2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008–2016, 2017–2020, 2021–2022 |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
Entry should be prefaced or contain the words “within gender ideology” or “part of queer theory” 208.114.139.7 ( talk) 05:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, The article I made on Dignified Menstruation was not meant to be promotional, instead meant to be informative on the importance of having dignity and protecting the dignity of people who menstruate. If there is a way I could retrieve my article then I can work to make it from a neutral point of view. Otherwise I will try to find an editor or writer to better relay the message. Thank you Lalschalaune ( talk) 05:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey Jay, I noticed that the request for undeletion was archived by a bot despite no conclusion on the request, it looks like almost every other request was either marked as "Done" or "Not Done".
The archive is here for your convenience: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_382
I would also like to request undeletion of Wikipedia:WikiProject Autonomous Zones/Sandbox as it was part of the wikiproject and also has been deleted due to no other reason than being created by the sockpuppet user. TNebula ( talk) 09:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
you were involved in discussions related to micronations, although you had made only one edit (at an AfD). So I don't know if he was referring to discussions off-wiki. Courtesy ping Girth Summit. Jay 💬 20:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
|
|
Hello @ Jay i wanna connect you via email how can i reach you. 27.63.19.43 ( talk) 05:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Need help finding sources for Nari Bi Pindhipare Rakta Sindura. What is the name of this film in Odia letters? DareshMohan ( talk) 11:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Hey, Jay,
Is there are a good reason to delete a PROD'd article hours early? We usually don't delete PROD'd articles and files until after their expiration date and time. There are times when an article is de-PROD'd right before it becomes eligible for deletion. You don't need to restore this article, I just thought I'd inquire about it. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Dear Jay,
The pages "Ebu Press Ltd" and "Asian-Australasian Journal of Bioscience and Biotechnology" are deleted before the given time for editing and revising. I am wondering, the last time for deletion was 08:31 (so far I can remember), and both of the articles are deleted before around three hours. Could you please undelete both pages for revising them?
Thank you for your consideration. Asifupm22 ( talk) 08:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Dear Jay, Please help me undelete the page, "Asian-Australasian Journal of Bioscience and Biotechnology".
Thank you very much.
Asifupm22 ( talk) 11:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jay. I noticed your recent edits on Adecco Group and was hoping you'd be willing to help me out with some updates I am looking to make to Adam Pritzker's article. He is the founder of General Assembly, a company that was eventually bought by Adecco. My pending edit request lays out the two new roles that need to be added; my COI keeps me from making these changes directly. Thank you for your review and implementation. I'm available to discuss if you have any questions. Thanks DCBPI ( talk) 23:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).
|
|
[p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
I noticed that you retargeted First woe and second woe to Seven trumpets, but you also closed as no consensus. If there is no consensus, keep the original target per WP:RFD and WP:CLOSE. I have reverted it. Mast303 ( talk) 00:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
In case you have no notived, your retargets concerning this and this have been reverted. Veverve ( talk) 12:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Category:Recipients of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Baronnet ( talk) 13:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
You're speedy this morning ;-) Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
talk? Tousif ❯❯❯ Talk 10:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thank you for saving my deleted draft I spent a lot of time working on. Logiotek ( talk) 14:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC) |
Hello, Jay. I disagree with the reason for closing the AfD: Léon Gillis. There was no consensus for keep – the discussion ended evenly, and should be closed as no consensus (not deleted). Please consider adjusting the reason for non-deletion. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 18:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
'''no consensus'''
to be included in the closing. —
CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (
talk) 19:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
Hi, Jay, how are you? Did you perhaps mean to leave a VRT ticket number with the permission-pending template at Draft talk:Revvity? BTW, I've removed the copyvio for now – it can always be restored if verified permission comes through. Beats me why people go to so much trouble to give permission for unencyclopaedic text which is anyway never going to become part of the encyclopaedia when they could just write a couple of sentences from scratch, but that's what they do ... Regards, Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 10:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jay,
I don't know if you can help highlight the unreliable sources in the articles listed above. A template to that effect was placed on both articles, but most of the sources used are independent of the subjects and also from traditional media, so I am not sure which of them are classified as unreliable by the Wiki team.
