![]() | This 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. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
I have closed your RfB as successful. Welcome to the team, and good luck with the new tools. Maxim(talk) 17:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Sir, Thank you very much for dispelling my concerns. Have thanked you on that very talk page. Bkpsusmitaa ( talk) 04:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I've opened a bureaucrat chat for a current RfA. Your input would be most appreciated at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RexxS/Bureaucrat chat. Best regards, Maxim(talk) 22:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() | |
... with thanks from QAI |
There are two users, "ChangeTheRulesComrade" and "Emuwren" who are engaged in an edit war on the entry pages for Australian writer Van Badham ( /info/en/?search=Van_Badham) and Secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Sally McManus ( /info/en/?search=Sally_McManus). Their edits relate to adding in a false reference that Van Badham co-authored a book with Sally McManus. This can be seen in the change logs. There is currently a Federal election in Australia, and obviously political activists are attempting to cause trouble by doing this edit. I'm happy to keep an eye on the pages, but would it be possible to have the pages locked? Thanks. Lymantriidae ( talk) 12:57, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello Sir,
Can you please help in making changes to my article 'Jag Chima'. It has been rejected twice by StraussInTheHouse.
Here is the article - Draft:Jag_Chima
Any pointers would be highly appreciated.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaurav Dhingra PG ( talk • contribs) 06:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry but I'm new to wiki. Does your edit mean it is now OK to be published? I added lots of citations, lots of bits were removed - I assume they were too close to the associated citation so were deemed copyright breach. Ok for now, I think I need to represent those but until the basic article is published it's very difficult to interpret various editor actions. What is the basic next steps I need to take please? Gedgmoss ( talk) 10:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)G.Moss Gedgmoss ( talk) 10:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioscrivo ( talk • contribs) 14:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
How about this proposal? You are the admin who declined the prior request. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 21:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. I went through WP:BLOCK, WP:GAB, and appealing block; but I couldnt find about dealing with stale unblock requests on any of the pages. I think there is something like "procedural decline, declining stale request". What to do when one comes across a stale unblock request? Say, 30 days old or more. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Dear "Primefac".
You very kindly looked in and left some comments on the first draft I submitted of an article titled "Fleecehold". I then spent an intensely busy week re-working the article, eliminating all opinion, eliminating anything "primary", and ensuring that every statement is evidenced by a citation. Then I resubmitted, but the article was very swiftly rejected as if by a swashbuckling blow from a warlord who surely failed to carefully examine the editing record, and who must have failed to observe the substantial rewriting.
I really can do no more for this suggested entry about an issue which is extremely topical in the UK today. Only this morning, 16 April, further articles about Fleecehold issues have appeared in the UK press, AND a 40-minute radio documentary about Fleecehold was broadcast on BBC Radio 4's "You and Yours" programme at lunch-time, so I am appealing to YOU, Primefac, to do whatever you can to ensure the article is published.
Could you, please, fashion it according to whatever formula you know the Wikipedia guardians require? I don't mind at all if it is altered - after all, once it is published it will then be edited by many people as weeks, months, and years pass by.
Further background to my request to you, is as follows.
The rejection reason was again that the article "reads more like an essay", but both submissions were written according to encyclopedic form, that is, I used encyclopedia articles as models. So the submission does not have the form, style, or the elements of an essay (those elements being, as you are most probably aware: an exordium, followed by narration, partition, arguments, refutation, and conclusion). There is not even a classical introduction or a conclusion in the submission. It only presents information about what has occurred, and what has been stated in reputable secondary sources.
So the submission does not, for example, bear any similarity to any of the 33 essays by the celebrated essayists presented in Morley's "Modern Essays", as at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38280/38280-h/38280-h.htm
As the article's list of External Sources shows, the issue of Fleecehold has been "hot" in the UK since 2016, and I wrote the submission expecting that Wikipedia would be eager to include an informative entry for the benefit of readers. I am sure the submission could be better as it is rare that any article cannot be improved in some way. However, I am aware that the submission is majorly more informative and helpful than many of the articles which can currently be read in Wikipedia. In terms of formatting, it is possible that the number of endnotes could be reduced by using Wikipedia's method of combining endnotes, but after a month's work on this article I can afford no further time learning how to implement Wikipedia's styles, particularly as it is highly unlikely that I will ever submit another article, given that I have never submitted an article before.
So, please, Primefac, could you make the submission publishable? Or could you, please, facilitate an expert Wikipedian doing whatever is necessary to make the piece publishable as soon as possible?
The submission is at: /info/en/?search=Draft:Fleecehold#Fleecehold
Lastly, to ensure you fully understand my puzzlement, the following Wikipedia articles, all very recently edited, are longer and more complex than the Fleecehold submission.
An article on a pop-star: /info/en/?search=Phil_Collins Last edited on 7 April 2019, at 21:15.
An article on a medieval nobleman: /info/en/?search=William_de_Ros,_6th_Baron_de_Ros Last edited on 7 March 2019
Article on an economic idea: /info/en/?search=Neoliberalism Last edited on 5 April 2019
Article on a religion: /info/en/?search=Catholic_Church Last edited on 31 March 2019
Article on mythology: /info/en/?search=Greek_mythology Last edited on 6 March 2019
Please help as best you possibly can, for the benefit of the dissemination of knowledge!
Over the course of many years, I have instructed 100s of students in the art of essay-writing, so I reach out to you in exasperation. (My career has been that of a university lecturer in English Literature, Business English, and Business Communication, my postgraduate qualifications being in Linguistics.) I can do no more for this article, except ask you to take care of it.
Sincerely, Ioscrivo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioscrivo ( talk • contribs) 14:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Dear Primefac,
Thank you for your comments.
I appreciate that the draft will appear wordy to readers who are unfamiliar with the issues, particularly as the issues are entirely new, and complex. I do believe though that a careful reading of the articles which have been selected for the "External Sources" section of the draft will assist anyone who is unfamiliar with the issues to fully comprehend the whole submission.
I am delighted that Ancheta Wis has advised that they are reworking the draft.
Regards,
Ioscrivo ( talk) 13:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC).
Now that I'm no longer blocked, would you please unblock my alternate accounts Zawl, FWTH, FloodedBot, Z0 and KingAndGod that were (enthusiastically) blocked because of this account, according to the reason given "alt account of blocked user"? I'm not going to use them per the ArbCom sanction but they do not necessarily need to remain blocked. -- Flooded w/them 100s 10:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
I was hoping you could re-review the Draft:Lowndes County Freedom Organization. I rewrote the article to satisfy stub-class standards. Mitchumch ( talk) 18:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there. I see you added semi-protection to {{ yellow}}. Recently there was vandalism done to {{ lime}}. Where can I ask to have that template semi-protected as well? It was up for a few hours and caused issues at Mueller Report. Thanks, - Paul T +/ C 13:42, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Saw you reverted my change to the archived Editing Restrictions page; why would my old account name need to be listed? The restriction is still in place on this account. All that's changed is the name, and I need to have that removed per the fact that it contains personal information that I can't have up here anymore. Renamed user 2423tgiuowf 00:10, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. You just deleted Tonga women's national under-18 futsal team per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solomon Islands national under-18 futsal team. However, the article was never actually tagged with an AfD notice, and per WP:MULTIAFD it needs to be tagged. See also the discussion at User talk:DannyS712#AFD where I removed speedy deletion tags from the article for the same reason - looking through the (now-deleted) history, the page was never tagged. Would you be willing to restore it please? Thank, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 21:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello Primefac. Firstly I would like to thank you for restoring my user page on Wikipedia. However, I am just concerned why it was deleted, though I think I know why.
