to then just accept you have equally caused a lot of time and thought to be spent on something which looked like a done deal. In any court of opinion.- Adam37 Talk 20:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm currently in the process of working to implement some wikiproject mergers and accidentally made some duplicate categories for one thing due to a capitalization error in the original categories. Could you please move the categories listed at Category:Flood_articles_by_quality to have "Flood" instead of "flood"? Also, the Category:Flood articles by importance (lower case "flood" categories) for importance are empty since I changed/fixed the parameter. Sorry about that. Noah Talk 12:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hiya, I would appreciate some advice on making this draft page acceptable for publication - I saw you've edited a few Nursing Journal pages, so thought you might have some good insights? Tannim101 ( talk) 21:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello Brown Haired Girl,
Two years ago, you posted an article on John Archibald Mills. He was an MP in the Alberta legislature. I have no edits for you, just a thank you. I’m sure my grandfather would be quite flattered.
Beeronysus Beeronysus ( talk) 02:32, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm currently in the process of working to implement some wikiproject mergers and accidentally made some duplicate categories for one thing due to a capitalization error in the original categories. Could you please move the categories listed at Category:Flood_articles_by_quality to have "Flood" instead of "flood"? Also, the Category:Flood articles by importance (lower case "flood" categories) for importance are empty since I changed/fixed the parameter. Sorry about that. Noah Talk 12:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hiya, I would appreciate some advice on making this draft page acceptable for publication - I saw you've edited a few Nursing Journal pages, so thought you might have some good insights? Tannim101 ( talk) 21:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello Brown Haired Girl,
Two years ago, you posted an article on John Archibald Mills. He was an MP in the Alberta legislature. I have no edits for you, just a thank you. I’m sure my grandfather would be quite flattered.
Beeronysus Beeronysus ( talk) 02:32, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi There! Thanks for your heads up that I'd left the category tags in place on my user sandbox page User:Thedwan/sandbox. I was working on my first new article creation recently - Alex McKinnon Cup - and I forgot to wipe the Sandbox page afterwards. :) Thedwan ( talk) 10:32, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I have created a Draft Article: Draft:Bugha and don't worry it has Reference from Forbes, The New York Times, Arab News, Wall Street Journal, BBC , CNN, ESPN, and many more and i would like if you check it out and hopefully approve it Unnecessary Invention ( talk) 11:50, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Ok :)) Unnecessary Invention ( talk) 17:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Having an intention to write an article concerning teaching English pronunciation, methinks, it seems to be exceedingly important to know tha authors of the most popular SBs in your country. I think, these are Ann Baker "Tree or three", "Ship or sheep"; English Pronunciation in Use ; Get rid of your accent; O'Connor and Fletcher "Sounds English Am I right? Is it possible to study it without a good instructor? Роман Сергеевич Сидоров ( talk) 10:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that - someone userfied it for me at my request after they'd speedy-deleted it, and I haven't got round to doing anything with it yet! Pam D 20:29, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
When will you ?? Travis Damian Houle ( talk) 06:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Category:Indian Institute of Technology Madras people has been nominated for 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. Oculi ( talk) 10:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl. Thanks for the suggestion on JoshMortonMusic Sandbox. Are you available to write wikipedia pages for payment? I need help, I'm kinda lost
Pretty please with a cherry on top. -JoshMortonMusic JoshMortonMusic ( talk) 03:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I wish you well in all that do. JoshMortonMusic ( talk) 12:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, BHG,
I was surprised to see this category pop up on the Daily Empty Category list so I have placed what I think are appropriate categories in it but it's odd, there is a priest category for Northern Ireland but only a bishops category for the Republic of Ireland. Since you know both categories and Ireland very well, I thought I'd ask you to double-check and see if this was emptied out-of-process. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Liz and JJMC89. There is an editor who does a lot of categorisation in that area, and has a long history of out-of-process category emptying etc, and another who is prolific but has not great judgement, so this happens not infrequently. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 07:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
a sweet gift for a sweet person
U.J (
talk)
18:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello! As a longtime and extremely frequent reader (if not exactly much of an editor) of Wikipedia perusing an unrelated topic, I stumbled across the existence of something called ArbCom and became quite curious as to how this body operates, and fascinated by the workings and history of that body. Rather inexplicably becoming more and more absorbed, I've spent much of the last 72 hours reading through several of the cases they have ruled on in the last several years, as well as surrounding materials such as RfA requests and the FRAMGATE saga. I say this only to provide an explanation as to why a user with only a single 12-year-old edit knows or cares about this; it is because I read the Portals case and some surrounding materials during this process, discovered that you remain a highly active contributor, and have a question for you.
