This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello Mike. I wanted to confirm a few things about the stats and graphs you posted at WT:FAC, and ask about something
a) In the last graph you posted, we are graphing the size of the WP articles that were submitted for a FAC review. Is this correct?
b) Which of these sizes are we plotting:
Prose size (including all HTML code): 17 kB
Prose size (text only): 12 kB (2122 words) "readable prose size"?
c) In your table, the last column is the average size in KB of the featured article review of FACs. Is this correct?
d)Is there a list somewhere of FAC reviews by the closing date, or for that matter, by the nomination date?
Thanks, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 17:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, it took me longer than I'd planned. What would you say to the following hypothetical FAC rules: 1) A reviewer is not allowed to comment in the FAC of a nominator in any other FAC of whose s/he has commented in the last two months. 2) There is no limit on the number of articles an editor can nominate at FAC, 3) FACs cannot be archived because they do not have the critical number of reviews, and 4) All reviewers are required to change their comments to "promote," or "oppose" (with clear guidelines for off-FAC improvement) no more than one month after they have opened their review. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Mike, I just saw this discussion from the link at FAC talk. There are some faulty assumptions above, and a lot I would address ... but the environment at FAC has become so hostile that I am not sure it would be productive to comment on the stories the data tells and the pieces I believe your data analysis miss. There were many fundamental changes made in 2008 and 2009 that I think you are missing and that are affecting your analysis, beginning with your statement about effort from 2008. The change there was because of source checks, copyvio checks, and the quicker ability to get the obviously deficient off the page, and had almost Nothing to do with the one at a time rule, which was mostly one editor plus some Wikicup participants. It is no longer possible to have a civil discussion over there, and while I agree that none of Fowler's proposals are workable, his analysis at WT:FAC of the problems was right. Without Ealdgyth’s source reviews, FAC is fooling itself and has become a fan club. Without Coords who know who is in what mutually supportive group, who is a content expert, who is reviewing what for whom, who is really an independent reviewer, and who won’t promote without that independent review, FAC has become a fan club where lengthy FACs result from groups doing their work at FAC, instead of pre-FAC, lending the appearance of review ... that isn’t a review at all. If I get time I will go back to your posts and data to point out areas I believe you are misreading the story I know the data is clearly telling. But it hardly seems worth it, since FAC seems to be more about egos than articles these days. That is one nasty page, and the coords seem disinclined to do anything about it. Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I was editing away and noticed your edit too late. Personally, I don't miss that extra space after a full stop, but if you insist, I'll put it back in 1 by 1. Please just don't fully revert everything, as it really is just ballast. Thanks, Arminden ( talk) 17:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your FAC comments, now all addressed ( I hope). As you advised, I've contacted Ceoil as for feedback. Amitchell125 ( talk) 20:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Any future FAC plans for this article are toast thanks to your and Laser brain's comments. I'm not gonna berate you (sorry if it sounds like that, I'm just stating fact), I just want to know from you how far the article was from becoming FA, and if it is at least GA-worthy. I say this because Laser brain said, "I'd reject this for GA status" at the botched FAC, in spite of one of the best editors at the GOCE copyediting it. Hence, I've opened a GAR. Once again I apologise if I sounded like I was thrashing you since I bear no grudge towards you. After all you did help Andha Naal (nominated by me) get promoted. Just wish you'd comment sooner on Sathi Leelavathi. Besides, I've cancelled all other FAC plans for life as an article's factual accuracy and coherence matters more. I hope you'll comment at the GAR. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 09:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mike Christie. Thanks for initiating the FA review of Manilal Dwivedi. I have replied to almost all the comments. I just want to clarify that I am not so good in English language. So please apologize if my language is confusing or if there are any grammatical errors in my replies. Feel free to ask me again, I will try to explain with the help of other. I have also requested you to suggest better wording at some points in FA review. As you suggested, I am going to add more biographical details into Biography section. Will do it by tomorrow. Thank you very much again. -- Gazal world ( talk) 21:43, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
