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 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

• Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. ( T287380)

Arbitration

• Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

• You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

---

I don't know what you did but you messed up a bunch on the 1950's playboy playmate page. You can not bring up certain info on some of the playmates. It's almost like you deleted them. If you don't know what your doing don't mess with it! Moose696 ( talk) 03:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Moose696, Indeed its almost like I have deleted them, as I have redirected them to the decade articles. See the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Playboy_Playmates_of_2019. I am also going to redirect the rest but had simply gotten distracted. Wikipedia is not a directory of Playboy models, and so I am streamlining our coverage of the topic. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 03:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Greetings. I saw the comments you made on these list pages, which were all reverted by a very inexperienced editor. I've returned the redirects, as per your rationale, but the one above was just reverted, see comment in edit summary. While I agree with your assessment of the 2019 afd discussion, the closer did not expressly say they should all be redirected. Thoughts? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Onel5969, Well it appears I made a bold move, and have overestimated how well folks would accept that deleting one would apply to the others. There were four "delete all" votes, three "deletes", and a discussion about how the decades articles were superior. The AfD nearly deleted all the pages, so I felt that simply going through and redirecting them would in fact be a time saver, instead of having a massive AfD. But apparently not. I totally disagree that 1979 is somehow different than 2019. The same problems apply: the list is not notable by itself and its a big BLP problem. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 16:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

CaptainEek, I actually don't think it's that bold a move. I am of the same mind, hence my action in restoring your redirects. In addition, I feel there is no need for separate annual pages, the decade pages can be expanded, if necessary. In fact, I think folks looking for information on these models are better served keeping the information together, less jumping around. So far, that's the only redirect that I've been notified was reverted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:46, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi CaptainEek. Thanks for the AfD. There is a lot of history with these lists, and I'm not sure what the proper steps are in this case. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Playboy Playmates of 2014, which is the tip of the iceberg. I've mostly ignored those lists since. Look at the edit history of the 2014 article to get a feel of what was going on.

Other discussions: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Playboy_Playmates_of_1995, Talk:List_of_Playboy_Playmates_of_1995, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Pornography/Archive_6#Proposal_to_change_List_of_Playboy_Playmates_of..._to_simple_lists, Talk:List of Playboy Playmates of 1955. There are more. Many of these lists were created to work around AfDs of articles for individuals who were Playmates of the month.

Given all that's gone on, more discussion may be needed to create clear consensus. -- Hipal ( talk) 16:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:External_links/Noticeboard/Archive_15#List_of_Playboy_Playmates_of_2014 -- Hipal ( talk) 17:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

• I also vote for more discussions. Playmates of the year 2019 get little to no press coverage, but they were part of American culture more much deeply in the 1970s and 80s. Beauty pageants have also dried up substantially in the last 20 years, that doesn't make the prior 100 years of history lose notability.-- Milowent • ^{has spoken} 18:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

  Milowent, Hipal Onel5969 see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Playboy Playmates of XXXX CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 19:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello CaptainEek,

I saw you conducted the WikiEditorAd sockpuppet investigations in May this year. In March, I had requested to investigate WikiEditorAd too as part of the Sonofstar sockpuppet investigations, but the Checkuser did not find a connection. I looked closely at WikiEditorAd's socks, and found that their behaviors was very similar to the behaviour of the accounts I suspected to be sock puppets.

Now, I don't know how the Checkuser works exactly, but I wanted to know if it was possible to see if the the accounts I suspected of sockpuppetry in March are connected to those that were banned in May. Can that be considered? Mottezen ( talk) 22:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Mottezen, unfortunately, the account is now too old to Checkuser, as the CU database only stores info from the last three months. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 17:25, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank your your response. If the CU database only stores info from the last three month, wouldn't the data for WikiEditorAd still be there for one more week? Mottezen ( talk) 17:33, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@ Mottezen: nah, their last edit was in February CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 17:49, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi CaptainEek, just wondering if you can check out the additions to another page that may violate Wikipedia standards? The contributor is not neutral, particularly as he has a podcast and he's trying to make a name for himself (I can direct you to his Twitter feed with proof, if you need it) by constantly attacking the organization whose page he has modified: /info/en/?search=Atheist_Alliance_International#Criticism

In particular, he is presenting an opinion on the board meeting held in July, based on speculations of a disgruntled affiliate member: 'At that AGM, there were again complaints about the AAI Board preventing legitimate Members from voting. For example, the Humanist Union of Greece complained[18] that despite being a fully paid-up AAI Member, they were not permitted to vote during elections for Director roles, and they were not permitted to discuss their complaint during the AGM.' I know for a fact this is a deliberate skewing of the facts, as I was present at this board meeting. This is not a neutral presentation and presents a one-sided retelling of the events as the participant would like to frame it.