Looking forward for your answer,
DerpieDerpie :D 00:10, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Oh, I get what you're saying.
Thank you for the clear answer,
DerpieDerpie :D 00:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 15#Template:Infobox UK place - "The result of the discussion was keep." Why that?
Could you give more background? Why are UK places treated differently, cf. Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Geography and place#Place? Why exactly should it not be converted to a wrapper? Note the bold part of the proposal "No content will be lost, no code in the articles will change - just the back-end code in the template itself will be changed to use Infobox settlement.". Ping User:Gonnym 77.13.194.116 ( talk) 11:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Bureaucrat's Barnstar |
Congratulations on closing your first RfA! MelanieN ( talk) 02:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hopefully it became pretty clear very early that {{ edit template-protected}} is expected to become the main source of my edits. In other words, to offer help for other users more than do own projects. Do you expect me now to invent some MediaWiki-coded stuff while “policies and opinions certainly [changed]” since my old times? How to learn what should I write in sandboxes? But I suspect that your ruling was actually determined by some other factors, such as my substandard civility record in Wikipedia and controversies on Commons; it would be nice to mistake about that. Have a good day. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 21:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Administrators
must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Seen as you actually Declinined, your thoughts are requested. ~ RhinosF1 (chat - live)/ (contribs) 16:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, - Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so
will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
![]() |
I just wanted to belatedly give you some wikilove after reading about you getting your bureaucratship. I'm sure you'll need caffeine eventually. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message ( talk to me) ( My edits) @ 05:39, 5 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hi Primefac, I was wondering if you could help with a housekeeping revdel. I have just accepted this article at AfC which seems to have originated from a user sandbox and carried all the unrelated history from previous edits. This diff appears to be the starting point of the actual article. Previous entries are irrelevant to the article. Many thanks. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 11:53, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, you might like to read WP:LOGOUT. The editor disclosed that they are editing when logged out, so any sockpuppetry is automatically out of question. Regards, — kashmīrī TALK 00:41, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address. The "nutshell" header includes
Do not use ... to stir up controversy. Yes, editing while logged out (in the strictest sense) is allowed, but not when it's borderline gravedancing and (because of being logged out) borderline aspersions/personal attacks (i.e. no diffs to back up their claims). Primefac ( talk) 00:51, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
low-profile userwho isn't an ArbCom member? No, the editor wrote about their own case, and they have full rights to do so, issuing gag orders is a step too far IMHO.
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
16:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
[1]. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 20:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, Greetings. Is there a way to reserve the editor who writes the article as the original creator (so they name would shown on the article) instead of the editor who did the redirect edit? Also how do we go about accepting a draft which the article name already existed via a redirect - article here - Draft:Expedition 62 and the redirect here [2]? (note I have the page move right - not sure this right is applicable for the question above). Thanks in advance. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA( talk) 08:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for this action. I know that being an admin is a difficult job, and I'm grateful to those of you who are willing to take it on, despite the negative feedback that inevitably comes with it. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 14:03, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Template:Charmap seems to be broken... -- Polluks ★ 17:41, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello, it's been a while since Primefac deleted /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bloss%C3%B6m_Records
Since then the company has only grown and now we need to update the Wikipage as well as un-delete it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeinformationfront ( talk • contribs) 16:21, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
I have seen from the historic of the wiki page of warner chappel that the part concerning Mumbo Jumbo has been edited/removed many time. Some of the reason were about that source that was not reliable.
I do not know if this will be sufficient as a source, but here the link to an article that I suppose could solve the issue: https://5mag.net/news/mumbo-jumbo-youtube-copyright-warner-chappell/
Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.89.40.232 ( talk) 18:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi
You recently deleted a post by Anthony Bradbury on my talk page. Could you please undo that change? I did not do a copy of the text just yet.
Thanks in advance.
Regards, Frederikwh ( talk) 05:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Primefac! When you moved User:Binod2055 to Draft:Anish Luitel, [3] were you aware that Draft:Anish Luitel is create protected? [4] Knowing it had been salted, I was puzzled to see it as a blue link. Now I understand why: only an administrator could have created it. -- MelanieN ( talk) 16:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi you have protected Dipika Kakar's page but you forgot to add the protection symbol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.91.41 ( talk) 15:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok but don't you have to do it. I just informed you so you know.
Could you replace {{ cite}} with {{ citation}}. It is an outdated alias that makes CS1 and CS2 names confusing. {{ citation journal}} to {{ cite journal}} is a similar templat of CS1/CS2 confusion. Maybe even the spaces lacking {{ citeweb}}, {{ citejournal}}, {{ citepaper}}, and {{ citebook}} too which at least do not cross CS1/CS2 boundaries. AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 00:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello Primefac, thanks for your time, you just helped me with a question regarding using a picture of an interview from a Latino newspaper celebrating their 30th anniversary. How can I use that interview as "cite news" if there is no link to it? The interview is from 2009, and their web archives only go 5 years back. Disclaimer: the company is paying me to write that article and they gave me permission to publish that picture to illustrate the article. This might be a stretch but can I cite mentioning i.e. "see picture #3"? or Is it acceptable for Wikipedia to link to their website but not to the specific article? Can I still use the interview as a source doing a rephrasing? Thanks again!!ArgieAtl19 ArgieAtl19 ( talk) 20:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
|url=
parameter when you use {{
cite news}}. If the newspaper itself is allowing permission for an image to be uploaded, you (or they) should follow the instructions at
Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials so that it can be released for use on the article in question.Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I've opened an ANI thread about Chahal. I did not mention you in the thread, but given your recent involvement with the topic, I felt you should know about it. Lepricavark ( talk) 18:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
As mentioned in my request for AWB access, I plan on using a new alternate account, User:AspeningAWB, for AWB edits as there will probably be a lot of them. I can't use AWB as AspeningAWB because that username isn't on the check list. Can you add AspeningAWB to the list? Aspening ( talk) 19:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For repeatedly closing old TfD nominations. * Pppery * survives 23:35, 25 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hi Primefac, I’m sorry about the changes on Template:Infobox time zone UTC. I’m not sure how to edit the article without making mistakes because I copied a revision from August 2018 and the reason why I did that is because I’m not sure how to edit the article without copying an old revision. Can you please show me how to edit the article without making mistakes because I'm worried the next time I edit I might make another mistake, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 11:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I used the sandbox for my proposed changes to the article and then I put them down on the article. I have removed time zones UTC+01:30, UTC+02:30 and UTC+08:30 because these time zones are currently not being used by any country and I have also made the info is larger so it makes it easier for people to click on the time zones on the template. I made these changes because I want to help fix Wikipedia for you and I hope you agree with them. Lachlb ( talk) 07:59, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I blanked because it had OS-able details e.g. phone number, I think it's been cleaned now. Thanks, SITH (talk) 09:30, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
This is for your valuable contributions to Wikipedia as an Administrator. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 10:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC) |