FYI to any watchers: Hurricane Isaias took out my power yesterday, and given that about a quarter of Long Island is now without power it could be up to a week before I can edit regularly again. Apparently this is the worst power outage since Hurricane Sandy, and that took up to two weeks for everyone to get power back. I can recharge devices at work so will be able to respond to some things but may not be very active for a while. Gazal world and GamerPro64, I don’t know when I’ll be able to comment on your FACs again, so also pinging the FAC coords: Ian Rose and Ealdgyth. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 10:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Ok I understand. I responded to your comments meanwhile. GamerPro64 21:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I got power back last night and should be able to start paying attention to FACs again within a day or two. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike, hope you're doing well. I've been pulling together a stub about the 1976 anthology Aurora: Beyond Equality, and was wondering if you had access to any of the reviews listed here. I did see the message above about power outages, so please don't feel like this is urgent in any way. Best, Vanamonde ( Talk) 05:21, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | ||
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your going way beyond the call of duty in reviewing Manilal Dwivedi. Your patience, attention to detail and careful balance between encouragement and being firm as to what you will accept is a model; I am finding it educational. Gog the Mild ( talk) 11:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Squirm/archive1 - are you standing by your oppose? -- Ealdgyth ( talk) 13:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Peer review/Squirm/archive1 here is its Peer Review. GamerPro64 02:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 17, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 17, 2020. Congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 18:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for helping the article retain GA status. We can begin FAC once my three articles – Deiva Magan, Apoorva Raagangal and Payanangal Mudivathillai – finish their GA reviews which have not begun. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 15:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Super-Science Fiction article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 24, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. It's at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 24, 2020, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
The file File:Eadbald descendants.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused free use image with no clear use on the Wiki.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
fuzzy510 (
talk) 08:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
It always brightens my day to see you on the mainpage ! Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike. I've been attempting to source Vonda N. McIntyre bibliography, and been running into issues where very many stories don't have full bibliographic information on the internet outside ISFDB. When stories are reprinted, the anthologies just refer to the magazine, and not to date and volume. Do you know of other sources that might connect stories to the volume and issue they were published in? Vanamonde ( Talk) 16:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Due to a recent PC crash, I have lost access both to my jstor password and the email a/c used for retrieval. Yeah, I know and feel tick here. In the meantime, if you could get and email [1] would appreciate a lot. My bad, um what can I say. Ceoil ( talk) 06:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike; I hope you're well. The logo image in this article has been nominated for deletion, as it is too complex to be PD. Seems I made the wrong call. You may want to replace it with a non-free cover, as I suspect (but can't remember) that this was what was in use before I uploaded the logo image. Josh Milburn ( talk) 13:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
As our foremost subject-matter expert on SF, you may be interested and able to help us with this discussion. Andrew🐉( talk) 08:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello again! Apologies for the rather random message. I have a question about the "Inspired" (song) article. An IP user has been marking the song as a single although I have already cited sources in the article that support its status as a promotional single. I have already reverted their edit twice. In the first edit summary, I pointed out the existing sources in the article, and in the second edit summary, I encouraged them to open a talk page discussion to avoid edit warring. I know I should not revert their edit if they do it a third time. I was wondering if you had any advice on what I should do if this IP user continues making these edits on the page? Thank you in advance! I am sure the IP user means well, and I am always rather uncertain how to best handle these types of situations. Aoba47 ( talk) 15:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Ten years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike, I've another source request, if it's not too much trouble. I'm trying to get a decent number of magazine reviews for Dreamsnake to fill out the commentary from scholars, etc; do you have to own F&SF, January 1979, Asimov's Science Fiction, September-October 1978, or Locus, #216 November 1978? All have reviews that I would expect to be decent. Thanks in advance; not a problem if you don't have them. Vanamonde ( Talk) 20:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