You can also see his comments on the talk page. Sylvesterjay ( talk) 08:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Sylvesterjay, I partialblocked them from the page itself so they have to chat on the talk page. I encourage y'all to cleanup the criticism section, not really my place given the partialblock. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 04:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but if Aussie Article Writer is Arbcom blocked, logically all of his other accounts ( Iridescent should be able to give you a full list, but it includes at least Chris.sherlock ( talk · contribs)) should be blocked and tagged in the same manner? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie333, Good question, I've asked the Committee and I'll get back to you. A list of all accounts would certainly be helpful :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 18:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Per their user, "I edited under User:Chris.sherlock, User:Letsbefiends, User:Ta bu shi da yu and User:Tbsdy lives in the past." —valereee ( talk) 19:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. BusterD ( talk) 20:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

I believe there's more than that. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:49, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay. Please let the committee know about any others that are unblocked Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:20, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie333, Barkeep and Kevin got the rest of them today, which I appreciate since I was quite busy IRL–first day of law school! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 04:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

• /info/en/?search=User:StrangeloveFan101/sandbox_2
• /info/en/?search=User:StrangeloveFan101/sandbox_3
• /info/en/?search=User:StrangeloveFan101/sandbox_4
• /info/en/?search=User:StrangeloveFan101/sandbox_5
• and this one: /info/en/?search=User:StrangeloveFan101/sandbox_SL

Thanks in advance. StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 15:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

StrangeloveFan101, I have deleted them. In the future though you needn't ask an admin, simply add the WP:G7 deletion tag to the page and an admin will come by and delete it. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 04:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 10:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:White genocide conspiracy theory on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Naturopathy on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Women in Red | September 2021, Volume 7, Issue 9, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 207, 208 Online events: New: Women writers & their works Contest (Jul/Aug/Sep): Latin America contest Continuing: Women's leadership & empowerment | Olympic & Paralympic Games Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Interwiki Women Collaboration Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Learn more about our proposed one-day online recruitment initiative in October. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

-- Rosiestep ( talk) 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gallic Wars you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Levivich -- Levivich ( talk) 20:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Ahoy Captain Eek! I am sorry if this is overstepping my bounds, as I am not an admin or moderator, etc. I would like to address a concern I have about the blocking of user Fragglestomp. In response to the ArbCom sanction expiring on the Kubrick infobox thing September 1st, they said the following on the Stanley Kubrick talk page:

It's September 2021, and you know what that means: according to the top of the page, the ban on infobox discussions is officially over. Forgive me if this is the wrong place to bring it up. I would like to express my views on the matter wherever appropriate.

I do have to admit, the first part does come across as a bit cocky, but they could've been trying to introduce their statement in a humorous manner. After this, Fragglestomp came off as collected and humble, not malicious, at least to my perception. User Floquenbeam gave the following response:

No. You don't get to "express your views" here, or anywhere, they are not welcome. After looking at your first edit from March, it's clear you're a returning sock, here solely to disrupt this article. Not sure why you weren't blocked as such at the time. While any good faith editor is allowed to raise the issue again (keeping in mind that just because something is allowed doesn't mean it's necessarily a good idea), you can't, because I'm blocking you. I would strongly suggest we not allow new accounts to start this up again.

This response is why I came. I just want to express some concerns about this. Flo comes across as hostile and gives an automatic block. Shouldn't good faith be assumed? It seems mean to assume malice and accuse them of being a sock. Accusing and blocking here just comes across as a case of assuming bad faith and general meanness. That's my two cents. Again, I'm sorry if it was not my place to say anything and please correct me if I'm wrong anywhere here. StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 14:33, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

StrangeloveFan101, While perhaps not a sock, they do seem to be here for the sole purpose of the Stanley Kubrick infobox dispute. That speaks to being an WP:SPA and here to cause disruptions. If not sock blocked, Floq could probably have WP:NOTHERE'd them. The block reflects a reality that the Kubrick dispute has been beyond draining and doesn't need an influx of dubious accounts. It stretches credulity that a brand new editor shows up and just happens to know every detail about the Kubrick infobox saga off the bat. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 16:14, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Got you. Thanks for explaining, Captain. To me, it just seems like overkill to put in a block. IMHO, if this person is a sock account (beyond a shadow of a doubt), I agree with a ban. If they're not (like they're insisting on their personal talk page), maybe a slap on the wrist and let them move on. And if they become disruptive, maybe an IB topic/discussion ban. StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 16:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