So far as I can tell, the last thing that happened connected to those events was in October 2020 with a second RfA page in which you are renominated, with an accompanying Arbcom motion lifting your topic bans for that second RfA. However, the RfA itself seems to have been abandoned.
In a statement after the close of Portals, you expressed great discomfort regarding certain findings of fact which you felt would be a permanent stain on your record. As someone who is approximately as uninvolved with all this as it is possible to be and literally only knows about you because of that Arbcom case, I think the stain is not quite so bad as you thought, then or now. What matters more, I would say, is that despite having the both the stated intention and ample justification for abandoning this project, you did not do so at any point. The fact that you are still actively helping 15 months later speaks both to your extraordinary dedication to the project and to your subsequent ability to abide by a ruling with which you clearly strongly disagreed (otherwise you would probably be blocked, rather than actively editing). For most (perhaps even all) of the other participants in the cases I read, I have been less impressed with their subsequent record.
As I said at the start, I am not really an editor here, but I most certainly am a frequent reader, and it's in my interest that the high quality of content here is maintained. My sense is that you probably have nearly as good as case for reinstatement after an ArbCom desysop as it is possible to have from a "subsequent activity" standpoint, so my question is...whatever happened to your second RfA, and have you any interest in going back to it?
ShashakiroSH ( talk) 20:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Women in Red | May 2021, Volume 7, Issue 5, Numbers 184, 188, 197, 198
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 21:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Thank you for your correction/suggestion. - /info/en/?search=User:Gladiator-Citizen/sandbox - never done that well with Categories - I do not understand your correction, but I appreciate it, and will follow it for other categories. Could you direct me to a precise reference which I could study and would help me understand. Much thanks again. Gladiator-Citizen ( talk) 23:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
[[Categories:
towards the end, it places a link to your sandbox/draft article into a live listing on Wikipedia, such as (just for example)
Category:British artists. As far as I know, this is a failing of Wikipedia's underlying software rather than anything you have done. WP is complex, and telling new editors about this small problem hasn't been adequately addressed. Since the content of sandboxes, drafts etc. hasn't yet been approved for main article space, and 'we' don't want ordinary users of WP thinking that your sandbox is has been fully approved, placing a :
before the category e.g. [[:Category:British artists]]
simply prevents this happening. If and when your article goes live, all you you need to do is remove the initial colon, and your article will be part of the behind-the-scenes listings of all articles referring (if only in part) to British artists. You could try using {{
Draft categories}} but it seems like piling on another level of incomprehension to me. See also
Help:Category and
Preparing drafts. Best of luck.
MinorProphet (
talk)
02:18, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Thank you so much @MinorProphet - very much appreciate your time and information - I will keep trying to understand - I am now quite exhausted from finishing the article but my energy will come back! 118.127.122.147 ( talk) 09:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for the edits on my wiki article! Much appreciated. Eemakagoma ( talk) 16:56, 1 May 2021 (UTC) |
Help in getting this draft Verified. /info/en/?search=Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood The Subject is a professional Asian football confederation, B licensed Coach and has good search results. Darzubair ( talk) 11:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Songs written by Mahmoud Darwish has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Richhoncho ( talk) 17:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Apologies, forgot about these when I pasted text about Sonia Bassey back into my sandbox (in case the page was suddenly deleted). I will try to remember about inactivating these commands in future.-- MerielGJones ( talk) 08:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Ambassadors of China to Eswatini has been nominated for 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. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Paco Paco songs has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Richhoncho ( talk) 23:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Articles containing Luo (Kenya and Tanzania)-language text indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Interface administrator changes
oversight
will be renamed to suppress
. This is for
technical reasons. You can comment at
T112147 if you have objections.Hi. I noticed that you were adding templates to articles which are linked from the templates. One such example is: . In this case, this article is a generic term and the addition of the template does not make sense, despite the article being linked from the template. What are your thoughts? -- DaxServer ( talk) 16:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello again! Could you add the templates to Navboxes if present, like here :) -- DaxServer ( talk) 10:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Would you kindly add template {{Portalbar|India|Aviation}}
to Airports and related topics in India related articles? This would be helpful, that is of course if AWB has automation for it. Else, I would try to do it. If possible "Topics of x" template is helpful. One example is
Dabolim Airport. Thanks for your much help :)
-- DaxServer (
talk)
18:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
I usually use {{userpage blanked|reason=and the draft content has been moved to [[]] per [[WP:FAKEARTICLE]]}}
as might provide slightly more information. Just letting you know in case you didn't know about the template; your practice is probably fine as well. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (
talk)
18:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I just edited Nicola Sturgeon, and lo and behold, the previous edit was by you! Thank you for sticking around on Wikipedia even after what the ArbCom did to you, and I hope all of us appreciate that nothing on Wikipedia really matters. :) Egroeg5 ( talk) 20:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi BHG, I notice you created Category:Wales AMs 2021–, though since 2020 the elected members have been known as Members of the Senedd, or MSs. Maybe it will be quicker to change if you can request a speedy rename, as the creator, to Category:Wales MSs 2021–. Diolch/Thanks. Sionk ( talk) 01:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Time to remove the tags? Srnec ( talk) 23:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
BHG,
Would it be possible for you to create a Newspaper Establishments and Newspaper disestablishments templates something along the lines of Companies established in the year/disestablished in the year? I ask you because I know you have done template work around WP and that you recently did work on or created Newspaper establishment categories. I've created two myself and spent time filling some of those already created. Thanks in advance for any help. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I hope you are doing fine.