One other suggestion; I mentioned to my wife, who’s a fan of both Dreamsnake and The Exile Waiting, that you were working on the article, and she reminded me of Sarah Lefanu’s book In the Chinks of the World Machine, about feminist sf. We think it has at least some discussion of McIntyre, and a look on Google Books confirms that, though there’s not enough visible to tell how useful it would be. Do you have a copy? I used to own one but if I still have it I’ve no idea where it is. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 23:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Good start with [2]. I recommend copying it to your sandbox and restoring it as soon as the fancruft mess is deleted, we will get a new article and maybe we can even WP:DYK it. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:52, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
I expanded Far future in fiction and started Near future in fiction. That's good news. Bad news - future history. Wonder if it shouldn't also be blown up and rewriten from scratch... sigh. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:16, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike, I was looking through your table of FAC opposes for September. There is only one oppose (from HĐ) that wasn't withdrawn. But I wonder whether you overlooked Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Who by Numbers Tour/archive1. That opened on 23 September and was archived a couple of days later with two opposes. SarahSV (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Eight years! |
---|
I am still proud of the TFA 1 September ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Infinity Science Fiction, "about another minor science fiction magazine of the late 1950s. Its main claim to fame is for publishing Arthur Clarke's story "The Star", which was rejected by The Saturday Evening Post as blasphemous, but which went on to win that year's Hugo Award and is now considered a classic."! --
Signing so this will archive. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 16:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
... and today for Super-Science Fiction, "about a minor magazine from the late 1950s. It wouldn't have had enough meat on the bones to get further than GA if it weren't that Robert Silverberg, a well-known sf writer, reminisced about it in the introduction to one of his collections of stories."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
The Worm in my Egg Cream Award | |
This is for helping me get Squirm it's Featured Article status. Went a long way to get it to there and your criticisms helped get it to where it is now GamerPro64 14:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hello Mike. I have nominated my article Fasana-e-Azad for GA. Could you review it ? If you are busy, no problem at all. User:Oulfis had started the review, but he is inactive since almost one month. Thanks. -- Gazal world ( talk) 17:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Science Fiction Monthly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roger Dean. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:10, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Mike, it occurs to me that you'd find page mover rights useful if you ever need to clean up the FAC history of an article. I'd give you the flag in a heartbeat, but wanted to check whether there was a reason you didn't want it. Vanamonde ( Talk) 17:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 29, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 29, 2020. Congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 16:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Mike, ipad typing ... could you look at the last thread at WT:FAR and tell me if you know of other high N FAs I should check? Most of the high Ns are defeatured ... eg, New York City ... might there be errors other than Jesus ? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:45, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | ||
Thanks for all your help during the FAC for Warner Bros. Movie World! — CR4ZE ( T • C) 15:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC) |
I wanted to say thank you, and tell you that, you now have a lifelong fan. I hope you're okay with googly-eyed adoration. Oh, and send you this too: [3] I do remember correctly that you do have a sense of humor right?
Be safe, and please have a Happy Thanksgiving wherever you are!
Jenhawk777 (
talk) has given you a
Turkey! Turkeys promote
WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving!
Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{subst:Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Mike, if I may trouble you, get thee over to WP:URFA/2020 and add a "Satisfactory" note to your older FAs that you have watched and that are still at standard. They don't have to be perfect; we need to sort out which of the very old FAs need to go to WP:FAR, and which would be an embarrassment if run on the mainpage. If you indicate which of yours are "Satisfactory" (good enough), other editors are then triggered to look in, and get those moved off the list, so we can focus on the truly deficient (which are typically those that are no longer watched by their nominators). Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:47, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. The script recently received a significant update, detailed below.
If you have any feedback, requested features, or domains to add/remove, don't hesitate to bring it up on the script's talk page. Thank you! ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 23:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a user of Cite Unseen. If you no longer wish to receive very occasional updates, you may remove yourself from the mailing list.
Season's Greetings | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Magi (Jan Mostaert) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 12:11, 19 December 2020 (UTC) |
Happy holidays | ||
Dear Mike, For you and all your loved ones, "Let there be mercy".