[5] bad source, and in the UK most senior lecturers are the equivalent of full professors with lecturers being the same as junior professors. I was a tenured lecturer and not happy with the title. Senior lecturers at Oxford and Cambridge almost revolted and that ushered in a change of titles. It was embarrassing for them at international conferences. I might block him, he's started edit warring and his edits violate NPOV and particularly BLP. On my iPad in a car swinging around, no fun editing! Doug Weller talk 07:24, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Primefac: Could you get rid of this redirect. I would like to put draft at Draft:Cyclone Dineo into it. Thanks. scope_creep Talk 15:42, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Primefac:. I hope you are doing well and thank you for being the main moderator for my page. I read through all of these alerts I received and I wrote up a paragraph on my talk page for you and the other moderators to give a better understanding. I am getting alot of questions regarding Netflix and the show is growing and growing. I am being invited to give speeches across the country. People are researching me and you are simply going to have more activity from my page. Pleaee read my comments though on how I feel about some of the things people are trying to do. At the end of the day the moderators decide and I am not trying to influence or change things. I am simply trying to introduce another side to this. I actually agree with you taking out the Clandestine service for different reasons though. Thank you for helping make my page as accurate as possible. Everettstern ( talk) 04:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Primefac:, I am reviewing all of these alerts. May you please bann Pangolin876 from creating a company page for me. I am not sure why this person or group is trying to do this and they have my company spelled wrong and as an intellgiece director there is something wrong with this. This person does not represent me or anyone from my organization. I have not hired anyone to do ANYTHING for me on wikipedia. I am reading some of there comments and they are the ones going through my campaign donations. I do not like where this is going. If Tactical Rabbit is going to submit a company page I would want it to be offical and me disclosing it has official company contributions to it. Every other of my competitors have done this. We are a large company and this has to be done properly. No adverisement page. In fact the Everett Stern page covers Tactcial Rabbit tremendously so I am not sure we need a page. Either way I do not like how this person or group inserted themselves. If they want to comment on my page that is fine but submitting pages for my company? There is bad faith in that and I am concerned. What was even submitted? Was it accurate? If it read like an advertisement as I read then what message were they trying to convey? If we are going to have a company page for a company I built from nothing it had better be accurate. I dont want him or her notified. They could even be a group of people trying to commit some kind of scam against me. They see a high profile figure with a company and no company site and then they try to hit me up for money after it is up... There are a number of bad guys can try and get me with this. After my previous experience I do not like the way this looks. I just want them blocked please. I have nothing to do with this and I do NOT want a company page from this person or group. I he/she/or group was legit why not notify me about the company page? I just ran accross it when I clicked on their name and a Tactical Rabbit Submission popped up. If they felt the need to create a company page for me then why not post to me saying "Hey we love your work we are going to do research and try to get a company page going." That is not what happened. Randomly forming a company page? Something is off. Everettstern ( talk) 04:43, 2 June 2019 (UTC) --- I just read another moderators post about multiple users or accounts this person is using. I am now seriously concerned. I have not hired anyone to do anything to my Wikipedia. I actually like it the way it is. As someone who has been targeted before I am concerened about being set up again. If someone wants to make changes to my page - good or bad - I am all for that as long as it is in good faith. As someone who is nationally known for his ethics I have a real problem with what is going on. If someone or a group is making changes to my account especially in the formation of company pages then I have an issue. Of course you are asking if this person or group is being paid by me. It looks very suspicious. Now that I am looking at it the statements and changes are accurate but why the company page? I think these people or person are trying to set me up a house of cards that they can extort and and then the house comes down. This is the same situation like before except I have not been approached yet. A group of college kids watching Netflix and doing research on me and think Tactical Rabbit is cool leading to a dradt up of a page is one thing, but this is different. I have nothing to prove my allegations, but all I can say whatever this user is trying to submit for me - I do not want it. I want to make that very clear. I am not interested in some random Tactical Rabbit page being created about me by who knows who with an unknown intention. I do not want to have to worry about this or my page being attacked. My moderators have always looked out for me. Please watch out for an attack on the page. And please ban this user as they are clearly doing things that me or my associates have not authorized. I am going to be signing off of Wikiepedia for a while again as I rarely check this. I sign back in and post if I am approached with an extortion attempt. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everettstern ( talk • contribs) 06:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Looking over
Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_April_3#Template:Cleanup-SVG, I'm thinking there's no need for Twinkle to include {{
Cleanup-SVG}}? It uses type=SVG
per
Ahecht, but {{
Cleanup image}} doesn't take a type
parameter, so it doesn't do anything, right? Maybe it could still add to
Category:SVGs for cleanup, which is (oddly?) not a subcategory of
Category:Files for cleanup? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Amorymeltzer (
talk •
contribs)
19:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Could you reconsider your closure of Talk:Southeast Asian Games#Requested move 26 May 2019? The second !voter provided a rationale that seemed apparently confused, since the move in question concerned only "SEA Games", not any other iteration of "SEA", and was in no way ambiguous like the (rather irrelevant) WWF example they cited. To me it seems the outcome would be "no consensus" at best. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 06:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_28#Template:Infobox_Prefecture_Japan - it was 3 "replace and delete" and 2 "keep" when you relisted, could you explain why? @ Pigsonthewing: 78.54.88.162 ( talk) 14:57, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Lachlb not only mass edits article and template space against consensus, but also removes talk, now the second time, first:
77.13.28.252 ( talk) 15:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I think you made a mistake when you edited Template:Infobox time zone UTC by forgetting to add time zones UTC-10:30, UTC-08:30, UTC+07:30 and UTC+09:45. Can you please add these time zones down because I think you forgot to put them down, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 09:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC
What is a redlinked entry? Did it just need a source or was it because the actor didn't have a wikipedia entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.157.130 ( talk) 00:30, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
But that again is only your opinion..unless somewhere on the rules page says that tvguide is considered acceptable. If those two films can be found on tvguide, would that override deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.157.130 ( talk) 01:38, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
they're reliable, independent verification that the shows existisn't my opinion, but that's not really the point. Nothing has been "deleted", just removed. All content on Wikipedia needs to be properly sourced, so if a fact is sourced it can be added into an article. Primefac ( talk) 01:40, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
If it's not your opinion/your ruling then whose is it? What gave you the idea that it's reliable? Is there a link here that shows what is considered an acceptable source? If the administrators ruled that only tvguide and a few slected sources are acceptable then you got me and I can't counter argue you anymore. It just says you are an oversighter so I don't know if you are a mod or not. I'm not disagreeing with you in regards to the need to properly source something. But you didn't answer my question about movies becoming a reliable source if tv guide lists it (not that I plan on looking for it at this point). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.157.130 ( talk) 02:06, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I can’t put my proposed changes down that I used in the sandbox today like you said yesterday onto the main page Template:Infobox time zone UTC because the page is locked, what I do next after I’ve used the sandbox to get my proposed changes down onto the main template? Thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 13:09, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
Hi. I'd like to follow up on User talk:Primefac/Archive 22#BRFA - Substituting templates. I recently ran a query, Quarry:query/36726, and found that there are many templates that should be substituted but aren't automatically. Have you given the matter any more thought? -- DannyS712 ( talk) 03:36, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
parameter is superfluous and it should trigger auto-subst all the time. If it's only a suggestion, then why are using the template in the first place?