Thank you. Yourmmy ( talk) 10:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Jay. Thanks for your circular moves of List of football clubs in Wales and List of men's football clubs in Wales following the RfD, as well as your close to revert the redirect from 29 January.
Seeing the entries on my Watchlist (Deletion, Move, Page curation logs), I was reminded that I had written something on a Talk page about the weird new tables that had been added to List of football clubs in Wales. I had trouble finding my post, though, because it was still at Talk:List of men's football clubs in Wales (the name of the actual list at the time).
Shouldn't the Talk page be moved, too? My comment about tables seems pretty silly on the Talk page for what is now a redirect, and probably nobody will even see it when poking around the actual list currently at List of football clubs in Wales, so I can be sure I'll never get an answer. :-p
Maybe you just forgot, or is there a reason you didn't (or couldn't) rearrange the Talks as well? — JohnFromPinckney ( talk / edits) 02:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Please review this RFD request. Consensus has clearly been formed that target should remain as is with the hatnotes discussed. Submitter has also shown bad faith in the process, debating almost every single response to the RFD with the same talkikng points and even !vote-ing again even though he submitted the RFD. I accidentally attempted a close myself not realizing of WP:NACINV. - SanAnMan ( talk) 13:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
It is good practice to leave a note at the discussion itself about notifications which have been made, particularly if made to individual users., however I would not want to participate in this RfD, either as voter or closer, so as to make this request redundant. Jay 💬 16:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
When the consensus is reasonably clear, participants may be best served by not requesting closure and then waiting weeks for a formal closure.Jay 💬 05:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
Hello, Jay!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Dege31 (
talk) 12:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
|
Hi, Jay,
I just happened to see your comment on User talk:Lastofthem. I don't check notification of pings so I missed it and just happened to be looking at your contributions to see if you had responded to someone else and saw my name in the edit summary. I should have been more specific in my warning notice to Lastofthem. But about half of my edits are talk page notices, mostly to new editors, so I get pinged a lot with general questions about Wikipedia and drafts but maybe I should return to looking at pings so I can see where I've been mentioned so I don't miss something important.
Any way, I see you are still doing the good work at REFUND. Just dropped by to say hello and wish that you have a temperate and restful summer (if you live in the Northern Hemisphere). Take care. Liz Read! Talk! 03:52, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
I've actually had a chance to look at their contributions over on frwiki, in relation to connected edits on Kore (producer) and its French Wiki equivalent, and it seems their COI was very apparent, as one of their responses to a Talk page post over there claims they work for the music artist. Regardless, I have gone ahead and reverted the frwiki article back to a less promotional version and requested a Global lock of the user over at Meta. Thanks for doing what you could in the matter. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:45, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).
Interface administrator changes
I am surprised by the lack of article on this subject. You know that noise that heroes make and bad guys fly. See Draft:Dishoom. DareshMohan ( talk) 06:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).
|
|
[s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to
note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
user:A smart kitten meow 06:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
I'd have conducted this interrogative via UTRS if the system had let me. On the other hand, it's better to have community feedback. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 11:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Jc37, it will be very helpful if you add a useful edit summary to the discussions you participate at RfD. If you look at the page history of any RfD, you'll see everyone's comments have the discussion name / page section prefixed along with what they are saying - "delete", "retarget", "keep", or just 1-letter symbols, but it gives a good idea for those who track RfD updates, like me! Jay 💬 05:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
.. typically merely just an automated bit of convenience done for them.and
pretty bland. When I'm looking at the page history of an RfD page which typically has 20 to 30 discussions, I do the edit compare depending on which of those discussions has been responded to. In your case, since you may not be doing an Edit section (which automatically adds the section name), that information is missing, so I'm forced to check your edit diff to see if what you responded to was in my interest. Whereas if you notice, edits of others have the section prefix. Jay 💬 07:49, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
All edits should be explained (unless the reason for them is obvious)—... by clear edit summaries, and
Accurate summaries help other contributors decide whether they want to review an edit, and to understand the change should they choose to review it.Since you have refused, and with no proper explanation, I'll try checking in other forums on what are the right expectations when a user refuses to provide a useful edit summary. This won't be specific to you though. Typically, I add one of the edit summary templates to newbie editor talk pages, and there is the {{ Summary2}} for experienced users, but I would want to know what to do in case of refusals. Jay 💬 11:30, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).
|
|
Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).