|
Natalis soli invicto! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC) |
Here or my talk page is fine. Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Season's Greetings | ||
Seasons greetings. Hope you and yours are safe and well during this rather bleak period, though I think we will get through it. Best Ceoil ( talk) 02:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Mike, I hope you had a great Christmas? If you could post my FAC reviewing stats to my talk page when you get a chance, that'd be appreciated. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
I can't speak for Ian Rose and Sarastro1, but I don't tend to follow nominations closely unless they are particularly controversial—I read through them comprehensively only when I begin considering action on them. This was more of Raul's approach but I'm well aware that Sandy in particular would spend hours (sometimes each day) combing through nominations and looking for issues. ... LaserI sure did :) I tried not to let off-topic or civility get out of hand. I used the "move to talk". I am worried that the results of some RFCs were, and continue to be, overstated and overinterpreted, and might need to be revisited. At what point did we switch from the idea that it was the delegate/coordinator responsibility to make sure all aspects had been reviewed, to the idea that if something was neglected it is not their job to flag it, their ONLY task was to judge consensus? What a detriment to FAC which was once known as the place where the buck stopped. Not only did I deal with inappropriate behaviors, faulty use of templates, moving off-topic to talk, unactionable commentary ... as soon as I saw it ... if I saw that a FAC had multiple Supports and looked "ready" for promotion, but there were outstanding issues that no one had reviewed for ... obvious prose issues, or a MOS review had not been done, or I could spot any other issue that no one had addressed or reviewed for ... I flagged that as needing attention before promotion. Have we really disempowered Coords from being able to do that today? Have we really moved to a model where reviewers only option to the Oppose is to remain silent (I admit to feeling bullied into silence myself on problematic noms, and there are probably at least ten on the page right now that I would have oppose in different times), and Coords are forced to promote without stating that something has not yet been looked at, because we have so hamstrung then based on interpretations of RFCs? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy New Year and a Prosperous 2021! | |
Hello Mike Christie, heartfelt and warm greetings for the New Year 2021. May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. I am wishing you and your loved ones all the best. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Happy New Year. |
Thank you today for Knap Hill, "about an Neolithic site on a hill in northern Wiltshire. It's a causewayed enclosure, one of the major types of Neolithic earthwork, and is historically interesting as it's the first one that was excavated to the point where the characteristics of a causewayed enclosure could be clearly seen -- an encircling ditch and bank with many more entrances, or causeways, than made sense if the earthworks were for defence."! - If my card 1 or card 2 speaks to you, take it, with best wishes for a new year. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Wow | |
Fascinating material! Who knew that Neolithic enclosed causeways could be so fascinating? Great read, congrats on the TFA.
I tried to find an appropriate pottery image but went for this flint axe-head instead. Shearonink ( talk) 14:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Mike, I hope this finds you well. I was wondering if I could interest you (or any tpw who may see this) in commenting at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/O Captain! My Captain!/archive1. I'm loathe to request favors, but it seems that nobody is very interested in giving it a review and the co-ords have suggested that it may be in danger of getting archived. Hope your holidays are pleasant and I wish you and yours all the best as we enter a new year. Please don't feel obligated to comment-- I can only imagine how busy you must be, but I'd greatly appreciate it if you did. Thanks for all the hard work you've put into content work this year. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 15:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mike Christie! I am hoping you and yours had such a wonderful holiday season that you are in a good mood! If so, I have just completed a rewrite of another monstrously long article, and will eventually post a request for a peer review, but it sure would benefit from a once over from you before that. Don't worry - not intending FA - just looking to improve quality. It needs polishing with a fresh eye. If you don't have time, I understand. I still hope you are well and happy! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 06:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I believe you are being very possessive over this article. Why would you revert an editor acting in good faith? A minute ago I added an additional reference to Battle of Hastings: William of Jumieges as I noted it is an important source for the battle but is not in the reference list. And you reverted it. It's a good job I save my work. Djp.mortimer ( talk) 13:54, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
We just left the terminal with our next load and are going to be bouncing thru Indiana for the next few hours. Impossible to get out laptop, much less deal with the above. Any 3RR reports will have to be done by someone else ...I’m doing this on my iPad... Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Mike, when you have some time, I'd like to take you up on your offer, if still available, to look at Dreamsnake before FAC. I hope you don't mind that it's also at GAN; wait times there are often measured in months... Vanamonde ( Talk) 23:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Whitehawk camp excavation plan 1929 and 1932-1933.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 03:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Whitehawk camp excavations 1929 and 1935.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 03:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
The file File:Fantastic titles grid.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Replaced by wikitable in the article.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
P,TO 19104 (
talk) (
contribs) 01:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | ||
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your unceasing work on generating useful and informative facts and figures regarding FAC. Wonderful stuff. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
Hiya I have this nagging question about whether the racecourse at Whitehawk is sited on a former cursus heading towards the causewayed enclosure. This isn't a comment that needs to go on Whitehawk Camp because I've never read anything to suggest it, but I just thought I'd drop you a line since you've probably read all the available documents and I was wondering if you'd seen it mentioned anywhere. Nothing remains today, it's just an intriguing thought inspired by visiting sites in Cumbria and Yorkshire from around the same time period. Cheers! Mujinga ( talk) 17:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Later when we get to the unload. After my lazy self does a lazy or something. Ealdgyth ( talk) 13:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
But Isento did apologize on my talk page. Ealdgyth ( talk) 01:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello Mike. I wanted to confirm a few things about the stats and graphs you posted at WT:FAC, and ask about something
a) In the last graph you posted, we are graphing the size of the WP articles that were submitted for a FAC review. Is this correct?
b) Which of these sizes are we plotting:
Prose size (including all HTML code): 17 kB
Prose size (text only): 12 kB (2122 words) "readable prose size"?
c) In your table, the last column is the average size in KB of the featured article review of FACs. Is this correct?
d)Is there a list somewhere of FAC reviews by the closing date, or for that matter, by the nomination date?