Primefac (
talk)
02:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I’ve made a proposal on the template talk page and transcluded the template and sandbox into the testcases pages in Template:Infobox time zone UTC, what do I do next now to put my proposed changes on the main template? Thank you Lachlb ( talk) 12:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
See this. I just nominated some templates at TfD, but they're template editor-protected so I can't add the appropriate notices. Retro ( talk | contribs) 00:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Hiya thanks for checking in on the page I tried to make. I haven't edited in a long time and I must have made some mistake.
I was confused because I tried to make a page for a person named Andrea Lewis, and I know there are some others with that name, so I wanted to clarify it was a Jamaican person of note. I tried to make a page for Andrea Lewis (Jamaica)and submit it for review. But then when I added a link to the Andrea Lewis (Jamaica) page on another page - it appeared not to link to the one I submitted, but to link to an empty page, which allowed me to create a whole new page under the same name. I would prefer to have it be live and visible and linked-to, so I tried to replace the empty text of the new page with the draft. That got it flagged, I assume.
Would you mind explaining: How can I make the draft be linked to, if I can't recreate the draft on the linked-to page? If I delete the draft submitted for review (I note there is a significant backlog), can I just add that text back into the page that you deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djripley ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Draft:
prefix (
Draft:Andrea Lewis (Jamaica)).
DannyS712 (
talk)
02:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)Hi Primefac, I have left a message on Template talk:Infobox time zone UTC regarding why we should unlock the template as we used to because I made a mistake by accidentally using edit warring when I didn’t know before I edited so now I know not to. I’m sorry I used edit warring when editing and I promise I won’t use it again, so I think we should unlock the template as we used to because me using edit warring was a mistake, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 11:28, 18 June 2019
Hi Primefac, how long will it take for my proposed changes to Template:Infobox time zone UTC be discussed because I really want to put them down on the main template to help improve the article and Wikipedia, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 12:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I have just left a message on Template:Infobox time zone UTC requesting that the split proposal be installed and move the unused time zones onto a separate template and should not have a colour or have a key " are no longer used. Please can you have a look at my edit requests and say what you think of them, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 10:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I’ve heard there has been discussions about my request to unlock the template on 1 August this year. I wanted to ask you a question about how I can install my proposed changes if the template gets unlocked because I’m worried I might make a mistake when I install them? Can you please show me the best way to avoid them getting deleted and the template locked again.
I hope my proposed changes to the template are going to get consensus and not get into a situation that led to the initial lock on the template, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 15:35, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Primefac, I left a message that if Template:Infobox time zone UTC is unlocked my proposed changes will be made consensus and will not get into a situation that led to the initial lock of the page on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 17:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. A link to Wikipedia on policy pages may be counter-intuitive at first, but makes sense in terms of both new and regular users seeing it and deciding to read the Wikipedia article (which they may have never thought of reading). A link also makes sense in terms of understanding the full concept of the encyclopedia, which, again, many editors (new, old, or wandering by for a look) and the project may benefit from. So I think the links should stay, and were already on many pages. Thanks for the edit summary. Randy Kryn ( talk) 13:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I might be missing something, but this thread did not seem to indicate cause for this action. Would you mind explaining in a few details why you blocked that user? Please ping any response. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 02:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, since you protected the template, I can't make the change myself. Can you arrange a parameter for teams which withdrew (e.g. bankrupcy or voluntary relegation) or got removed (e.g. multiple no shows or misbehavior of players/fans) from a league (during the season). The documentation mentions a "Dissolved" parameter. However this parameter is not implemented. Dissolved doesn't cover all scenario's anyway. In case of a voluntary relegation, dissolved isn't the appropriate term. So maybe even 2 parameters, "dossived" and "withdrawn". -- Sb008 ( talk) 19:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I tried to edit that discussion but it concluded before I had the chance to participate again. I was at work. I'm asking for your assistance because you were on the side of the section. I don't know if you were part of the discussion but I don't know how to contact them as a whole. And contacting them individually seems like too much work to me. If you can't then simply tell me so.
"Understood and I'll try to get better as an editor in this regard as it is correct I am not the best with edit summaries and I don't have much experience on Talk pages with other editors and I should begin to do that more. I need to personally improve in this regard. I had no intention of creating this section/discussion to belittle or demean MarnetteD. As redundant as it is to restate I have no quarrel with someone I don't know personally. I will try to take it to the forums you guys have told me of such as WT:FILM, WP:OR, WP:NOTESSAY, and WP:SECONDARY. Which before this I had not known about it. I will state that it's hard to learn from other editors as I often get nothing but minor snippets from them. Personally I wish there was an editor that would help me improve in all these regards by guiding me step by step. Now I know this is a content dispute and not behavioral. I didn't know which forum to take this to, I simply thought I was taking the appropriate actions. I have nothing else to comment on and I regard this case as closed. Thank you for all of you taking your time to even discuss this with me.
If any of you dislike me then that's fine, I don't any of you personally so that would be a waste of emotional effort on your part and mine. I don't know if any of you do, I simply am just stating this if that is the case with anyone here or other editors not on here who take issue with my problematic editing. This is simply a case of Wikipedia being a difficult thing to figure out.
If anyone receives this please know there was never any malicious intent." User:IceBrotherhood ( talk 21:38, 20 June 2019
Is Wikipedia talk:Bots/Archive index and Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox/search needed now that Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox is more functional? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar |
For Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:24, 23 June 2019 (UTC) |
Primefac,
I see that you have the authority to allow editors to use the AutoWikiBrowser. You have addressed the use-requests of three editors, who all applied for permission after I did, yet you did not address my request.
If this place is the proper forum for doing so, please share your reasoning for neither approving or denying my request for permission to use the AutoWikiBrowser. If it is proper that this discussion takes place somewhere else, then I apologize for bringing up the question here, and I will be happy to repeat my question wherever you deem is the best place for us to discuss the situation.