SF101 has a point: I have been making questionable decisions lately... If I can speak freely for a minute, it's really disheartening to remove SF101's topic ban - which was imposed due to their severe disruption on the Kubrick talk page regarding infoboxes - and less than a week later see them defend a clearly disruptive editor whose sole interest is infoboxes on the Kubrick talk page. I'm embarrassed that I believed their unban request. I have a bad feeling about the future of that talk page. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 16:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Floquenbeam, if I could speak freely for a moment, I am sorry for misconstruing what you said. I honestly thought you were jumping the gun on blocking this person. I was wrong, and that was a mistake on my part. I will not talk about this anymore, and I am sorry for my disruption. And I can promise this: I will not try to defend disruptive users, like Fragglestomp, in discussions anymore. I admit that I am clearly not experienced enough to discern who is being disruptive and who is not. Again, I'm sorry. StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 17:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, I retract what I said on this page, besides my latest message above this one. StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 17:18, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I saw the top of your talk page, and I have to know: What's your favorite sea-shanty? Personally, I'm partial to the Trailer Park Boys "Soon May The Kittyman Come" (parody of Soon May the Wellerman Come). Fair winds, Cap'n! StrangeloveFan101 ( talk) 21:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Precious

One year!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

• Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
• A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
• A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
• A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

• The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

---

I just came across [ this edit] which seems to be a violation of their Topic Ban.-- VViking _{Talk Edits} 13:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Viewmont Viking Well it was five months ago and I don't believe there's been any problems since so I am of the opinion it should be let slide. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 17:03, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for checking. I'm good with that decision. -- VViking _{Talk Edits} 18:37, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

I suspect that "breeding" means stock-rearing, but it's one of those cases where divining the author's intent is non-trivial. Lavateraguy ( talk) 09:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

		The Science Barnstar
		Here is a barnstar for expanding on male and female CycoMa ( talk) 14:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

• Sachinsethi16 ( talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sandeep Brar ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi CaptainEek, Dear my article references are genuine From reliable Sources. All Article related references from reputed News papers and recently Published. Dear Kindly Review again. Requested you to Please Check and Approve & check other then English languages news references Because These References with significant coverage.

Thanks & Regards Sachinsethi16

sachin sethi 08:06, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Sachinsethi16 This regards Draft:Sandeep Singh Brar (politician). I see he has not been elected to any regional or national political office, which is the standard of notability for politicians. Am I missing something? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 16:49, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello! How do I publish a draft? -- Mattdimarc ( talk) 18:59, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Mattdimarc, well at the moment your draft has been put up for review, which could take a little bit, so be patient. However, your draft as it is currently will not be accepted, because it does not show that you are notable. To fix that, you will need high quality reliable sources. I have just declined your draft to that effect. At the top will be the decline reasons. You should follow some of the blue links and learn more about the process. Also, you should realize that your draft is written like an advertisement. Wikipedia is not for promotion. Our articles are written neutrally, in an encyclopedic style that does not puff up the subjects. There is definitely a lot to take in here, so don't be afraid to post followup questions :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 02:32, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

ok. assuming the article is edited to be neutral, is there a way to make it “notable” at the moment and publishable, in your opinion? Mattdimarc ( talk) 14:25, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Mattdimarc, I think your odds are not good. I'd give you probably a 10% chance at success. At the moment, my guess is the subject is just not well known enough, something we call WP:NOTYET. My personal recommendation would be to wait a few years until the company is off the ground and successful, then it should be much easier to get an article. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 16:44, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

makes sense Mattdimarc ( talk) 23:57, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Avicenna on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey CaptainEek, Does Wikipedia have a simple template to fill in the blanks for creating a page for my company? -- LOKATION REAL ESTATE ( talk) 16:58, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

LOKATION REAL ESTATE Not really, no. I should also make you aware that your business is highly unlikely to qualify for a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia is NOT for promotion. I highly recommend you click and read this link. Let me know if you have follow-up questions. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 18:19, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Women in Red | October 2021, Volume 7, Issue 10, Numbers 184, 188, 209, 210, 211 Online events: New: Women in STEM New Contest (Oct/Nov/Dec): Women in Oceania contest Continuing: Women's rights | #1day1woman Special event: 12 October: Ada Lovelace Day 24-Hour Global Edit-a-thon See also: Women in Green Good Article Edit-a-thon Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

-- Rosiestep ( talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Your feedback is requested at Talk:AUKUS on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
• Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.