Thanks, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 17:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, it took me longer than I'd planned. What would you say to the following hypothetical FAC rules: 1) A reviewer is not allowed to comment in the FAC of a nominator in any other FAC of whose s/he has commented in the last two months. 2) There is no limit on the number of articles an editor can nominate at FAC, 3) FACs cannot be archived because they do not have the critical number of reviews, and 4) All reviewers are required to change their comments to "promote," or "oppose" (with clear guidelines for off-FAC improvement) no more than one month after they have opened their review. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Mike, I just saw this discussion from the link at FAC talk. There are some faulty assumptions above, and a lot I would address ... but the environment at FAC has become so hostile that I am not sure it would be productive to comment on the stories the data tells and the pieces I believe your data analysis miss. There were many fundamental changes made in 2008 and 2009 that I think you are missing and that are affecting your analysis, beginning with your statement about effort from 2008. The change there was because of source checks, copyvio checks, and the quicker ability to get the obviously deficient off the page, and had almost Nothing to do with the one at a time rule, which was mostly one editor plus some Wikicup participants. It is no longer possible to have a civil discussion over there, and while I agree that none of Fowler's proposals are workable, his analysis at WT:FAC of the problems was right. Without Ealdgyth’s source reviews, FAC is fooling itself and has become a fan club. Without Coords who know who is in what mutually supportive group, who is a content expert, who is reviewing what for whom, who is really an independent reviewer, and who won’t promote without that independent review, FAC has become a fan club where lengthy FACs result from groups doing their work at FAC, instead of pre-FAC, lending the appearance of review ... that isn’t a review at all. If I get time I will go back to your posts and data to point out areas I believe you are misreading the story I know the data is clearly telling. But it hardly seems worth it, since FAC seems to be more about egos than articles these days. That is one nasty page, and the coords seem disinclined to do anything about it. Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I was editing away and noticed your edit too late. Personally, I don't miss that extra space after a full stop, but if you insist, I'll put it back in 1 by 1. Please just don't fully revert everything, as it really is just ballast. Thanks, Arminden ( talk) 17:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your FAC comments, now all addressed ( I hope). As you advised, I've contacted Ceoil as for feedback. Amitchell125 ( talk) 20:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Any future FAC plans for this article are toast thanks to your and Laser brain's comments. I'm not gonna berate you (sorry if it sounds like that, I'm just stating fact), I just want to know from you how far the article was from becoming FA, and if it is at least GA-worthy. I say this because Laser brain said, "I'd reject this for GA status" at the botched FAC, in spite of one of the best editors at the GOCE copyediting it. Hence, I've opened a GAR. Once again I apologise if I sounded like I was thrashing you since I bear no grudge towards you. After all you did help Andha Naal (nominated by me) get promoted. Just wish you'd comment sooner on Sathi Leelavathi. Besides, I've cancelled all other FAC plans for life as an article's factual accuracy and coherence matters more. I hope you'll comment at the GAR. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 09:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mike Christie. Thanks for initiating the FA review of Manilal Dwivedi. I have replied to almost all the comments. I just want to clarify that I am not so good in English language. So please apologize if my language is confusing or if there are any grammatical errors in my replies. Feel free to ask me again, I will try to explain with the help of other. I have also requested you to suggest better wording at some points in FA review. As you suggested, I am going to add more biographical details into Biography section. Will do it by tomorrow. Thank you very much again. -- Gazal world ( talk) 21:43, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
FYI to any watchers: Hurricane Isaias took out my power yesterday, and given that about a quarter of Long Island is now without power it could be up to a week before I can edit regularly again. Apparently this is the worst power outage since Hurricane Sandy, and that took up to two weeks for everyone to get power back. I can recharge devices at work so will be able to respond to some things but may not be very active for a while. Gazal world and GamerPro64, I don’t know when I’ll be able to comment on your FACs again, so also pinging the FAC coords: Ian Rose and Ealdgyth. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 10:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Ok I understand. I responded to your comments meanwhile. GamerPro64 21:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I got power back last night and should be able to start paying attention to FACs again within a day or two. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike, hope you're doing well. I've been pulling together a stub about the 1976 anthology Aurora: Beyond Equality, and was wondering if you had access to any of the reviews listed here. I did see the message above about power outages, so please don't feel like this is urgent in any way. Best, Vanamonde ( Talk) 05:21, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | ||