Interface administrator changes
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Radhika (disambiguation), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radhika Nair.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:05, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenton Tarrant (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.OrewaTel ( talk) 22:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).
Just thought I'd let you know (based on your comments at Draft talk:Edward Sullam), a 35% copyvio match is almost never enough to merit full-scale G12 deletion; removal and revdel would be more appropriate. Cheers, Primefac ( talk) 07:46, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
I hadn't looked at your edit summary, hence my change of the wikt redirect to a disambig. It seems a very weird decision that the term is so bad that no internal redirect/disambig is allowed, but we are more than happy to outsource it to Wiktionary for some reason, which gives essentially the same result as my disambig, but without further encyclopedic information (which is what people on Wikipedia are interested in). I would expect either a disambig (fully protected) or a redlink (salted) to both be superior to a wiktionary redirect here. Fram ( talk) 16:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
My recent revision to the decade articles that were mistakenly reverted by you were justified and not unexplained. See the RfC for the removal of these images on [2]
Remove them again and you will be reported for edit warring. DementiaGaming ( talk) 19:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
The article Jakarta Slide has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:NSOFT
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I think you forgot to change the target of Wikipedia:PROMOTE after you closed the RfD. Veverve ( talk) 16:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).
Hi Jay. Thanks for your close of the difficult Minor-attracted person RfD. Another editor pointed out to me today that Minor attracted person and Minor Attracted Person (the latter kept in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9 § Minor Attracted Person, the former created by me on the basis of that RfD) were deleted after the AfD and should now be recreated. I would do it myself, but I want to exercise an abundance of caution here with respect to WP:INVOLVED. Would you mind recreating and FPPing? -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed (they|xe|she) 04:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
I cannot think of any reason why anyone would want to treat all the reasonable capitalisation and hyphenation variants identically to this one- i.e. the reasonable variants should be treated identically. These two are indeed reasonable variants so I'll create them. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:17, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Back when I blocked this range I determined there would be too much negative impact on enwiki, so while the block is there its actually disabled on enwiki.
2021-04-05T03:07:57: Jon Kolbert (meta.wikimedia.org) globally blocked 31.167.0.0/16 (global block log) (expires on 2024-04-05 at 03:07:57, locally disabled by Jon Kolbert: prevent collateral damage) (Cross-wiki spam: spambot: excessive spam from this range) (unblock locally) Jon Kolbert ( talk) 15:36, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isla Phillips until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.voorts ( talk/ contributions) 23:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, they were at RfD, but why put an unsourced article back into mainspace. All its doing is completly subverting the WP:NPP process and reducing the quality of Wikipedia. Both references are dead. What is the point of that? They should have been sent to draft. They are trash articles. scope_creep Talk 11:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).
Hello,
I noticed that you closed the proposal to delete the redirect "Glorification of martyrdom in Palestinian society" as a keep consensus.
This is odd, as the delete !votes outnumbered the keep !votes, especially if you count my nom comments as a !vote. This is also not a situation where the strength of the arguments is noticeably a determining factor that would outweigh the number of !votes (or if it is, this was not articulated by the simple "closed as keep" comment).
It would have been more appropriate to close as delete here, or at the very least, as no consensus, right?
