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.

		The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award
		For over 360 article reviews during 2022. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 03:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to ask why you removed the Trivia section in the Angry Birds Reloaded article. The summary was just "no" so what was the reason behind it? SuperWikiBrother ( talk) 18:51, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Because we don't do trivia sections in articles. Apologies for being unclear. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:52, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, apology accepted and thanks for clarifying. SuperWikiBrother ( talk) 18:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey just curious, why did you mark this article as unpatrolled? ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 23:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Because newly-undeleted articles are supposed to be unpatrolled but aren't due to T315591, so I've been manually adding them back to the queue. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see. But shouldn't it be patrolled since I have AP? ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 23:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

The software implementation of unpatrol-on-undelete, during the brief time it worked, deliberately ignored autopatrolled so I'm doing the same. Related discussions at the bottom of User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2022-07#History merge mistake? and at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Archive 44#Article patrol status after refund/undelete.

While in the specific case of an autopatrolled admin doing their own undelete it would arguably be safe to not do a procedural unpatrol (no other combination of attributes works; if an admin undeletes a PROD at the request at the request of someone else then their autopatrolled status is inapplicable since they didn't review the merits of the article, likewise for an admin undeleting a PROD at the request of an autopatrolled non-admin), I find it neater to just unpatrol everything undeleted (except for history merges), and it's only one article every few days so doesn't add much to the queue. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks for taking the time to explain. I'd just never had it happen before and I wondered if it was a technical thing or on the article's merits. Cheers! ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 23:46, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Module:Pages with authority control identifiers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 13:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

BloxyColaSweet ( talk) 01:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed this edit. That happens to me too: whenever I manually do a CSD, prod, RM, or one of the various XfDs, I never seem to know whether the particular template uses |reason=, or |rationale=, or |text=, or something else entirely. It's annoying to go by trial and error or to have to look up the template's documentation each time. I really wish these templates were consistent, so that the same set of parameter aliases could work across all of them. – Uanfala ( talk) 12:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Of course, inconsistencies like that happen with independently-developed code. That edit followed a AWB run that tagged ~20 obsolete categories for speedy deletion using |reason=, and I figured it was easier to fix the template than fix all of them. So I did so. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I just want to let you know, so you're not surprised, that I have moved your proposal for a page name change notice and comments from Template talk:Annotated link --> to Module talk:AnnotatedLink. I have also responded to the proposal there, going some way to explain why I have also removed the redirect from the module talk to the template's, which should be discussed on the module talk too if desired. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 07:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi -- Thanks for fixing my duplicate AFD for Draft:Ivana Knöll. I must have nominated it a second time in error. Thanks again. Cheers! AldezD ( talk) 19:29, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

I just refreshed Category:Pages displaying redlinks processed by Module:AnnotatedLink to ensure things are dropping off as they should and the speedy rename notice scared the crap out of me! I thought something had gone horribly wrong and fight-or-flight kicked in 😲 This and other stories available on demand 😉 Thanks for helping with the cleanup 😊 Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 15:11, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Two are erroneous

Category:Pages displaying short descriptions with no spaces via Module:AnnotatedLink has the requested name to be changed to Category:Pages displaying alarming messages about Module:Annotated link which is not correct. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 17:24, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Also Category:Pages displaying redlinks processed by Module:AnnotatedLink --> Category:Pages displaying alarming redlinks processed by Module:Annotated link is wrong. I have commented at the request page. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 17:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Oops. I've updated the CFDS page. When I find myself making this many stupid mistakes it tells me I may need to take a break from Wikipedia. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:40, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

No harm is done. I know I need to get some food before doing anything else, or there will definitely be more mistakes 😉 Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 17:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Related to the Chemical Abstracts Service page that you just moved, I moved to CAS (formerly Chemical Abstracts Service). The issue here is that CAS is not a mere acronym for the company. The company has rebranded to simply "CAS". Since however there is already a CAS disambiguation article page, I moved to this new page CAS (formerly Chemical Abstracts Service). If you have an alternate suggestion on how to proceed please let me know. However, keeping the article as Chemical Abstracts Service is no longer correct since the company has rebranded and only goes by CAS. Brandopedia ( talk) 19:14, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

History repeats itself: a different company did the exact same thing, of rebranding from a full name to an acronym, over at Talk:Archaeological Services Inc., and yet Wikipedia's requested move process decided that the article should still be titled at the full name because people such as Necrothesp claimed that the abbreviation is just branding (see also WP:NAMECHANGES). I didn't see a meaningful distinction between that case and yours, so reverted the move.