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your going way beyond the call of duty in reviewing Manilal Dwivedi. Your patience, attention to detail and careful balance between encouragement and being firm as to what you will accept is a model; I am finding it educational. Gog the Mild ( talk) 11:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Squirm/archive1 - are you standing by your oppose? -- Ealdgyth ( talk) 13:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Peer review/Squirm/archive1 here is its Peer Review. GamerPro64 02:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 17, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 17, 2020. Congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 18:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for helping the article retain GA status. We can begin FAC once my three articles – Deiva Magan, Apoorva Raagangal and Payanangal Mudivathillai – finish their GA reviews which have not begun. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 15:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Super-Science Fiction article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 24, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. It's at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 24, 2020, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
The file File:Eadbald descendants.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused free use image with no clear use on the Wiki.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
fuzzy510 (
talk) 08:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
It always brightens my day to see you on the mainpage ! Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike. I've been attempting to source Vonda N. McIntyre bibliography, and been running into issues where very many stories don't have full bibliographic information on the internet outside ISFDB. When stories are reprinted, the anthologies just refer to the magazine, and not to date and volume. Do you know of other sources that might connect stories to the volume and issue they were published in? Vanamonde ( Talk) 16:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Due to a recent PC crash, I have lost access both to my jstor password and the email a/c used for retrieval. Yeah, I know and feel tick here. In the meantime, if you could get and email [1] would appreciate a lot. My bad, um what can I say. Ceoil ( talk) 06:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike; I hope you're well. The logo image in this article has been nominated for deletion, as it is too complex to be PD. Seems I made the wrong call. You may want to replace it with a non-free cover, as I suspect (but can't remember) that this was what was in use before I uploaded the logo image. Josh Milburn ( talk) 13:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
As our foremost subject-matter expert on SF, you may be interested and able to help us with this discussion. Andrew🐉( talk) 08:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello again! Apologies for the rather random message. I have a question about the "Inspired" (song) article. An IP user has been marking the song as a single although I have already cited sources in the article that support its status as a promotional single. I have already reverted their edit twice. In the first edit summary, I pointed out the existing sources in the article, and in the second edit summary, I encouraged them to open a talk page discussion to avoid edit warring. I know I should not revert their edit if they do it a third time. I was wondering if you had any advice on what I should do if this IP user continues making these edits on the page? Thank you in advance! I am sure the IP user means well, and I am always rather uncertain how to best handle these types of situations. Aoba47 ( talk) 15:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Ten years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike, I've another source request, if it's not too much trouble. I'm trying to get a decent number of magazine reviews for Dreamsnake to fill out the commentary from scholars, etc; do you have to own F&SF, January 1979, Asimov's Science Fiction, September-October 1978, or Locus, #216 November 1978? All have reviews that I would expect to be decent. Thanks in advance; not a problem if you don't have them. Vanamonde ( Talk) 20:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
One other suggestion; I mentioned to my wife, who’s a fan of both Dreamsnake and The Exile Waiting, that you were working on the article, and she reminded me of Sarah Lefanu’s book In the Chinks of the World Machine, about feminist sf. We think it has at least some discussion of McIntyre, and a look on Google Books confirms that, though there’s not enough visible to tell how useful it would be. Do you have a copy? I used to own one but if I still have it I’ve no idea where it is. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 23:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Good start with [2]. I recommend copying it to your sandbox and restoring it as soon as the fancruft mess is deleted, we will get a new article and maybe we can even WP:DYK it. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:52, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