Vanilla Wizard 💙 21:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
All arguments were countered by participants who voted to keep the term as a redirect.as the expanded statement doesn't really say anything specific about the strength of the arguments on either side. Is there an avenue for deletion review for redirects? I feel a second opinion may be best as I still feel that even a most charitable assessment of the strength of the arguments would result in a "no consensus" close to encourage re-discussion in the future, not to say there is a consensus for the minority "keep" position without elaborating. I won't bother you anymore, thank you for your time. Vanilla Wizard 💙 06:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
improbable that a reader is going to search for this
title is a plausible search term (and given that people keep creating articles at titles like this it clearly is)
the redirect is superfluous and potentially POV
"Superfluous" is never a reason to delete a redirect. per WP:RNEUTRAL being "potentially" POV is not relevant
not convinced the old name has major NPOV problems... "glorification" seems only redundant, not a further NPOV violation
per the redirect discussion
{{subst:DRV notice|PAGE_NAME}}
, but that would just generate a message that would make it sound as though we weren't already discussing this, so I figured typing this out is better.Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
zoglophie •talk• 09:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).
|
|
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rebecca Peterson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Estonian.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
There might've been a misunderstanding at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 1#Dada (Ultra monster) and etc. by the way. I was hoping for that set of titles to be deleted (as none had substantial history) which would open the door to moves. It's a pretty messy situation all things being considered; I guess the redirects can still be swapped to return the histories back to the correct locations, is that what you were implying in the close? Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello . Jay 💬, following your instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 394 , I have worked with Draft:Korvi Rakshand, can you please review it and move as main article.-- IqbalHossain ( talk) 06:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
It appears the Cody Taylor vandal, which you previously blocked, has returned. I've opened up an SPI here. The Kip 03:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).
Hello Jay.
I would like to contest the non-admin RfD closure of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 5#Holy Chao. Could you tell me what the procedure is? Veverve ( talk) 10:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
I changed this to a redirect ( and have reverted your edit) because she plainly is not independently notable; see the talk page. TheLongTone ( talk) 15:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello Jay. Could you please remove the RfD tag at Twoallbeefpattiesspecialsaucelettucecheesepicklesonionsonasesameseedbun? I've edited the edit request on the redirect's talk page, but nobody has replied yet. Thank you. CycloneYoris talk! 20:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of company name etymologies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008–2016, 2017–2020, 2021–2022 |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
Entry should be prefaced or contain the words “within gender ideology” or “part of queer theory” 208.114.139.7 ( talk) 05:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, The article I made on Dignified Menstruation was not meant to be promotional, instead meant to be informative on the importance of having dignity and protecting the dignity of people who menstruate. If there is a way I could retrieve my article then I can work to make it from a neutral point of view. Otherwise I will try to find an editor or writer to better relay the message. Thank you Lalschalaune ( talk) 05:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey Jay, I noticed that the request for undeletion was archived by a bot despite no conclusion on the request, it looks like almost every other request was either marked as "Done" or "Not Done".
The archive is here for your convenience: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_382
I would also like to request undeletion of Wikipedia:WikiProject Autonomous Zones/Sandbox as it was part of the wikiproject and also has been deleted due to no other reason than being created by the sockpuppet user. TNebula ( talk) 09:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
you were involved in discussions related to micronations, although you had made only one edit (at an AfD). So I don't know if he was referring to discussions off-wiki. Courtesy ping Girth Summit. Jay 💬 20:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
|
|
Hello @ Jay i wanna connect you via email how can i reach you. 27.63.19.43 ( talk) 05:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Need help finding sources for Nari Bi Pindhipare Rakta Sindura. What is the name of this film in Odia letters? DareshMohan ( talk) 11:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Hey, Jay,
Is there are a good reason to delete a PROD'd article hours early? We usually don't delete PROD'd articles and files until after their expiration date and time. There are times when an article is de-PROD'd right before it becomes eligible for deletion. You don't need to restore this article, I just thought I'd inquire about it. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Dear Jay,
The pages "Ebu Press Ltd" and "Asian-Australasian Journal of Bioscience and Biotechnology" are deleted before the given time for editing and revising. I am wondering, the last time for deletion was 08:31 (so far I can remember), and both of the articles are deleted before around three hours. Could you please undelete both pages for revising them?