At the very least, "CAS (formerly Chemical Abstracts Service)" is contrary to Wikipedia's title disambiguation format, but I'm unfortunately not coming up with any better ideas for names given the wide variety of companies called "CAS". * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:04, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

This is just not how we title articles on Wikipedia. An organisation's name and its branding are very often not the same thing. The current title is the best one. Using an abbreviation as the title and then stating what it stands for as a disambiguator is utterly pointless. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 09:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pppery,

I'd like to ask you to consider using Twinkle when you tag pages for deletion. Looking over your recent PRODs, not all article creators were given deletion notifications (none for The Coordinating Secretariat for Science, Technology and Innovation (COSTI) for example). FastilyBot sometimes posts notices when editors forget to notify article creators but I've noticed that it doesn't do this 100% of the time. I'm not sure why it posts talk page notices for some PRODs but not all, but it just doesn't.

However, if you set up your Twinkle Preferences to "Notify page creator", then whenever you use Twinkle to tag a page for a CSD, PROD, or XfD, then Twinkle will post these notices on your behalf so you don't have to remember to. Notification isn't mandatory but it is best practices and a common courtesy to your fellow editors. I'm sure if a page you created was going to be deleted, you'd want to know about it in case it was a mistaken tagging. Thank you for considering this request and for all you do on the project (which is a lot!). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

This is deliberate. I don't notify users who have been inactive for years when I PROD an article they created. The creator of The Coordinating Secretariat for Science, Technology and Innovation (COSTI) appears to have made no edits since 2013. If I ever stopped editing Wikipedia for a decade, I would almost certainly have long-since stopped caring about the fate of the pages I created. Repeatedly posting on my talk page about it is not going to convince me to change by behavior here absent a clear consensus to make notifiying even long-gone users required. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

A week ago, on April 7, you proposed deletion of two pages I created. I received notification only on one of them. Using your own rationale, from the time frame you should assume that I am active. Moreover, the categories were about a week old when nominated and created within days of each other. Perhaps you should take User:Liz's suggestion and use Twinkle, because your deliberate choice of who to notify seems to be hit or miss. Cheers! WikiUser70176 ( talk) 15:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Not hit or miss. It's a deliberate decision that when I do a batch nomination I only notify each user once, on the assumption that they would look at the page and see all relevant nominations, as you appear to have done. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Just a word of caution: in my case, the assumption is faulty because one incidence does not a trend make. Have a good week! WikiUser70176 ( talk) 11:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Good morning/afternoon/evening! (Choose the one that best suits your current time.) You put merge tags on these articles, but didn't specify which one you think should be merged into the other. Which way do you want the merge to go? Joyous! | Talk 23:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I originally didn't care. But now that you are asking, I think Hardware reset is a better title for the merged article, since Reset (computing) refers to several different things (quoting my own edit summary prior to some cleanup, This article is currently about 3 different things: the variation of a reboot, a bunch of terminal commands of unclear function, and factory resetting. [...] * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:53, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, as an active New Page Patroller, I wanted to make sure you were aware of an upcoming Wikimedia Foundation project to improve the PageTriage extension. We recently published results of user interviews, and have some findings that we would value patrollers' opinions on. If you haven't yet, please consider adding the project page to your watchlist to stay up to date with our progress! Samwalton9 (WMF) ( talk) 13:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, do you know why you added the module type check in Template:Tfm for the |bigbox= parameter? |bigbox={{safesubst:#ifeq:{{{type|}}}|module|yes|{{safesubst:((}}#invoke:Noinclude{{safesubst:!}}noinclude{{safesubst:!}}text=yes{{safesubst:))}}}} Gonnym ( talk) 10:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