I expanded Far future in fiction and started Near future in fiction. That's good news. Bad news - future history. Wonder if it shouldn't also be blown up and rewriten from scratch... sigh. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:16, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike, I was looking through your table of FAC opposes for September. There is only one oppose (from HĐ) that wasn't withdrawn. But I wonder whether you overlooked Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Who by Numbers Tour/archive1. That opened on 23 September and was archived a couple of days later with two opposes. SarahSV (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Eight years! |
---|
I am still proud of the TFA 1 September ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Infinity Science Fiction, "about another minor science fiction magazine of the late 1950s. Its main claim to fame is for publishing Arthur Clarke's story "The Star", which was rejected by The Saturday Evening Post as blasphemous, but which went on to win that year's Hugo Award and is now considered a classic."! --
Signing so this will archive. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 16:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
... and today for Super-Science Fiction, "about a minor magazine from the late 1950s. It wouldn't have had enough meat on the bones to get further than GA if it weren't that Robert Silverberg, a well-known sf writer, reminisced about it in the introduction to one of his collections of stories."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
The Worm in my Egg Cream Award | |
This is for helping me get Squirm it's Featured Article status. Went a long way to get it to there and your criticisms helped get it to where it is now GamerPro64 14:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hello Mike. I have nominated my article Fasana-e-Azad for GA. Could you review it ? If you are busy, no problem at all. User:Oulfis had started the review, but he is inactive since almost one month. Thanks. -- Gazal world ( talk) 17:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Science Fiction Monthly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roger Dean. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:10, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Mike, it occurs to me that you'd find page mover rights useful if you ever need to clean up the FAC history of an article. I'd give you the flag in a heartbeat, but wanted to check whether there was a reason you didn't want it. Vanamonde ( Talk) 17:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 29, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 29, 2020. Congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 16:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Mike, ipad typing ... could you look at the last thread at WT:FAR and tell me if you know of other high N FAs I should check? Most of the high Ns are defeatured ... eg, New York City ... might there be errors other than Jesus ? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:45, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | ||
Thanks for all your help during the FAC for Warner Bros. Movie World! — CR4ZE ( T • C) 15:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC) |
I wanted to say thank you, and tell you that, you now have a lifelong fan. I hope you're okay with googly-eyed adoration. Oh, and send you this too: [3] I do remember correctly that you do have a sense of humor right?
Be safe, and please have a Happy Thanksgiving wherever you are!
Jenhawk777 (
talk) has given you a
Turkey! Turkeys promote
WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving!
Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{subst:Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Mike, if I may trouble you, get thee over to WP:URFA/2020 and add a "Satisfactory" note to your older FAs that you have watched and that are still at standard. They don't have to be perfect; we need to sort out which of the very old FAs need to go to WP:FAR, and which would be an embarrassment if run on the mainpage. If you indicate which of yours are "Satisfactory" (good enough), other editors are then triggered to look in, and get those moved off the list, so we can focus on the truly deficient (which are typically those that are no longer watched by their nominators). Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:47, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. The script recently received a significant update, detailed below.
If you have any feedback, requested features, or domains to add/remove, don't hesitate to bring it up on the script's talk page. Thank you! ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 23:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a user of Cite Unseen. If you no longer wish to receive very occasional updates, you may remove yourself from the mailing list.
Season's Greetings | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Magi (Jan Mostaert) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 12:11, 19 December 2020 (UTC) |
Happy holidays | ||
Dear Mike, For you and all your loved ones, "Let there be mercy".