Thank you for your consideration. Asifupm22 ( talk) 08:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Dear Jay, Please help me undelete the page, "Asian-Australasian Journal of Bioscience and Biotechnology".
Thank you very much.
Asifupm22 ( talk) 11:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jay. I noticed your recent edits on Adecco Group and was hoping you'd be willing to help me out with some updates I am looking to make to Adam Pritzker's article. He is the founder of General Assembly, a company that was eventually bought by Adecco. My pending edit request lays out the two new roles that need to be added; my COI keeps me from making these changes directly. Thank you for your review and implementation. I'm available to discuss if you have any questions. Thanks DCBPI ( talk) 23:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).
|
|
[p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
I noticed that you retargeted First woe and second woe to Seven trumpets, but you also closed as no consensus. If there is no consensus, keep the original target per WP:RFD and WP:CLOSE. I have reverted it. Mast303 ( talk) 00:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
In case you have no notived, your retargets concerning this and this have been reverted. Veverve ( talk) 12:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Category:Recipients of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Baronnet ( talk) 13:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
You're speedy this morning ;-) Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
talk? Tousif ❯❯❯ Talk 10:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thank you for saving my deleted draft I spent a lot of time working on. Logiotek ( talk) 14:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC) |
Hello, Jay. I disagree with the reason for closing the AfD: Léon Gillis. There was no consensus for keep – the discussion ended evenly, and should be closed as no consensus (not deleted). Please consider adjusting the reason for non-deletion. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR ( talk) 18:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
'''no consensus'''
to be included in the closing. —
CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (
talk) 19:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
Hi, Jay, how are you? Did you perhaps mean to leave a VRT ticket number with the permission-pending template at Draft talk:Revvity? BTW, I've removed the copyvio for now – it can always be restored if verified permission comes through. Beats me why people go to so much trouble to give permission for unencyclopaedic text which is anyway never going to become part of the encyclopaedia when they could just write a couple of sentences from scratch, but that's what they do ... Regards, Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 10:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jay,
I don't know if you can help highlight the unreliable sources in the articles listed above. A template to that effect was placed on both articles, but most of the sources used are independent of the subjects and also from traditional media, so I am not sure which of them are classified as unreliable by the Wiki team.
Thank you. Yourmmy ( talk) 10:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Jay. Thanks for your circular moves of List of football clubs in Wales and List of men's football clubs in Wales following the RfD, as well as your close to revert the redirect from 29 January.
Seeing the entries on my Watchlist (Deletion, Move, Page curation logs), I was reminded that I had written something on a Talk page about the weird new tables that had been added to List of football clubs in Wales. I had trouble finding my post, though, because it was still at Talk:List of men's football clubs in Wales (the name of the actual list at the time).
Shouldn't the Talk page be moved, too? My comment about tables seems pretty silly on the Talk page for what is now a redirect, and probably nobody will even see it when poking around the actual list currently at List of football clubs in Wales, so I can be sure I'll never get an answer. :-p
Maybe you just forgot, or is there a reason you didn't (or couldn't) rearrange the Talks as well? — JohnFromPinckney ( talk / edits) 02:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Please review this RFD request. Consensus has clearly been formed that target should remain as is with the hatnotes discussed. Submitter has also shown bad faith in the process, debating almost every single response to the RFD with the same talkikng points and even !vote-ing again even though he submitted the RFD. I accidentally attempted a close myself not realizing of WP:NACINV. - SanAnMan ( talk) 13:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
It is good practice to leave a note at the discussion itself about notifications which have been made, particularly if made to individual users., however I would not want to participate in this RfD, either as voter or closer, so as to make this request redundant. Jay 💬 16:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
When the consensus is reasonably clear, participants may be best served by not requesting closure and then waiting weeks for a formal closure.Jay 💬 05:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
Hello, Jay!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Dege31 (
talk) 12:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
|
Hi, Jay,
I just happened to see your comment on User talk:Lastofthem. I don't check notification of pings so I missed it and just happened to be looking at your contributions to see if you had responded to someone else and saw my name in the edit summary. I should have been more specific in my warning notice to Lastofthem. But about half of my edits are talk page notices, mostly to new editors, so I get pinged a lot with general questions about Wikipedia and drafts but maybe I should return to looking at pings so I can see where I've been mentioned so I don't miss something important.