The reason for this is that TfD tags of modules are placed on the doc page, so are supposed to transclude the full box to the module itself, whereas TfD tags of anything else are not supposed to transclude the full box anywhere. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Toomanycharts/Draft, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other test edits you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. MClay1 ( talk) 06:28, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Computer art and Category:Digital art were both parent category and subcategory of each other. I just changed that. But at the same time I wonder if those should be distinct categories at all. Thoughts? Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Not really my area of interest, but from a quick glance a merge does seem reasonable. Oh, and you may be interested in User:SDZeroBot/Category cycles - circular categorization is more common that you would think. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Would you complain if I gave you the page mover right? You certainly have ample experience with titling policies/guidelines, and you've made enough RM/TR requests over the years that I'm sure it'd come in useful. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Go ahead. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Done. You may want to take a look at Wikipedia:Page mover and/or Template:Page mover granted, although I'm sure you're already familiar with all that. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 00:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Magic: The Gathering rules 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski ( talk) 12:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Would it be okay for me to re-create Right to life movement with sources? 184.21.204.5 ( talk) 14:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Go ahead. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:45, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, since you're proposing changes, are you able to sort out an existing redirect? Category:User en-CA-N is being populated by Babel with no obvious way to empty it. Timrollpickering ( talk) 10:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

You can create MediaWiki:Babel-category-override with {{resolve category redirect|$1}}, which should solve all babel-populated redirects. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Erm where do I create that? Timrollpickering ( talk) 00:12, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

By going to the page I linked and clicking "Edit"? I don't understand the question. MediaWiki messages appear as blue as long as the message is recognized by the software, even if no local page with the given title has been created, which may be confusing you. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

The article Magic: The Gathering rules you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Magic: The Gathering rules for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski ( talk) 22:21, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

The redirect Wikipedia:Digits has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 24 § Wikipedia:Digits until a consensus is reached. Dsuke1998AEOS ( talk) 13:17, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for redirecting. I was going to do that and got sidetracked. -- Whpq ( talk) 23:09, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I hope this is a good place to share this. I posted a proposal for a new parameter that will be beneficial for Wikipedia readers on the talk page for Template:Infobox musical artist, however that page seems to be somewhat inactive with only the same 2-3 editors commenting, and implementation of this into Wikipedia code requires consent from an administrator. Here is my proposal, and I hope you agree:

I am advocating a new parameter to reasonably replace "Associated acts". This parameter, "Protégé of" will be specifically reserved for Musical Acts billed as Individuals. Theoretically, this parameter will serve the same function as "Spinoff of" with musical groups, giving readers the ability to see which artist, producer, or talent manager discovered the subject of the article.

The inclusion of this parameter comes adds encyclopedic value as the figure who discovered an artist is a key characteristic of how the artists' career plays out event-wise, what makes them distinctive, and will be information that is found in the article. In the modern day music industry and the future, an artists success is nearly based entirely on connections and collaboration. ^[1] Readers need the ability to briefly skim at the infobox and see which individual is best associated with the success of the article subject – adding to the encyclopedic value of why that artist is worthy of a Wikipedia article. In many cases, an artist is most known for being under the wing of another artist or producer, or in other cases, a reader may not know who was the individual to sign (to their label), mentor, or executive produce the career/discography of an artist. If this is new information to the reader, it may serve as incentive to read the entire article and give context behind their discovery.

This parameter will tie-in seamlessly with all other information on the Musical artist Infobox as well as the article. A rule for this parameter is that the individual must already be mentioned in the article and cited, must executive produce their breakout project (album or EP that launched their career into mainstream notability), and must have a proof of signing to that individuals record label or company. "Protégé of" will consist of typically no more that 1 name mentioned – however in some cases of a joint-venture signing, there may be 2 or 3 names mentioned.