Technical news

• DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

Arbitration

• A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
• Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
• The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

• Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
• The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

---

Hello, I want to write a biography in English about the first black transgender woman to obtain a Ph.D. in Education in Brazil. But, as my sources are in Portuguese my self-called genius editor says they aren't reliable. What can I do? -- Missvielo ( talk) 17:34, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Portuguese sources are acceptable, as long as they are reliable in their language. Your first two sources look reliable, but your third looks like a professors blog. Blogs are not reliable. So first, you'll need another source. Second, you'll need to say what source is providing the second sentence. Third, you really should make it a bit longer. There is not enough evidence that she is notable, and going into some more detail might help. Fourth, in English, the proper translation is "transgender" not "transvestite".

Ultimately, your article probably has a low chance of success due to how our notability criteria work. However, I have put your article on a noticeboard for articles about women and you may be able to get some help from there too. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 18:54, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Best, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd settle for "acquired primarily as a result of the Mexican-American War," if you'd prefer that. Maurice Magnus ( talk) 22:22, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

On second thought, I don't know whether that is true; I don't know what percentage of the new territories were acquired as a result of the Mexican War Maurice Magnus ( talk) 22:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Maurice Magnus I don't think that's better. The use of "especially" is meant to single out the land garnered from mexico. McPherson has an entire chapter in battle cry of freedom entitled "Mexico shall poison us" focusing on just that, and is why I had chosen that wording. Sure, other territory was part of the slavery question, but it was the fate of the Mexican cession and California especially that caused much political turmoil. In terms of wording, what about "acquired after the Mexican-American war"? That is correct, and makes the sentence less wordy. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 22:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

CaptainEek On your first point, I'll go along with omitting "and otherwise" and omitting "primarily." I hadn't noticed "especially," and that does limit the scope of the reference to the Mexican-American War.

On your second point, I had changed it from "after" to "as a result of" because "after" refers merely to the time sequence and not necessarily to a connection between the Mexican-American War and the acquisition of territories. I grant that most people will infer a connection, but it's better to be explicit about it. It's only three extra words. Maurice Magnus ( talk) 22:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Maurice Magnus Alright, that works for me. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 22:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

CaptainEek I thought it would, and so I deleted "and otherwise" but retained "as a result of." It has been a pleasure doing business with you. :) Maurice Magnus ( talk) 22:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

OrangeMike see the above conversation on the nature of "otherwise" and "especially" :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 23:58, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

CaptainEek and : OrangeMike . Despite my above statement about "especially," its placement in the sentence does not make it obvious that it does not limit the territories to those acquired as a result of the Mexican-American War. I have an idea. Suppose we end the sentence with "territories" and drop the rest. It's not really relevant for purposes of this paragraph how the territories were acquired. Maurice Magnus ( talk) 00:35, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

If you like my suggestion, then I'd change "territories" to "U.S. territories." Maurice Magnus ( talk) 00:38, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (UK stations) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Transition Korea on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The article Gallic Wars you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gallic Wars for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Levivich -- Levivich ( talk) 15:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Commentarii de Bello Gallico VII:77: "Qui se ultro morti offerant facilius reperiuntur quam qui dolorem patienter ferant." / "It's easier to find a person who will volunteer for death than one who will volunteer to endure pain patiently," which is what is required to bring a vital article like Gallic Wars to GA. Great work! Levivich 15:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

CaptainEek, congratulations on the GA for Gallic Wars. I was glad to see my minor edits push it over the top! :) Seriously though, well done! — WILDSTAR ^talk 15:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Women in Red | November 2021, Volume 7, Issue 11, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 212, 213 Online events: New: Film + Stage | Endocrine health Contest (Oct/Nov/Dec): Women in Oceania contest Continuing: Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Wikipedia Asian Month 2021 Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

-- Innisfree987 ( talk) 21:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. ( t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I created a Wikipedia page and it is currently a draft, how do I publish it? Thank you -- Tommyboy12345678 ( talk) 02:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

@ Tommyboy12345678 Unfortunately, it is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Wikipedia has very high standards for what we include, which we call our Wikipedia:Notability criteria. That means that most subjects just can't be included. There are 8 billion people, but less than 2 million biographies on Wikipedia. There are however millions of subjects that you can write about! My personal suggestion is to take the The Wikipedia Adventure to learn about how to edit. Then, work on editing some existing articles about topics you like. But I would not suggest trying to create an article from scratch unless you really know what you're doing :) Let me know if I can be of further help. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 03:06, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

• Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

• Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.