Any way, I see you are still doing the good work at REFUND. Just dropped by to say hello and wish that you have a temperate and restful summer (if you live in the Northern Hemisphere). Take care. Liz Read! Talk! 03:52, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
I've actually had a chance to look at their contributions over on frwiki, in relation to connected edits on Kore (producer) and its French Wiki equivalent, and it seems their COI was very apparent, as one of their responses to a Talk page post over there claims they work for the music artist. Regardless, I have gone ahead and reverted the frwiki article back to a less promotional version and requested a Global lock of the user over at Meta. Thanks for doing what you could in the matter. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:45, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).
Interface administrator changes
I am surprised by the lack of article on this subject. You know that noise that heroes make and bad guys fly. See Draft:Dishoom. DareshMohan ( talk) 06:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).
|
|
[s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to
note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
user:A smart kitten meow 06:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
I'd have conducted this interrogative via UTRS if the system had let me. On the other hand, it's better to have community feedback. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 11:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Jc37, it will be very helpful if you add a useful edit summary to the discussions you participate at RfD. If you look at the page history of any RfD, you'll see everyone's comments have the discussion name / page section prefixed along with what they are saying - "delete", "retarget", "keep", or just 1-letter symbols, but it gives a good idea for those who track RfD updates, like me! Jay 💬 05:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
.. typically merely just an automated bit of convenience done for them.and
pretty bland. When I'm looking at the page history of an RfD page which typically has 20 to 30 discussions, I do the edit compare depending on which of those discussions has been responded to. In your case, since you may not be doing an Edit section (which automatically adds the section name), that information is missing, so I'm forced to check your edit diff to see if what you responded to was in my interest. Whereas if you notice, edits of others have the section prefix. Jay 💬 07:49, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
All edits should be explained (unless the reason for them is obvious)—... by clear edit summaries, and
Accurate summaries help other contributors decide whether they want to review an edit, and to understand the change should they choose to review it.Since you have refused, and with no proper explanation, I'll try checking in other forums on what are the right expectations when a user refuses to provide a useful edit summary. This won't be specific to you though. Typically, I add one of the edit summary templates to newbie editor talk pages, and there is the {{ Summary2}} for experienced users, but I would want to know what to do in case of refusals. Jay 💬 11:30, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).
|
|
Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).
Interface administrator changes
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Radhika (disambiguation), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radhika Nair.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:05, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenton Tarrant (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.OrewaTel ( talk) 22:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).
Just thought I'd let you know (based on your comments at Draft talk:Edward Sullam), a 35% copyvio match is almost never enough to merit full-scale G12 deletion; removal and revdel would be more appropriate. Cheers, Primefac ( talk) 07:46, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
I hadn't looked at your edit summary, hence my change of the wikt redirect to a disambig. It seems a very weird decision that the term is so bad that no internal redirect/disambig is allowed, but we are more than happy to outsource it to Wiktionary for some reason, which gives essentially the same result as my disambig, but without further encyclopedic information (which is what people on Wikipedia are interested in). I would expect either a disambig (fully protected) or a redlink (salted) to both be superior to a wiktionary redirect here. Fram ( talk) 16:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
My recent revision to the decade articles that were mistakenly reverted by you were justified and not unexplained. See the RfC for the removal of these images on [2]
Remove them again and you will be reported for edit warring. DementiaGaming ( talk) 19:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
The article Jakarta Slide has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:NSOFT
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I think you forgot to change the target of Wikipedia:PROMOTE after you closed the RfD. Veverve ( talk) 16:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).