In conclusion, this parameter will simply be a version of "Spinoff_of" except for individual artists. Associated acts, over a period of time got too cluttered and spammy; this resolves that issue and provides readers a meaningful replacement that incentivizes further research, extracts important information, justifies the subjects encyclopedic notability, and gives otherwise unknown information to readers of Wikipedia. A makeshift version has been implemented by myself and other Wikipedia members, however they were reversed due to lack of consensus on the talk page. When I added with this edit, it has been met with acceptance and non-revertion among highly prolific, long-time Wiki editors. With that being said, here are examples of how this parameter will be used:

• Eminem (Protégé of) → Dr. Dre
• Justin Bieber → Usher, Scooter Braun
• Mariah Carey → Tommy Mottola
• Drake → Lil Wayne
• P!nk → L.A. Reid
• J. Cole → Jay-Z
• Kanye West → Jay-Z/ No I.D.
• Lizzo → Ricky Reed
• Machine Gun Kelly → Puff Daddy
• Lil Wayne → Birdman
• Jack Harlow → DJ Drama, Don Cannon

StreetKnockerzEnt ( talk) 00:39, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I have no desire to involve myself with this. If there's a specific change ready for implementation, and you need to attract the attention of someone why has the rights to edit the template, then add {{ edit template-protected}} and I or another template editor will respond. Probably not me, since it's been months since I was last actively clearing that queue. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:41, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

What is the error you are referring to on Alamein railway line? -- ThylacineHunter ( talk) 03:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I definitely remember the article showing a Lua error in the section of the table that I edited, but it seems to be gone now. Weird. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Interesting, I'll have a look into it as I'm the one who made that template and I thought I tested it fully before making it into a "template:" page. -- ThylacineHunter ( talk) 03:34, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no drafts.

The page appears broken. Are you able to fix it? Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 18:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I have little inclination to fix serious reports that have been broken by April Fools silliness (in this case there being too many open MfDs). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:13, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

It looks like I was mistaken and the problem wasn't actually April Fools related but instead this giant MfD, which I've now closed as keep. The page should start working again when the bot archives the page. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:57, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

I've posted a canvassing warning at /info/en/?search=User_talk:Tomastvivlaren#Canvassing?. I'm interested in an explanation from the editor, and thought that you might be as well. I don't recall having ever met them. I'm highly experienced in list development and policy, so perhaps that had something to do with my being pinged. I also wonder how the list of editors who were pinged were selected. Thank you for the link to the canvassing policy. I hadn't read that in a very long time.    — The Transhumanist   09:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I normally go to BrownHairedGirl when I have questions about categories, but I noticed that she hasn't been on-wiki in almost two weeks. Would you be a good person to ask? Someone else? Please let me know either way; I don't want to go into detail unless you're willing. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:00, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

It depends what exactly the issue is. I certainly am willing to look into the situation, although I don't promise I will be able to help and I will be busier than usual in the next few days so may not respond quickly. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I blocked RedSorcery16 for disruptive editing and personal attacks. They added a lot of categories to fictious Harry Potter character articles. I found many of the category additions dubious, and I'm curious what you think about them. They also added cats to the Luna Lovegood article. Another user reverted the cats with the edit summary "removed categories for non-canon or minor characteristics". RS16 then posted to the reverting user's Talk page saying "Magic Awakened is not non-canon. It is considered canon (tier-three)." What are canon and non-canon, and what does "tier-three" mean? Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

The term "canon" in this context refers to Canon (fiction). I'm not involved with Harry Potter fandom, but "tier 3" appears to mean https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Canon#Tier_Three:_Licenced from a quick search, and that page, at least, supports RS16's claim.

Whether or not it's "canon", the categories removed in that edit do not appear to be defining, as two of them are mentioned only in passing and the other two ("biologists", "war veterans") is not mentioned at all (see also WP:CATV). This amounts to a content dispute, and one in which I disagree with RS16, but not a conduct issue. Looking at Rs16's other categorization edits:

1. Added Category:Fraud to Snake Oil. This is on its own merits fine, but I would probably have put the article in a more specific category instead.
2. Added Category:Films about murder to Full Circle (1977 film) I see no problems with this.
3. Added Category:Filicide in fiction to Flowers in the Attic. I personally don't think this category belongs, as, after reading through the plot section myself, it's not clear that a actual filicide (deliberate act of a parent killing their own child) took place, and even if there is one it may not be defining, but I see how one could rationally disagree with that.
4. Added Category:Fiction with false allegations of sex crimes to The Wacky Molestation Adventure. Seems fine, although the category itself is poorly named and maybe should be deleted.
5. Added Category:Rape in fiction to Flowers in the Attic Seems mostly fine, although the definingness is borderline