Arbitration

• GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.

---

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man ( submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:

1. The Rambling Man ( submissions) with 5072 points
2. Lee Vilenski ( submissions) with 3276 points
3. Amakuru ( submissions) with 3197 points
4. Epicgenius ( submissions) with 1611 points
5. Gog the Mild ( submissions) with 1571 points
6. BennyOnTheLoose ( submissions) with 1420 points
7. Hog Farm ( submissions) with 1043 points
8. Bloom6132 ( submissions) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

• The Rambling Man ( submissions) wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
• Lee Vilenski ( submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
• Gog the Mild ( submissions) wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
• Epicgenius ( submissions) wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
• The Rambling Man ( submissions) wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
• The Rambling Man ( submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
• Epicgenius ( submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
• Bloom6132 ( submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Unless Lightburst has a nickname I don't know about, I think you maybe got their username wrong at ARC. Firefangledfeathers ( talk) 03:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@ Firefangledfeathers Thanks for pointing that out, my bad...further evidence of the utility of Wikipedia:Editors who may be confused CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 03:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

As you know, I was extremely disruptive in July of 2020 (I am really sorry.). While I said sorry to User:Nussun05, I still regret what I did and I am wishing to remove my disruptive comments. Is it allowed?-- The Space Enthusiast ( talk) 01:34, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@ The Space Enthusiast Well I'm glad you've reflected on your comments and have come away productive :) Now, you shouldn't modify the archives of others. Now, if its an archive of your own talkpage, sure, go ahead, do whatever you want. But don't modify other people's archives without asking. As a practical matter, the comments are saved in the edit history anyway, so unless they should have been say RevDel'd in the first place, deleting them from an archive doesn't do all that much. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 04:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

In this case, they were article talk page comments here. @ The Space Enthusiast, I've reverted you deleting them, because without your comments many other comments don't make sense any more. They're responses to something that's gone. So even if you regret them, I think that they should stay in the archive. But I'm not sure if there's any policy about that. -- rchard2scout ( talk) 14:00, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Republican Party (United States) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Phenomenal work. The thread that leads from those forgotten names and battlefields has terminated here, for all the world to read. Incredible research and prose. Thank you. No Swan So Fine ( talk) 15:53, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

@CaptainEek , i am interested in biology (especially bugs and jumping spiders), like you, can you adopt me? Leomk0403 ( talk) 01:23, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@ Leomk0403 I would be more than happy to! If you could answer a few questions that would be great!

1. What would you like to get out of mentorship?
2. What topic areas and individual articles interest you the most?
3. What made you edit Wikipedia?

CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 06:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

1. i would want to know all of the templates and its use. also have an goodunderstandment of guideelinws 2. definitely etymology and arachnology. 3. A local jumping spider ( Cosmophasis lami) not having a Wikipedia article so i copied the templates from iNaturalist and created the article. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 08:41, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

• Anyways i would LOVE to get Cosmophasis lami and iNaturalist featured or GA. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 08:41, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

How do I post to the Biographical Wiki? -- Daimion.hurst ( talk) 16:58, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

@ Daimion.hurst Well what exactly do you mean? You mean you'd like to write a biography? Who do you want to write a biography about? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 23:05, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Women in Red | December 2021, Volume 7, Issue 12, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 214, 215, 216 Online events: New: "Double the lede!" | Women who died in 2021 Contest (Oct/Nov/Dec): Women in Oceania contest Continuing: Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Women in Climate Change and preparations for our 2022 Climate initiative Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

-- Innisfree987 ( talk) 00:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Usar o Chrome em casa OutlookPupilo ( talk) 05:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@ OutlookPupilo:, what, exactly is it you are trying to do here? All you've done so far is make seemingly random comments that serve no obvious purpose. This is an encyclopedia, not a chat forum, and I would also note it is the English-language version of Wikipedia all users are expected to be able to communicate coherently in English. Beeblebrox ( talk) 05:10, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Limpar dados de navegação

O Flash Player não está mais disponível OutlookPupilo ( talk) 05:18, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't have the slightest idea what's going on here, but I've blocked this person for not even trying to contribute to the project. I know, I know, I'm mean, but they don't seem to even be trying to understand what Wikipedia is and how to contribute. Beeblebrox ( talk) 05:46, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