I appreciate your attention to this matter, and I thank you, for your work on Wikipedia. catsmoke ( talk) 14:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
The Ministry of Justice of Romania is one of the ministries of the Romanian Government. It administers the judicial system" then there's not enough information for an article. You are more than welcome to create a list article of the Justice Ministers, but that would likely be located at List of Justice Ministers of Romania, similar to List of Ministers of Finance of Romania. Primefac ( talk) 13:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Per you edits Steve Kazor, on what basis should we need redundant references in infoboxes? Such references are typically absent from Good Articles and others well-developed articles. Jweiss11 ( talk)
This is a courtesy note that based on your recent close [6] I have recommended that you be added as a party to the pending WJBscribe case [7] Regards, Crazynas t 09:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Given the action taken re WJBscribe, I have added you as a party to case request. - SchroCat ( talk) 10:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
I have closed your RfB as successful. Welcome to the team, and good luck with the new tools. Maxim(talk) 17:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Sir, Thank you very much for dispelling my concerns. Have thanked you on that very talk page. Bkpsusmitaa ( talk) 04:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I've opened a bureaucrat chat for a current RfA. Your input would be most appreciated at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RexxS/Bureaucrat chat. Best regards, Maxim(talk) 22:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() | |
... with thanks from QAI |
There are two users, "ChangeTheRulesComrade" and "Emuwren" who are engaged in an edit war on the entry pages for Australian writer Van Badham ( /info/en/?search=Van_Badham) and Secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Sally McManus ( /info/en/?search=Sally_McManus). Their edits relate to adding in a false reference that Van Badham co-authored a book with Sally McManus. This can be seen in the change logs. There is currently a Federal election in Australia, and obviously political activists are attempting to cause trouble by doing this edit. I'm happy to keep an eye on the pages, but would it be possible to have the pages locked? Thanks. Lymantriidae ( talk) 12:57, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello Sir,
Can you please help in making changes to my article 'Jag Chima'. It has been rejected twice by StraussInTheHouse.
Here is the article - Draft:Jag_Chima
Any pointers would be highly appreciated.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaurav Dhingra PG ( talk • contribs) 06:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry but I'm new to wiki. Does your edit mean it is now OK to be published? I added lots of citations, lots of bits were removed - I assume they were too close to the associated citation so were deemed copyright breach. Ok for now, I think I need to represent those but until the basic article is published it's very difficult to interpret various editor actions. What is the basic next steps I need to take please? Gedgmoss ( talk) 10:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)G.Moss Gedgmoss ( talk) 10:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioscrivo ( talk • contribs) 14:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
How about this proposal? You are the admin who declined the prior request. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 21:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. I went through WP:BLOCK, WP:GAB, and appealing block; but I couldnt find about dealing with stale unblock requests on any of the pages. I think there is something like "procedural decline, declining stale request". What to do when one comes across a stale unblock request? Say, 30 days old or more. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Dear "Primefac".
You very kindly looked in and left some comments on the first draft I submitted of an article titled "Fleecehold". I then spent an intensely busy week re-working the article, eliminating all opinion, eliminating anything "primary", and ensuring that every statement is evidenced by a citation. Then I resubmitted, but the article was very swiftly rejected as if by a swashbuckling blow from a warlord who surely failed to carefully examine the editing record, and who must have failed to observe the substantial rewriting.
I really can do no more for this suggested entry about an issue which is extremely topical in the UK today. Only this morning, 16 April, further articles about Fleecehold issues have appeared in the UK press, AND a 40-minute radio documentary about Fleecehold was broadcast on BBC Radio 4's "You and Yours" programme at lunch-time, so I am appealing to YOU, Primefac, to do whatever you can to ensure the article is published.
Could you, please, fashion it according to whatever formula you know the Wikipedia guardians require? I don't mind at all if it is altered - after all, once it is published it will then be edited by many people as weeks, months, and years pass by.
Further background to my request to you, is as follows.
The rejection reason was again that the article "reads more like an essay", but both submissions were written according to encyclopedic form, that is, I used encyclopedia articles as models. So the submission does not have the form, style, or the elements of an essay (those elements being, as you are most probably aware: an exordium, followed by narration, partition, arguments, refutation, and conclusion). There is not even a classical introduction or a conclusion in the submission. It only presents information about what has occurred, and what has been stated in reputable secondary sources.
So the submission does not, for example, bear any similarity to any of the 33 essays by the celebrated essayists presented in Morley's "Modern Essays", as at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38280/38280-h/38280-h.htm
As the article's list of External Sources shows, the issue of Fleecehold has been "hot" in the UK since 2016, and I wrote the submission expecting that Wikipedia would be eager to include an informative entry for the benefit of readers. I am sure the submission could be better as it is rare that any article cannot be improved in some way. However, I am aware that the submission is majorly more informative and helpful than many of the articles which can currently be read in Wikipedia. In terms of formatting, it is possible that the number of endnotes could be reduced by using Wikipedia's method of combining endnotes, but after a month's work on this article I can afford no further time learning how to implement Wikipedia's styles, particularly as it is highly unlikely that I will ever submit another article, given that I have never submitted an article before.
So, please, Primefac, could you make the submission publishable? Or could you, please, facilitate an expert Wikipedian doing whatever is necessary to make the piece publishable as soon as possible?
The submission is at: /info/en/?search=Draft:Fleecehold#Fleecehold
Lastly, to ensure you fully understand my puzzlement, the following Wikipedia articles, all very recently edited, are longer and more complex than the Fleecehold submission.
An article on a pop-star: /info/en/?search=Phil_Collins Last edited on 7 April 2019, at 21:15.
An article on a medieval nobleman: /info/en/?search=William_de_Ros,_6th_Baron_de_Ros Last edited on 7 March 2019
Article on an economic idea: /info/en/?search=Neoliberalism Last edited on 5 April 2019
Article on a religion: /info/en/?search=Catholic_Church Last edited on 31 March 2019
Article on mythology: /info/en/?search=Greek_mythology Last edited on 6 March 2019
Please help as best you possibly can, for the benefit of the dissemination of knowledge!
Over the course of many years, I have instructed 100s of students in the art of essay-writing, so I reach out to you in exasperation. (My career has been that of a university lecturer in English Literature, Business English, and Business Communication, my postgraduate qualifications being in Linguistics.) I can do no more for this article, except ask you to take care of it.
Sincerely, Ioscrivo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioscrivo ( talk • contribs) 14:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Dear Primefac,
Thank you for your comments.
I appreciate that the draft will appear wordy to readers who are unfamiliar with the issues, particularly as the issues are entirely new, and complex. I do believe though that a careful reading of the articles which have been selected for the "External Sources" section of the draft will assist anyone who is unfamiliar with the issues to fully comprehend the whole submission.
I am delighted that Ancheta Wis has advised that they are reworking the draft.
Regards,
Ioscrivo ( talk) 13:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC).
Now that I'm no longer blocked, would you please unblock my alternate accounts Zawl, FWTH, FloodedBot, Z0 and KingAndGod that were (enthusiastically) blocked because of this account, according to the reason given "alt account of blocked user"? I'm not going to use them per the ArbCom sanction but they do not necessarily need to remain blocked. -- Flooded w/them 100s 10:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
I was hoping you could re-review the Draft:Lowndes County Freedom Organization. I rewrote the article to satisfy stub-class standards. Mitchumch ( talk) 18:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there. I see you added semi-protection to {{ yellow}}. Recently there was vandalism done to {{ lime}}. Where can I ask to have that template semi-protected as well? It was up for a few hours and caused issues at Mueller Report. Thanks, - Paul T +/ C 13:42, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Saw you reverted my change to the archived Editing Restrictions page; why would my old account name need to be listed? The restriction is still in place on this account. All that's changed is the name, and I need to have that removed per the fact that it contains personal information that I can't have up here anymore. Renamed user 2423tgiuowf 00:10, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. You just deleted Tonga women's national under-18 futsal team per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solomon Islands national under-18 futsal team. However, the article was never actually tagged with an AfD notice, and per WP:MULTIAFD it needs to be tagged. See also the discussion at User talk:DannyS712#AFD where I removed speedy deletion tags from the article for the same reason - looking through the (now-deleted) history, the page was never tagged. Would you be willing to restore it please? Thank, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 21:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello Primefac. Firstly I would like to thank you for restoring my user page on Wikipedia. However, I am just concerned why it was deleted, though I think I know why.