Since you were the last person to edit the wiki page for IndiGo, I wanted to let you know that the airline is planning to induct four Airbus A321P2F. The airline is expecting to receive its first A321 freighter by June of 2021 and start its freighter operations soon after that. I would highly appreciate it if you add/direct this to a person who can add this into the fleet section of the airline's Wikipedia page. (I would have done it by myself however I don't know how to do it and am just figuring out Wikipedia's editing side :sweat-smile:)
Source for this: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/pandemic-effect-indigo-to-induct-freighters-in-its-fleet/articleshow/82183050.cms
Thank you and good day! -- Hari.shreyas08 ( talk) 07:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
BHG,
I've noticed you added 'Companies established in year' to these pages. There is only one problem. These categories are already categorized entertainment companies established in. So that's overcategorization since Entertainment companies is a subcategory of Companies. I'm kind of lukewarm towards mass media being subcategorized entertainment. Before I have over 150 redlights popping up on your page as I revert the companies established you added, I'd like your thoughts on this. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello BHG. You've been on a spree and now there are over 120 articles in the Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations. It is going to take some time to empty the cat so if you can hold off on adding anymore tags for a bit it will give the few of us who work on them a chance to catch up. You see it only takes a second to add the tag but it can take several minutes (or longer in some cases) to format the refs. Add to that the fact that other editors will be adding articles to the cat as well and I'm not sure how many days it will take to get to all of these. Anything you can do will be appreciated. MarnetteD| Talk 00:52, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@ MarnetteD, I have been thinking some more about this, and want to run my thoughts past you.
AFAIK, all other cleanup tags are added simply when there is a problem that needs to be cleaned up. Sometimes the issue is resolved promptly and the tag is removed promptly, and sometimes the problem remain unfixed for years.
That may mean that few pages are tagged, or it may mean lots of pages have the tag. What drives the tagging is simply whether editors identify a problem, so the number of currently-tagged pages is simply a measure of the balance between the problem being identified and the problem being resolved.
For example, {{ Citation needed}} is on over 400,000 pages in Category:All articles with unsourced statements. Many other tags have similarly large backlogs, while some are cleared more thoroughly, e.g. Category:Unreferenced BLPs, where the backlog is not too horrible.
I can't see any reason to treat {{ Cleanup bare URLs}} any differently. I have scanned Template:Cleanup bare URLs and Template talk:Cleanup bare URLs, and I don't see any guidance to hold back from tagging, or even any discussion suggesting restraint.
So my inclination now is to finish my AWB run, and tag the more than 1,000 pages identified in my AWB run, and currently awaiting tagging.
However I am conscious of all your good work filling the refs, and I don't want to discourage you by swamping your in-tray. So it occurred to me that I could hold off until the end of the month, and then tag them all on 31 May. That would leave a backlog in Category:Articles with bare URLs for citations from May 2021, but thereafter Category:Articles with bare URLs for citations from June 2021 would include only the latest additions. I hope that would be a win-win solution for everyone.
How does that sound to you? I would also welcome input from anyone else watching this talk page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 12:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
it is not a tiny change), then sadly I can only conclude that you are being perverse.