How to add a pic of my -- Sunnyboxer2017 ( talk) 20:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Sunnyboxer2017:, I've left a welcome message on your talk page with some helpful information in it. I would be remiss if I did not mention that Wikipedia is not social media, it is not really a place to write about yourself, user pages primarily exist to discuss what you do on Wikipedia and maybe just a little bit about yourself in the "real world". Keeping that in mind, you can upload images at Wikimedia Commons, provided you own the rights to the image and are willing to release it under a free license. You can log in there using the same name and password you use here on Wikipedia. Beeblebrox ( talk) 01:20, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Can i be verified On Instagram -- Sunnyboxer2017 ( talk) 08:06, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Please see my above post. I can't imagine why anyone would think Wikipedia has anything to do with Instagram. Beeblebrox ( talk) 08:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Medical disclaimer on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:33, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Captain Eek. When I click on my name, it says this page does not exist. Can you fix it please? Thank you.

And I would like to show that I am a native speaker of norwegian, but I do not know how to make a Norwegian Babel box either.

Thank you for all your help. -- Ærlig Sam ( talk) 07:27, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Captain, turns out it does work. Please help me with the second request only. Ærlig Sam ( talk) 07:31, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Ærlig Sam The details are at Wikipedia:Babel, but in short you can simply add {{babel|no}}to your userpage. The "no" is the code for Norwegian. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 17:41, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Ærlig Sam ( talk) 18:29, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

"Welcome aboard, matey" - Thanks, and I'm glad to support the cause. Question: Why don't I see my mthly contribution in my account. My email registered with both is the same address, by the way. -- Wikicrdi1 ( talk) 14:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Wikicrdi1 Well because you have not yet made any edits from this account. Perhaps you made some edits while logged out? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 17:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Which part of the protection policy permitted the locking of Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Mass killings under communist regimes (4th nomination)? schetm ( talk) 17:36, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Schetm: The use of admin tools, like protection, is to prevent disruption and build an encyclopedia. Arguing on an AfD page after the AfD has closed and without a Wikipedia:Deletion review achieves nothing. Thus, I locked the page so that substantive discussion would happen in a place where it would be more easily accessed: the talk of the article itself. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 17:55, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

So, just to be clear, no part of WP:PP is being cited? Is there any place that this locking can be appealed? Normally, this is done on an article's talk page, but this is rendered impossible here. schetm ( talk) 00:55, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Schetm: perhaps I've misread the situation, but what exactly would you talk about if I unprotected it? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 01:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

There are ongoing concerns about 114 revisions on the AfD and 148 revisions on the talk page being hidden. I have raised those with the redacting admin. Additionally, there were ongoing discussions about the notability of the AfD, its place in articles like Criticism of Wikipedia and Ideological bias on Wikipedia, and the like. These are discussions that don't belong on the MKUCR article talk page. Further, protection without cause, or even preemptively, "is contrary to the open nature of Wikipedia and is generally not allowed." Page protection should only be applied if disruption is taking place. There wasn't any (apart from IP's and SPA's), so it's a major policy stretch to apply protection here. Finally, there was significant opposition to locking the page raised on the talk page. To directly answer your question, I probably won't be getting involved at all on this talk page, but the ongoing discussions, which weren't related to the MKUCR article, should have been allowed to peter out on their own. schetm ( talk) 01:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Those various issues can be talked about at other places. If folks think it should be added to Criticism of Wikipedia, it should be discussed at that talkpage. My main concern was that folks were abusing the page to WP:NOTFORUM effect and starting to argue in circles about an already closed discussion. This is the sixth discussion about deleting this page. Editor time should not be sunk into a matter that is not changing for the time being. Though several folks objected to protection, several also supported it. I believe this will have the intended goal: stopping people arguing in circles while not preventing productive discussion elsewhere. If you still disagree, you could list it at Wp:Rfpp. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 02:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Eek. I assumed you'd been pinged or notified, but now it occurs to me that you might not have seen the thread about your protection at VPP (of all places!) –  Joe ( talk) 19:31, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

I had not, that is an unusual place. Thank you. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 19:33, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

• Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. ( T284642)
• The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. ( T293866)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
• The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.