Looking forward for your answer,
DerpieDerpie :D 00:10, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Oh, I get what you're saying.
Thank you for the clear answer,
DerpieDerpie :D 00:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 15#Template:Infobox UK place - "The result of the discussion was keep." Why that?
Could you give more background? Why are UK places treated differently, cf. Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Geography and place#Place? Why exactly should it not be converted to a wrapper? Note the bold part of the proposal "No content will be lost, no code in the articles will change - just the back-end code in the template itself will be changed to use Infobox settlement.". Ping User:Gonnym 77.13.194.116 ( talk) 11:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Bureaucrat's Barnstar |
Congratulations on closing your first RfA! MelanieN ( talk) 02:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hopefully it became pretty clear very early that {{ edit template-protected}} is expected to become the main source of my edits. In other words, to offer help for other users more than do own projects. Do you expect me now to invent some MediaWiki-coded stuff while “policies and opinions certainly [changed]” since my old times? How to learn what should I write in sandboxes? But I suspect that your ruling was actually determined by some other factors, such as my substandard civility record in Wikipedia and controversies on Commons; it would be nice to mistake about that. Have a good day. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 21:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Administrators
must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Seen as you actually Declinined, your thoughts are requested. ~ RhinosF1 (chat - live)/ (contribs) 16:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, - Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so
will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
![]() |
I just wanted to belatedly give you some wikilove after reading about you getting your bureaucratship. I'm sure you'll need caffeine eventually. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message ( talk to me) ( My edits) @ 05:39, 5 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hi Primefac, I was wondering if you could help with a housekeeping revdel. I have just accepted this article at AfC which seems to have originated from a user sandbox and carried all the unrelated history from previous edits. This diff appears to be the starting point of the actual article. Previous entries are irrelevant to the article. Many thanks. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 11:53, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, you might like to read WP:LOGOUT. The editor disclosed that they are editing when logged out, so any sockpuppetry is automatically out of question. Regards, — kashmīrī TALK 00:41, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address. The "nutshell" header includes
Do not use ... to stir up controversy. Yes, editing while logged out (in the strictest sense) is allowed, but not when it's borderline gravedancing and (because of being logged out) borderline aspersions/personal attacks (i.e. no diffs to back up their claims). Primefac ( talk) 00:51, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
low-profile userwho isn't an ArbCom member? No, the editor wrote about their own case, and they have full rights to do so, issuing gag orders is a step too far IMHO.
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
16:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
[1]. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 20:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, Greetings. Is there a way to reserve the editor who writes the article as the original creator (so they name would shown on the article) instead of the editor who did the redirect edit? Also how do we go about accepting a draft which the article name already existed via a redirect - article here - Draft:Expedition 62 and the redirect here [2]? (note I have the page move right - not sure this right is applicable for the question above). Thanks in advance. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA( talk) 08:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for this action. I know that being an admin is a difficult job, and I'm grateful to those of you who are willing to take it on, despite the negative feedback that inevitably comes with it. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 14:03, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Template:Charmap seems to be broken... -- Polluks ★ 17:41, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello, it's been a while since Primefac deleted /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bloss%C3%B6m_Records
Since then the company has only grown and now we need to update the Wikipage as well as un-delete it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeinformationfront ( talk • contribs) 16:21, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
I have seen from the historic of the wiki page of warner chappel that the part concerning Mumbo Jumbo has been edited/removed many time. Some of the reason were about that source that was not reliable.
I do not know if this will be sufficient as a source, but here the link to an article that I suppose could solve the issue: https://5mag.net/news/mumbo-jumbo-youtube-copyright-warner-chappell/
Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.89.40.232 ( talk) 18:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi
You recently deleted a post by Anthony Bradbury on my talk page. Could you please undo that change? I did not do a copy of the text just yet.
Thanks in advance.
Regards, Frederikwh ( talk) 05:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Primefac! When you moved User:Binod2055 to Draft:Anish Luitel, [3] were you aware that Draft:Anish Luitel is create protected? [4] Knowing it had been salted, I was puzzled to see it as a blue link. Now I understand why: only an administrator could have created it. -- MelanieN ( talk) 16:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi you have protected Dipika Kakar's page but you forgot to add the protection symbol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.91.41 ( talk) 15:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok but don't you have to do it. I just informed you so you know.
Could you replace {{ cite}} with {{ citation}}. It is an outdated alias that makes CS1 and CS2 names confusing. {{ citation journal}} to {{ cite journal}} is a similar templat of CS1/CS2 confusion. Maybe even the spaces lacking {{ citeweb}}, {{ citejournal}}, {{ citepaper}}, and {{ citebook}} too which at least do not cross CS1/CS2 boundaries. AManWithNoPlan ( talk) 00:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello Primefac, thanks for your time, you just helped me with a question regarding using a picture of an interview from a Latino newspaper celebrating their 30th anniversary. How can I use that interview as "cite news" if there is no link to it? The interview is from 2009, and their web archives only go 5 years back. Disclaimer: the company is paying me to write that article and they gave me permission to publish that picture to illustrate the article. This might be a stretch but can I cite mentioning i.e. "see picture #3"? or Is it acceptable for Wikipedia to link to their website but not to the specific article? Can I still use the interview as a source doing a rephrasing? Thanks again!!ArgieAtl19 ArgieAtl19 ( talk) 20:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
|url=
parameter when you use {{
cite news}}. If the newspaper itself is allowing permission for an image to be uploaded, you (or they) should follow the instructions at
Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials so that it can be released for use on the article in question.Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I've opened an ANI thread about Chahal. I did not mention you in the thread, but given your recent involvement with the topic, I felt you should know about it. Lepricavark ( talk) 18:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
As mentioned in my request for AWB access, I plan on using a new alternate account, User:AspeningAWB, for AWB edits as there will probably be a lot of them. I can't use AWB as AspeningAWB because that username isn't on the check list. Can you add AspeningAWB to the list? Aspening ( talk) 19:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For repeatedly closing old TfD nominations. * Pppery * survives 23:35, 25 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hi Primefac, I’m sorry about the changes on Template:Infobox time zone UTC. I’m not sure how to edit the article without making mistakes because I copied a revision from August 2018 and the reason why I did that is because I’m not sure how to edit the article without copying an old revision. Can you please show me how to edit the article without making mistakes because I'm worried the next time I edit I might make another mistake, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 11:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I used the sandbox for my proposed changes to the article and then I put them down on the article. I have removed time zones UTC+01:30, UTC+02:30 and UTC+08:30 because these time zones are currently not being used by any country and I have also made the info is larger so it makes it easier for people to click on the time zones on the template. I made these changes because I want to help fix Wikipedia for you and I hope you agree with them. Lachlb ( talk) 07:59, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I blanked because it had OS-able details e.g. phone number, I think it's been cleaned now. Thanks, SITH (talk) 09:30, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
This is for your valuable contributions to Wikipedia as an Administrator. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 10:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC) |