I looked at several more, but that's enough to get the general picture - at least the recent category edits are on their own merits not problematic (or at least within the overton window of positions on categorization), although I question the value of "films about X"/"X in fiction" categories and I wouldn't call them useful, just harmless. The bigger problem is WP:ICANTHEARYOU and personal attacks, which triggered the block. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:05, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

That was quick! I dunno, I still think there is a fair amount of disruption by the user, including edits to existing cats and the addition of cats to other Harry Potter-related articles. But you're right, the personal attacks and "attitude" was the more compelling reason for the block. I'm going to remove some of the stuff at the Lovegood article as it's all supported by the video game, the source for which is only Wikipedia. Once I remove the source, the rest falls apart. Thanks so much for your time.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 12:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi there Pppery,

I noticed that you turned the Ricky Velez article back into a redirect to The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore. I found that when the article was being created, there wasn't sufficient evidence to mark it for deletion, given that Ricky Velez satisfied WP:GNG in my eyes. He seems to be an up and coming comedian who has received notable recognition. The page was only reviewed after it became a redirect to the show and wasn't given a chance for review beforehand.

Would you be okay with reinstating Ricky Velez again? Let me know if you intended to delete it and why you did so; editors who likewise did or did not contribute to the article could have offered insight in a WP:PROD or a broader WP:AfD discussion. Would be happy to hear from you.

Thanks! — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} ( talk) ( contribs) 04:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If you want to write an article based on the sources you seem to have found, go ahead - I restored the redirect because the version I reviewed was an entirely unsourced stub, and we can't have unsourced articles on living people. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, then that was totally appropriate. It should not have been in the mainspace at that stage. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} ( talk) ( contribs) 04:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You said totally unsourced, I ask you. What exactly? As soon as you native English speakers read the word gypsy, rewrites as Romani? isnt it the case? Cental Asian Gyps = changend to Romani even though they aren't. Middle eastern gypsy = changend to Romani even though they are Domari. Caucasian mountain gypsy = changend to Romani although they are Lomari, etc. Vlax Romani ( talk) 15:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

None of this is an excuse to write an article without citing your sources, as you are required to do. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:48, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Which sources? those are facts, all gypsys are made into romanis in english wikipedia. You can see that in the articles here. Even groups that distance themselves from Roma are made into Romani. And what's the point? Vlax Romani ( talk) 15:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The WP:BURDEN to provide sources is on you, not on me, and a mere assertion that those are facts does not satisfy it. And the point is that Wikipedia has standards, which your article did not meet, and it is my responsibility at a new page reviewer to enforce those standards. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

That's out of concept of what you're answering me... I didn't write an article as such, I write about the Term Gypsy for other groups, who are not Roma but mistakenly changend into roma, because english speakers now generally change the word gypsy in romani. about the word gypsy. Vlax Romani ( talk) 16:00, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Domari and Lyuli are indeed not Roma.  Lomari (Lomavren), however, ARE Roma. –  .Raven   ^.talk 03:30, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Pppery. I decided to create Wikipedia:What G6 is not in the hopes that having an essay to direct people to makes it easier to fight the liberal use of G6. Is there anything missing from the page? In particular, are there any common reasons that I missed which should be included in § Things that do not qualify for G6 (or ones I did include but almost never happen)? Best, House Blaster ^talk 18:28, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I added some things. While I haven't seen some of the specific cases you mentioned I think they are worth keeping around anyway. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:09, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I see you removed the WD links and this has been restricted for such articles. I've no strong opinion on that but it's quite inconvenient in this case, as I'm trying to validate the identities of the people in the list and track down articles in multiple languages as they are often missing in English.

I note that the RFC mentions using this template: {{ill|Jokery|WD=Q131138}}

Before I start work on adding or using that, can you confirm if this is acceptable or not? Jim Killock (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

I personally do not systematically remove that format, but there's AFAIK no consensus either way on whether it's allowed. The closing statement of the RfC I linked in by edit summary says I do not see any consensus as to the proposed exception of linking to WD, by something similar to inline inter-language link(s)which may be executed using the same template. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:24, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll make a note of what's happening on the talk page before doing anything to avoid any edit wars. Jim Killock (talk) 19:29, 30 April 2023 (UTC)