I'd like to seek your help in making my first FL here. I've already did it on Urdu Wikipedia but please share your ideas about List of students of Mahmud Hasan Deobandi. Might be out of our topic arena, but "advises" would be helpful because you're "Brown Haired Girl". Thanks. ─ The Aafī (talk) 01:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Dear BrownHairedGirl. Thank you for your recent attention to the articles Henry Dillon, 13th Viscount Dillon, Alexander Stewart (1746–1831), and Frederick Stewart, 4th Marquess of Londonderry. Your replacements of Member of Parliament with Member of Parliament (United Kingdom) are clearly improving the articles. However, why did you replace <br> with <br /> at the same occasion? HTML5 prefers <br>, as I understand it. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 11:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
<br>
tags is because the unclosed tags breaks some syntax highlighters, which makes it harder for editors to maintain the wiki markup.very few people still use that old highlighter? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
very few people still use that old highlighter... so I will assume that there is no evidence, just an assumption. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St John Brodrick, 1st Earl of Midleton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
Apologies for the regional list succession box on Maree Todd, I had seen someone else use them but without a predecesssor and successor to denote it was a regional list, but I do acknowledge that having it like that is not especially useful. -- ScottishNardualElf ( talk) 17:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Christopher, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 20:30, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
I have no further interest in any opinion of yours that involves me. Your communication with me, about me, whether pinging me or not, will cease, please. This includes any talk page, broadly construed. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 22:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
For the record, some links, so that they end up in my archive:
Note that this is for my records. It is not an invitation to Timtrent to post here again. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs)
BHG, I have had quite enough.
Please do not interact with me again. No pings, no replies, no messages, no answers, nothing, on any part of Wikipedia including talk pages, project pages, and the like.
Regards, doktorb words deeds 04:04, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Since everyone seems to be communicating their preferences regarding your interactions with them, I thought I'd join the fun. I haven't interacted with you much, but I'd welcome more interaction. The couple times I've run into you, you've always been on the right side of the argument, in my view. Some people just get angry when they're arguing against someone who is right most of the time. Cheers. —ScottyWong— 06:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, @ Scottywong and Sluzzelin: both for your support and for expressing it in a way that made me grin. We need to keep communicating with people we disagree with, and to distinguish clearly between disagreement and hostility/rudeness. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 12:18, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey, BHG,
You were the last editor to this category page and it popped up on the nightly Empty Category List. It says it's a maintenance category but it doesn't have an Empty Category tag on it so I'm not sure if it is really utilized much. As far as I know, Wikipedia bots correct any double redirects that exist. So, do you think it should be tagged as a perennially empty category or tag it CSD C1? Thanks in advance for offering your opinion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Women in Red | June 2021, Volume 7, Issue 6, Numbers 184, 188, 196, 199, 200, 201
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 18:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Why are you moving references back into headings? Per the MOS references do not belong in headings. I was moving them out of the heading and to the below the tables for that section. RJFJR ( talk) 22:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Irish theologians has been nominated for merging. 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. Rathfelder ( talk) 09:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have (hopefully) cleaned up the bare URL's on the article 2017 Cardiff Council election. Any chance you can tale a quick look and let me know if i have got it right? Thanks Benawu2 ( talk) 08:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey, it was actually me that removed the comapct table. It was a year ago, but I forgot. I left edit comments when I did it, but maybe I wasn't clear enough? All the constituency pages should have the same format, so I think you should reverse your reversal of my reversal to keep consistency. Happy to discuss though. -- Gharbhain ( talk) 11:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey BrownHairedGirl, I just saw that you placed a "bare url" template on the Leszek Borysiewicz article, suggesting there should be full citations. As I'm looking at the article, only 2 out 20 sources seem bare URLs. The other ones are citations. Rather than simply removing, I wanted to ask you on your thoughts first. Thank you. 2A02:1205:34E0:C0A0:C18:9DDB:194B:AABF ( talk) 18:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
To Beowrnhairedgirl You've added a header link re: bare urls! to John Francon Williams wiki page, Instead of adding the link, I'm unsure why you didn't just correct the links yourself? I thought the whole idea of Wikipedia was for people to assist one another with building pages of historical knowledge? By adding a link, off which I personally am not familiar with - I probably speak for many subscribers here - the message comes across in quite a threatening manner. Subscribers can willingly add knowledge and links to determine the knowledge is correct, but all subscribers are not technical wizards. If you are a wizard, perhaps it might be helpful to assist by using that knowledge. I'm sorry to sound a little perturbed, but I've noticed a lot of people delete, add headings, jumble paragraphs up, on wiki pages for no apparent reason, that becomes a little tiresome after a while. Only yesterday I noticed a subscriber deleted a 'Born in' category from a wiki page for no apparent reason, when the person the page is about was clearly 'born in' that region. Please help by correcting whatever the 'bare urls are ... or at least show how a subscriber does this procedure. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevenseaocean ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
The bare urls template currently puts them in Category:Articles needing cleanup. This makes it impossible to find the articles that are put into cleanup for other reasons. Do you think it would be worth proposing that the categories be changed? (Perhaps to a sub category of cleanup?)