[5] bad source, and in the UK most senior lecturers are the equivalent of full professors with lecturers being the same as junior professors. I was a tenured lecturer and not happy with the title. Senior lecturers at Oxford and Cambridge almost revolted and that ushered in a change of titles. It was embarrassing for them at international conferences. I might block him, he's started edit warring and his edits violate NPOV and particularly BLP. On my iPad in a car swinging around, no fun editing! Doug Weller talk 07:24, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Primefac: Could you get rid of this redirect. I would like to put draft at Draft:Cyclone Dineo into it. Thanks. scope_creep Talk 15:42, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Primefac:. I hope you are doing well and thank you for being the main moderator for my page. I read through all of these alerts I received and I wrote up a paragraph on my talk page for you and the other moderators to give a better understanding. I am getting alot of questions regarding Netflix and the show is growing and growing. I am being invited to give speeches across the country. People are researching me and you are simply going to have more activity from my page. Pleaee read my comments though on how I feel about some of the things people are trying to do. At the end of the day the moderators decide and I am not trying to influence or change things. I am simply trying to introduce another side to this. I actually agree with you taking out the Clandestine service for different reasons though. Thank you for helping make my page as accurate as possible. Everettstern ( talk) 04:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Primefac:, I am reviewing all of these alerts. May you please bann Pangolin876 from creating a company page for me. I am not sure why this person or group is trying to do this and they have my company spelled wrong and as an intellgiece director there is something wrong with this. This person does not represent me or anyone from my organization. I have not hired anyone to do ANYTHING for me on wikipedia. I am reading some of there comments and they are the ones going through my campaign donations. I do not like where this is going. If Tactical Rabbit is going to submit a company page I would want it to be offical and me disclosing it has official company contributions to it. Every other of my competitors have done this. We are a large company and this has to be done properly. No adverisement page. In fact the Everett Stern page covers Tactcial Rabbit tremendously so I am not sure we need a page. Either way I do not like how this person or group inserted themselves. If they want to comment on my page that is fine but submitting pages for my company? There is bad faith in that and I am concerned. What was even submitted? Was it accurate? If it read like an advertisement as I read then what message were they trying to convey? If we are going to have a company page for a company I built from nothing it had better be accurate. I dont want him or her notified. They could even be a group of people trying to commit some kind of scam against me. They see a high profile figure with a company and no company site and then they try to hit me up for money after it is up... There are a number of bad guys can try and get me with this. After my previous experience I do not like the way this looks. I just want them blocked please. I have nothing to do with this and I do NOT want a company page from this person or group. I he/she/or group was legit why not notify me about the company page? I just ran accross it when I clicked on their name and a Tactical Rabbit Submission popped up. If they felt the need to create a company page for me then why not post to me saying "Hey we love your work we are going to do research and try to get a company page going." That is not what happened. Randomly forming a company page? Something is off. Everettstern ( talk) 04:43, 2 June 2019 (UTC) --- I just read another moderators post about multiple users or accounts this person is using. I am now seriously concerned. I have not hired anyone to do anything to my Wikipedia. I actually like it the way it is. As someone who has been targeted before I am concerened about being set up again. If someone wants to make changes to my page - good or bad - I am all for that as long as it is in good faith. As someone who is nationally known for his ethics I have a real problem with what is going on. If someone or a group is making changes to my account especially in the formation of company pages then I have an issue. Of course you are asking if this person or group is being paid by me. It looks very suspicious. Now that I am looking at it the statements and changes are accurate but why the company page? I think these people or person are trying to set me up a house of cards that they can extort and and then the house comes down. This is the same situation like before except I have not been approached yet. A group of college kids watching Netflix and doing research on me and think Tactical Rabbit is cool leading to a dradt up of a page is one thing, but this is different. I have nothing to prove my allegations, but all I can say whatever this user is trying to submit for me - I do not want it. I want to make that very clear. I am not interested in some random Tactical Rabbit page being created about me by who knows who with an unknown intention. I do not want to have to worry about this or my page being attacked. My moderators have always looked out for me. Please watch out for an attack on the page. And please ban this user as they are clearly doing things that me or my associates have not authorized. I am going to be signing off of Wikiepedia for a while again as I rarely check this. I sign back in and post if I am approached with an extortion attempt. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everettstern ( talk • contribs) 06:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Looking over
Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_April_3#Template:Cleanup-SVG, I'm thinking there's no need for Twinkle to include {{
Cleanup-SVG}}? It uses type=SVG
per
Ahecht, but {{
Cleanup image}} doesn't take a type
parameter, so it doesn't do anything, right? Maybe it could still add to
Category:SVGs for cleanup, which is (oddly?) not a subcategory of
Category:Files for cleanup? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Amorymeltzer (
talk •
contribs)
19:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Could you reconsider your closure of Talk:Southeast Asian Games#Requested move 26 May 2019? The second !voter provided a rationale that seemed apparently confused, since the move in question concerned only "SEA Games", not any other iteration of "SEA", and was in no way ambiguous like the (rather irrelevant) WWF example they cited. To me it seems the outcome would be "no consensus" at best. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 06:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_28#Template:Infobox_Prefecture_Japan - it was 3 "replace and delete" and 2 "keep" when you relisted, could you explain why? @ Pigsonthewing: 78.54.88.162 ( talk) 14:57, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Lachlb not only mass edits article and template space against consensus, but also removes talk, now the second time, first:
77.13.28.252 ( talk) 15:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I think you made a mistake when you edited Template:Infobox time zone UTC by forgetting to add time zones UTC-10:30, UTC-08:30, UTC+07:30 and UTC+09:45. Can you please add these time zones down because I think you forgot to put them down, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 09:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC
What is a redlinked entry? Did it just need a source or was it because the actor didn't have a wikipedia entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.157.130 ( talk) 00:30, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
But that again is only your opinion..unless somewhere on the rules page says that tvguide is considered acceptable. If those two films can be found on tvguide, would that override deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.157.130 ( talk) 01:38, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
they're reliable, independent verification that the shows existisn't my opinion, but that's not really the point. Nothing has been "deleted", just removed. All content on Wikipedia needs to be properly sourced, so if a fact is sourced it can be added into an article. Primefac ( talk) 01:40, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
If it's not your opinion/your ruling then whose is it? What gave you the idea that it's reliable? Is there a link here that shows what is considered an acceptable source? If the administrators ruled that only tvguide and a few slected sources are acceptable then you got me and I can't counter argue you anymore. It just says you are an oversighter so I don't know if you are a mod or not. I'm not disagreeing with you in regards to the need to properly source something. But you didn't answer my question about movies becoming a reliable source if tv guide lists it (not that I plan on looking for it at this point). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.157.130 ( talk) 02:06, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I can’t put my proposed changes down that I used in the sandbox today like you said yesterday onto the main page Template:Infobox time zone UTC because the page is locked, what I do next after I’ve used the sandbox to get my proposed changes down onto the main template? Thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 13:09, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
Hi. I'd like to follow up on User talk:Primefac/Archive 22#BRFA - Substituting templates. I recently ran a query, Quarry:query/36726, and found that there are many templates that should be substituted but aren't automatically. Have you given the matter any more thought? -- DannyS712 ( talk) 03:36, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
parameter is superfluous and it should trigger auto-subst all the time. If it's only a suggestion, then why are using the template in the first place?