---

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I would like to add a couple of pages, one is for a new business and one is for a professional athlete. Thank you, Curtis. -- Curttom ( talk) 20:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Curttom Do you have a close relationship with the business or the athlete? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 21:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I am not closely associated with the business or the athlete, I just think they should have their stories told. I would like to be neutral and add a lot of people, places, and things to Wikipedia. -- Curttom ( talk) 21:15, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Curttom Coolio. I do provide one key piece of advice: starting pages from scratch is very hard. Its one of the hardest things to do on Wiki. My personal advice to new folks is usually to start by editing existing topics you like, and getting a feel for how the place works first. What sort of topics are you interested in? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 21:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I am a writer and digital savvy, I have done some edits already, and know how to work Wiki to add new pages as I have experience writing in many different formats and how to communicate effectively. I have a lot of exceptional interests, I like sports, art, digital/technology, and entertainment. -- Curttom

Curttom Well then we can turn to the subjects you'd like to write about. What are you writing about? Can you provide three reliable sources that discuss each? Links below would be helpful. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 22:36, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I would like to write about Canada, and British Columbia, I grew up here and have been almost everywhere. I would use websites from reliable sources such as https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/home or https://www.hellobc.com/ I also think the local sports organizations should receive more attention and be included in Wikipedia. I would use resources from their respective websites like I have done before on my editing. Then there is art galleries that should have their pages as well, Canadian artists should be featured, and more. I would look to sites such as: https://www.vanartgallery.bc.ca/ or https://www.art-bc.com/places/category/art-galleries/ Curttom

Curttom If you would like to write an article for scratch, start by writing a draft by using WP:AFC. Go there, follow the instructions. Once you've got a draft written, leave me a note and I'll take a look. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 20:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Kindly help me My page is not published yet -- Abid Mughal (RUJ) ( talk) 12:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Abid Mughal (RUJ) Well for starters, the article doesn't use any Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Further, its in almost all caps, which is not an English practice. Plus, the article is very bare bones: almost no content. So you will need to find some sources and expand the article first. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 03:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

how do i do the doxing -- Desidoxu ( talk) 11:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 ( talk) 14:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Russia–Ukraine relations on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Trickle-down economics on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey @ CaptainEek:, I remember you reaching out to help me edit a stub article I was working on. I was wondering if you could take a look at what I have got so far? This is for the United States v. Felix page. I have a draft of it on my sandbox, was not able to figure out how to link it here. If you could show me how I can share it with you, or if you can just access my sandbox without it that would be great. This is my first article, I do know a bit about double jeopardy from work, but I am new to wikipedia so any helpful tips and tricks would be great! Amicuswiki07 ( talk) 05:49, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Amicuswiki07 Howdy! Glad to hear you're doing well on that. I can indeed see your sandbox ( User:Amicuswiki07/sandbox). That is good work. You can go ahead and implement those changes into the article whenever you'd like. I have the article on my watchlist, so I'll see when you make changes to it. I would suggest you expand the decision section a bit, going more into the justice's reasoning. I would also suggest you make a note about the concurrence. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 05:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@ CaptainEek Sounds good! I have put up what I have worked on so far, I have some expertise in international law, foreign policy, and criminal law so let me know if there are other articles I can contribute to Amicuswiki07 ( talk) 05:45, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crusades on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello CaptainEek! So I saw article today that included titles of francizes, with links to the main page, but not all of them had links to the main page, possibly because some of them were francizes that belonged to the main francizes. Do I add links to the main pages of the titles without links, or do I leave it? The article was on batman figurines. -- Otaku Feesh ( talk) 08:56, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Otaku Feesh I'm not quite sure what you mean. What was the exact page? and do you mean franchises? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 18:11, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:John Diefenbaker on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, CaptainEek! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 01:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

One thing we can probably both agree on is that Baby Yoda is pretty cool regardless of any editing differences we may have... Huggums537 ( talk) 15:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year from Women in Red Jan 2022, Vol 8, Issue 1, Nos 214, 216, 217, 218, 219 Online events: New: Climate (year-long initiative) | Women in business | US territories Continuing: #1day1woman | Women who died in 2021 Other ways to participate: Encourage someone to become a WiR member this month. Go to Women in RedJoin WikiProject Women in Red Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Template:CaptainsWelcome has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 17:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

01:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Howzit?Hope you're well? Just seen the Arch.Bishop Tutu obituary page and I'm concerned that the initial reputable South African source,revealing his death,via the Tutu Foundation to the SA media News 24 was removed and replaced by two American media houses.Why would a non South African and non American choose to alter the source,when the info was sourced in South Africa?Shouldn't local journalists be credited with the news scoop,rather than media giants picking up secondary or 3rd hand sources? Thank you. -- Mark Hutton 100 ( talk) 09:17, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

@ Mark Hutton 100 Sorry for the late reply, its the holidays and was quite busy. I see your point, and I think it could be valid. You should raise that on the talk page of the relevant article, Talk:Desmond Tutu CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 19:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Thank you, best regards, Hansmuller ( talk) 08:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey CaptainEek,

Regarding your reply to Lomrjyo at WP:ARC [1] - can you expand on where the committee's standing ATM?