I take an interest in articles needing cleanup, but I'm not as interested in bare-urls other than getting in my way when looking for cleanup. I never bothered to proposing a change to the categorizing previously, but there are nearly 2000 articles added this month and since yester day it was less than 300 probably over 1500 are for bare urls.
Also, for those article titles "<year> <place> by-election" that have http://www.leighrayment.com/commons.htm as the only reference. Do you think they should be tagged as needing additional references?
Sorry about not responding faster to your previous message. RJFJR ( talk) 22:40, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
@ RJFJR, back to the issues you raised above. I will reply separately to them, to facilitate threaded discussion.
First, please note that your decision not to link the categories and templates you were referring to makes replying a bit more onerous. Please use links, as requested in the big editnotice shown above when you edit this page.
You write bare urls template currently puts them in Category:Articles needing cleanup. This makes it impossible to find the articles that are put into cleanup for other reasons. Do you think it would be worth proposing that the categories be changed? (Perhaps to a sub category of cleanup?)
{{
Cleanup bare URLs}} does not put anything in
Category:Articles needing cleanup; it puts them in [[:Category:Articles needing cleanup from <month year>]]. See e.g.
Francis Bryan, in
Category:Articles needing cleanup from May 2021 ... which has a header message This category combines all articles needing cleanup from May 2021 (2021-05) to enable us to work through the backlog more systematically
. So it's a catch-all category, which combines all the articles given any cleanup tag in that month.
Those who want to work on a specific issue can go to Category:Clean-up categories from May 2021, which has a subcat for each specific issue. So why remove any one cleanup tag from this part of dual system? I don't get why you would want to do that. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
@
RJFJR: you wrote for those article titles "<year> <place> by-election" that have
http://www.leighrayment.com/commons.htm as the only reference. Do you think they should be tagged as needing additional references?
I assume that refers to articles such 1874 Wigtown Burghs by-election, which you edited yesterday, then reverted. [24]
(Note that after our encounter yesterday, I did another AWB run to fix all the by-election articles with bare URL links to Rayment, using {{
Rayment-hc}}
instead of
http://www.leighrayment.com/commons.htm. See
these 502 edits).
Basically, my view is that those are mostly a set of abysmal sub-stubs whose failings are so deep that they could be tagged with a multitude of tags. There are several hundred such sub-stubs on Westminster by-elections, mostly created in a flurry by a small set of editors. They are basically pointless, because they simply restate the facts contained in lists: constituency name, name and party of outgoing MP and new MP.
Yes, a decent article can be written on nearly any by-election. (see e.g. my own efforts at inter alia 1869 Blackburn by-election, 1943 St Albans by-election, and 1919 St Albans by-election, plus many examples of fine work done by others). But these sub-stubs don't even try to add any value beyond the lists, and seem to be inadequately verified even for the few facts they assert.
As far as I can see, the cited references are often bogus in that in most cases it seems to me to improbable that the editors who created these page actually consulted the cited sources, which are nearly always one or both of FWS Craig's election results and/or Rayment. Here's why:
So I am fairly sure that these are kinda bogus refs: a mention of sources which would probably confirm roughly the facts asserted, but which are very unlikely to have actually been consulted. To my mind, that's no way to use sources ... but last time I tried to challenge an editor who was misusing citations in that way (about a decade ago), there was a shitstorm. I haven't the stomach for doing that again.
However, I don't think that a tag forest is needed for these sub-stubs. I would like something stronger than plain "stub", but until the community will accept a {{ abysmally-constructed-sub-stub-which-serves-no-purpose}}, I think that a stub tag is sufficient.
Anyway, I look fwd to hearing your thoughts in response. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Category:Bougainvillean priests has been nominated for merging to ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Papua New Guinean priests. 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. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you help me in getting this Draft Published. The subject is a professional football coach from india. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood Dar zubair 07:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)