Primefac (
talk)
02:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I’ve made a proposal on the template talk page and transcluded the template and sandbox into the testcases pages in Template:Infobox time zone UTC, what do I do next now to put my proposed changes on the main template? Thank you Lachlb ( talk) 12:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
See this. I just nominated some templates at TfD, but they're template editor-protected so I can't add the appropriate notices. Retro ( talk | contribs) 00:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Hiya thanks for checking in on the page I tried to make. I haven't edited in a long time and I must have made some mistake.
I was confused because I tried to make a page for a person named Andrea Lewis, and I know there are some others with that name, so I wanted to clarify it was a Jamaican person of note. I tried to make a page for Andrea Lewis (Jamaica)and submit it for review. But then when I added a link to the Andrea Lewis (Jamaica) page on another page - it appeared not to link to the one I submitted, but to link to an empty page, which allowed me to create a whole new page under the same name. I would prefer to have it be live and visible and linked-to, so I tried to replace the empty text of the new page with the draft. That got it flagged, I assume.
Would you mind explaining: How can I make the draft be linked to, if I can't recreate the draft on the linked-to page? If I delete the draft submitted for review (I note there is a significant backlog), can I just add that text back into the page that you deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djripley ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Draft:
prefix (
Draft:Andrea Lewis (Jamaica)).
DannyS712 (
talk)
02:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)Hi Primefac, I have left a message on Template talk:Infobox time zone UTC regarding why we should unlock the template as we used to because I made a mistake by accidentally using edit warring when I didn’t know before I edited so now I know not to. I’m sorry I used edit warring when editing and I promise I won’t use it again, so I think we should unlock the template as we used to because me using edit warring was a mistake, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 11:28, 18 June 2019
Hi Primefac, how long will it take for my proposed changes to Template:Infobox time zone UTC be discussed because I really want to put them down on the main template to help improve the article and Wikipedia, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 12:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I have just left a message on Template:Infobox time zone UTC requesting that the split proposal be installed and move the unused time zones onto a separate template and should not have a colour or have a key " are no longer used. Please can you have a look at my edit requests and say what you think of them, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 10:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I’ve heard there has been discussions about my request to unlock the template on 1 August this year. I wanted to ask you a question about how I can install my proposed changes if the template gets unlocked because I’m worried I might make a mistake when I install them? Can you please show me the best way to avoid them getting deleted and the template locked again.
I hope my proposed changes to the template are going to get consensus and not get into a situation that led to the initial lock on the template, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 15:35, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Primefac, I left a message that if Template:Infobox time zone UTC is unlocked my proposed changes will be made consensus and will not get into a situation that led to the initial lock of the page on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, thank you. Lachlb ( talk) 17:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. A link to Wikipedia on policy pages may be counter-intuitive at first, but makes sense in terms of both new and regular users seeing it and deciding to read the Wikipedia article (which they may have never thought of reading). A link also makes sense in terms of understanding the full concept of the encyclopedia, which, again, many editors (new, old, or wandering by for a look) and the project may benefit from. So I think the links should stay, and were already on many pages. Thanks for the edit summary. Randy Kryn ( talk) 13:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I might be missing something, but this thread did not seem to indicate cause for this action. Would you mind explaining in a few details why you blocked that user? Please ping any response. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 02:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, since you protected the template, I can't make the change myself. Can you arrange a parameter for teams which withdrew (e.g. bankrupcy or voluntary relegation) or got removed (e.g. multiple no shows or misbehavior of players/fans) from a league (during the season). The documentation mentions a "Dissolved" parameter. However this parameter is not implemented. Dissolved doesn't cover all scenario's anyway. In case of a voluntary relegation, dissolved isn't the appropriate term. So maybe even 2 parameters, "dossived" and "withdrawn". -- Sb008 ( talk) 19:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I tried to edit that discussion but it concluded before I had the chance to participate again. I was at work. I'm asking for your assistance because you were on the side of the section. I don't know if you were part of the discussion but I don't know how to contact them as a whole. And contacting them individually seems like too much work to me. If you can't then simply tell me so.
"Understood and I'll try to get better as an editor in this regard as it is correct I am not the best with edit summaries and I don't have much experience on Talk pages with other editors and I should begin to do that more. I need to personally improve in this regard. I had no intention of creating this section/discussion to belittle or demean MarnetteD. As redundant as it is to restate I have no quarrel with someone I don't know personally. I will try to take it to the forums you guys have told me of such as WT:FILM, WP:OR, WP:NOTESSAY, and WP:SECONDARY. Which before this I had not known about it. I will state that it's hard to learn from other editors as I often get nothing but minor snippets from them. Personally I wish there was an editor that would help me improve in all these regards by guiding me step by step. Now I know this is a content dispute and not behavioral. I didn't know which forum to take this to, I simply thought I was taking the appropriate actions. I have nothing else to comment on and I regard this case as closed. Thank you for all of you taking your time to even discuss this with me.
If any of you dislike me then that's fine, I don't any of you personally so that would be a waste of emotional effort on your part and mine. I don't know if any of you do, I simply am just stating this if that is the case with anyone here or other editors not on here who take issue with my problematic editing. This is simply a case of Wikipedia being a difficult thing to figure out.
If anyone receives this please know there was never any malicious intent." User:IceBrotherhood ( talk 21:38, 20 June 2019
Is Wikipedia talk:Bots/Archive index and Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox/search needed now that Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox is more functional? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar |
For Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:24, 23 June 2019 (UTC) |
Primefac,
I see that you have the authority to allow editors to use the AutoWikiBrowser. You have addressed the use-requests of three editors, who all applied for permission after I did, yet you did not address my request.
If this place is the proper forum for doing so, please share your reasoning for neither approving or denying my request for permission to use the AutoWikiBrowser. If it is proper that this discussion takes place somewhere else, then I apologize for bringing up the question here, and I will be happy to repeat my question wherever you deem is the best place for us to discuss the situation.
I appreciate your attention to this matter, and I thank you, for your work on Wikipedia. catsmoke ( talk) 14:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
The Ministry of Justice of Romania is one of the ministries of the Romanian Government. It administers the judicial system" then there's not enough information for an article. You are more than welcome to create a list article of the Justice Ministers, but that would likely be located at List of Justice Ministers of Romania, similar to List of Ministers of Finance of Romania. Primefac ( talk) 13:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Per you edits Steve Kazor, on what basis should we need redundant references in infoboxes? Such references are typically absent from Good Articles and others well-developed articles. Jweiss11 ( talk)
This is a courtesy note that based on your recent close [6] I have recommended that you be added as a party to the pending WJBscribe case [7] Regards, Crazynas t 09:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Given the action taken re WJBscribe, I have added you as a party to case request. - SchroCat ( talk) 10:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)