|
Natalis soli invicto! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC) |
Here or my talk page is fine. Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Season's Greetings | ||
Seasons greetings. Hope you and yours are safe and well during this rather bleak period, though I think we will get through it. Best Ceoil ( talk) 02:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Mike, I hope you had a great Christmas? If you could post my FAC reviewing stats to my talk page when you get a chance, that'd be appreciated. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
I can't speak for Ian Rose and Sarastro1, but I don't tend to follow nominations closely unless they are particularly controversial—I read through them comprehensively only when I begin considering action on them. This was more of Raul's approach but I'm well aware that Sandy in particular would spend hours (sometimes each day) combing through nominations and looking for issues. ... LaserI sure did :) I tried not to let off-topic or civility get out of hand. I used the "move to talk". I am worried that the results of some RFCs were, and continue to be, overstated and overinterpreted, and might need to be revisited. At what point did we switch from the idea that it was the delegate/coordinator responsibility to make sure all aspects had been reviewed, to the idea that if something was neglected it is not their job to flag it, their ONLY task was to judge consensus? What a detriment to FAC which was once known as the place where the buck stopped. Not only did I deal with inappropriate behaviors, faulty use of templates, moving off-topic to talk, unactionable commentary ... as soon as I saw it ... if I saw that a FAC had multiple Supports and looked "ready" for promotion, but there were outstanding issues that no one had reviewed for ... obvious prose issues, or a MOS review had not been done, or I could spot any other issue that no one had addressed or reviewed for ... I flagged that as needing attention before promotion. Have we really disempowered Coords from being able to do that today? Have we really moved to a model where reviewers only option to the Oppose is to remain silent (I admit to feeling bullied into silence myself on problematic noms, and there are probably at least ten on the page right now that I would have oppose in different times), and Coords are forced to promote without stating that something has not yet been looked at, because we have so hamstrung then based on interpretations of RFCs? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy New Year and a Prosperous 2021! | |
Hello Mike Christie, heartfelt and warm greetings for the New Year 2021. May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. I am wishing you and your loved ones all the best. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Happy New Year. |
Thank you today for Knap Hill, "about an Neolithic site on a hill in northern Wiltshire. It's a causewayed enclosure, one of the major types of Neolithic earthwork, and is historically interesting as it's the first one that was excavated to the point where the characteristics of a causewayed enclosure could be clearly seen -- an encircling ditch and bank with many more entrances, or causeways, than made sense if the earthworks were for defence."! - If my card 1 or card 2 speaks to you, take it, with best wishes for a new year. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Wow | |
Fascinating material! Who knew that Neolithic enclosed causeways could be so fascinating? Great read, congrats on the TFA.
I tried to find an appropriate pottery image but went for this flint axe-head instead. Shearonink ( talk) 14:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Mike, I hope this finds you well. I was wondering if I could interest you (or any tpw who may see this) in commenting at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/O Captain! My Captain!/archive1. I'm loathe to request favors, but it seems that nobody is very interested in giving it a review and the co-ords have suggested that it may be in danger of getting archived. Hope your holidays are pleasant and I wish you and yours all the best as we enter a new year. Please don't feel obligated to comment-- I can only imagine how busy you must be, but I'd greatly appreciate it if you did. Thanks for all the hard work you've put into content work this year. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 15:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mike Christie! I am hoping you and yours had such a wonderful holiday season that you are in a good mood! If so, I have just completed a rewrite of another monstrously long article, and will eventually post a request for a peer review, but it sure would benefit from a once over from you before that. Don't worry - not intending FA - just looking to improve quality. It needs polishing with a fresh eye. If you don't have time, I understand. I still hope you are well and happy! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 06:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I believe you are being very possessive over this article. Why would you revert an editor acting in good faith? A minute ago I added an additional reference to Battle of Hastings: William of Jumieges as I noted it is an important source for the battle but is not in the reference list. And you reverted it. It's a good job I save my work. Djp.mortimer ( talk) 13:54, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
We just left the terminal with our next load and are going to be bouncing thru Indiana for the next few hours. Impossible to get out laptop, much less deal with the above. Any 3RR reports will have to be done by someone else ...I’m doing this on my iPad... Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Mike, when you have some time, I'd like to take you up on your offer, if still available, to look at Dreamsnake before FAC. I hope you don't mind that it's also at GAN; wait times there are often measured in months... Vanamonde ( Talk) 23:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Whitehawk camp excavation plan 1929 and 1932-1933.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 03:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Whitehawk camp excavations 1929 and 1935.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 03:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
The file File:Fantastic titles grid.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Replaced by wikitable in the article.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
P,TO 19104 (
talk) (
contribs) 01:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | ||
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your unceasing work on generating useful and informative facts and figures regarding FAC. Wonderful stuff. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
Hiya I have this nagging question about whether the racecourse at Whitehawk is sited on a former cursus heading towards the causewayed enclosure. This isn't a comment that needs to go on Whitehawk Camp because I've never read anything to suggest it, but I just thought I'd drop you a line since you've probably read all the available documents and I was wondering if you'd seen it mentioned anywhere. Nothing remains today, it's just an intriguing thought inspired by visiting sites in Cumbria and Yorkshire from around the same time period. Cheers! Mujinga ( talk) 17:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Later when we get to the unload. After my lazy self does a lazy or something. Ealdgyth ( talk) 13:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
But Isento did apologize on my talk page. Ealdgyth ( talk) 01:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)