Best regards,

François Robere ( talk) 18:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

@ François Robere I don't think we have a consensus yet on the course of action to take. The new committee is still being seated and oriented. We are considering resolving by motion, but are still working on the text of a motion. Various parties have also provided some private evidence, which we are considering. The matter is also complicated by the multiple directions this case request has taken. What started as a COIN concern became a Holocaust in Poland topic in general, and then included misbehavior during the ARC as well as concerns about Ice Whiz, plus the famous Ha'aretz article. Bottom line: a lot to sort through, and tearing a case between two committees always makes thing take longer. I can't give a definite timeline, but we are working on it. We'd rather do it right than rush into accepting or declining. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 20:07, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Good to know. I've a lot of evidence of my own, but I'm not keen on posting it for two reasons: a) APL is a cesspool of bullying, tag-teaming and harassment, and I'm not anxious to get back in; and b) It's unclear if ArbCom is finally willing to tackle this head on, so it'll be a waste of time and diffs if I did. That said, some of my evidence is already on record with T&S (correspondence from Feb. 23rd to March 16th, 2021), and a lot of evidence is on record at WP:APL, ARCA, AE and ANI, if anyone is willing to connect the dots instead of treating them as "isolated incidents". François Robere ( talk) 11:54, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

• Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

• Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.

Miscellaneous

• The functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

---

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. / Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cannabis (drug) on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello User:CaptainEek can you review please -- Make America Great Again 1980 ( talk) 14:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Oops, that's been deleted. For more information on this globally-banned self-promoter, see User:علي_أبو_عمر. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Greetings and all the best in New Year, for a few days now there are unsourced changes in lots of wikipedia articles, some of them were already noticed by admins, it started with this ip [ [2]] after few days it continued with this ip [ [3]] and today it continued with this ip [ [4]],All 3 have the same target articles, the last 2 ip have the same geolocation, could it be that they are the same person, could you run a quick SPI check ? Thank you. Theonewithreason ( talk) 17.January 2022 (UTC)

Theonewithreason, I've left them a message. Let me know if more IPs pop up. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} ⚓ 21:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Theonewithreason ( talk) 17.January 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Non-fungible token on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

	The Citation Barnstar
	Template:Did you know nominations/Nebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin) "Fools rush in ..." but legal scholars do their research first. Thanks for your ameliorative citation and assistance. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 14:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen ( ☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 14:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi friend, you helped me out when I first started Wiki Editing and I was wondering if you could spare a bit of time and maybe pop over to the Beekeeping in Ireland page. Some other Editors have taken an interest and are trying to Copy-editing it, to try and get it up to a B-Class, but the result is somewhat difficult to assess. I am not sure where now to start with it as there are lots of little but important inaccuracies, certainly the additional Sections with Sub-Sections does help in readability, but I fear we may be losing the parameters of the well defined subjects. There are a lot of conflicting views within the community and I have tried to give both sides, but I'm not sure that is being done now (although I do personally agree with the tone of the Article, I must put my personal opinions on subjects aside and present counter arguments in a balanced and fair way, ie: if scientific research concludes ABC, but a sizable vocal and very influential minority dismissed the Science and says XYZ then I think both sides should be acknowledged, but the scientific facts made clear, etc.). I'm just thinking that maybe a fresh pair of eyes may help, if a decision could be reached on how the page is to be Copy-edited then that might be more effective? Bibby ( talk) 18:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, you're receiving this note because you're currently signed up for the 2022 WikiCup and don't yet have any points in the competition. As you may know, scoring any points in the first round is traditionally sufficient to advance to the second, and a fast way to get 5 points is to complete a good article review. Given that the January 2022 Good Article Nomination Backlog Drive is active for another 10 days, you might be interested in pitching in. Complete one review, and you'll be on to the next round in WikiCup; complete two or three, and you'll also be eligible to win some barnstars. As always, quality reviews with attention to detail are expected. Cheers, -- Usernameunique ( talk) 19:40, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 28 January 2022 (UTC)