Hi Jay. Thanks for your close of the difficult Minor-attracted person RfD. Another editor pointed out to me today that Minor attracted person and Minor Attracted Person (the latter kept in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9 § Minor Attracted Person, the former created by me on the basis of that RfD) were deleted after the AfD and should now be recreated. I would do it myself, but I want to exercise an abundance of caution here with respect to WP:INVOLVED. Would you mind recreating and FPPing? -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed (they|xe|she) 04:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
I cannot think of any reason why anyone would want to treat all the reasonable capitalisation and hyphenation variants identically to this one- i.e. the reasonable variants should be treated identically. These two are indeed reasonable variants so I'll create them. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:17, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Back when I blocked this range I determined there would be too much negative impact on enwiki, so while the block is there its actually disabled on enwiki.
2021-04-05T03:07:57: Jon Kolbert (meta.wikimedia.org) globally blocked 31.167.0.0/16 (global block log) (expires on 2024-04-05 at 03:07:57, locally disabled by Jon Kolbert: prevent collateral damage) (Cross-wiki spam: spambot: excessive spam from this range) (unblock locally) Jon Kolbert ( talk) 15:36, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isla Phillips until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.voorts ( talk/ contributions) 23:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, they were at RfD, but why put an unsourced article back into mainspace. All its doing is completly subverting the WP:NPP process and reducing the quality of Wikipedia. Both references are dead. What is the point of that? They should have been sent to draft. They are trash articles. scope_creep Talk 11:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).
Hello,
I noticed that you closed the proposal to delete the redirect "Glorification of martyrdom in Palestinian society" as a keep consensus.
This is odd, as the delete !votes outnumbered the keep !votes, especially if you count my nom comments as a !vote. This is also not a situation where the strength of the arguments is noticeably a determining factor that would outweigh the number of !votes (or if it is, this was not articulated by the simple "closed as keep" comment).
It would have been more appropriate to close as delete here, or at the very least, as no consensus, right?
Vanilla Wizard 💙 21:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
All arguments were countered by participants who voted to keep the term as a redirect.as the expanded statement doesn't really say anything specific about the strength of the arguments on either side. Is there an avenue for deletion review for redirects? I feel a second opinion may be best as I still feel that even a most charitable assessment of the strength of the arguments would result in a "no consensus" close to encourage re-discussion in the future, not to say there is a consensus for the minority "keep" position without elaborating. I won't bother you anymore, thank you for your time. Vanilla Wizard 💙 06:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
improbable that a reader is going to search for this
title is a plausible search term (and given that people keep creating articles at titles like this it clearly is)
the redirect is superfluous and potentially POV
"Superfluous" is never a reason to delete a redirect. per WP:RNEUTRAL being "potentially" POV is not relevant
not convinced the old name has major NPOV problems... "glorification" seems only redundant, not a further NPOV violation
per the redirect discussion
{{subst:DRV notice|PAGE_NAME}}
, but that would just generate a message that would make it sound as though we weren't already discussing this, so I figured typing this out is better.Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
zoglophie •talk• 09:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).
|
|
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rebecca Peterson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Estonian.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
There might've been a misunderstanding at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 1#Dada (Ultra monster) and etc. by the way. I was hoping for that set of titles to be deleted (as none had substantial history) which would open the door to moves. It's a pretty messy situation all things being considered; I guess the redirects can still be swapped to return the histories back to the correct locations, is that what you were implying in the close? Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello . Jay 💬, following your instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 394 , I have worked with Draft:Korvi Rakshand, can you please review it and move as main article.-- IqbalHossain ( talk) 06:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
It appears the Cody Taylor vandal, which you previously blocked, has returned. I've opened up an SPI here. The Kip 03:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).
Hello Jay.
I would like to contest the non-admin RfD closure of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 5#Holy Chao. Could you tell me what the procedure is? Veverve ( talk) 10:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
I changed this to a redirect ( and have reverted your edit) because she plainly is not independently notable; see the talk page. TheLongTone ( talk) 15:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello Jay. Could you please remove the RfD tag at Twoallbeefpattiesspecialsaucelettucecheesepicklesonionsonasesameseedbun? I've edited the edit request on the redirect's talk page, but nobody has replied yet. Thank you. CycloneYoris talk! 20:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of company name etymologies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.