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.

Thankyou for you're history split. I used my 1 article a month to create the article, Upton, Huntingdonshire and Upton, Peterborough is now at that location. Interestingly you restored it to mainspace even though I suggested moving it to my userspace. Regarding you're comment here I'd suggest that if I ask for something to be split that didn't exist prior to my editing restriction being passed it would mean I couldn't restore it and now would cost my 1 of my 1 article a month as with Upton but if the change in article topic was after then it would be fine. Newby Head, Cumbria for example was split at my request when the subject changed in 2010 so I'd say if I restored that article which I won't anyway it would cost my an article but its fine since its a redirect. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 18:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I totally misread that diff. Sorry about that. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 19:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries, the last 36 hours have been rather opaque about the matter and it only got resolved about 10 hours ago. Primefac ( talk) 19:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Does this still need to be semi-protected now that all transclusions get substituted by a bot? If so, you should probably semi-protect its dependencies Module:CS1 translator, Module:CS1 translator/data, and Module:Month translator. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I suppose not. Primefac ( talk) 08:31, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, every aircraft infobox seems to be broken right now. I'm not an expert on templates or infoboxes but am assuming it was your edits to aircraft type and aircraft begin that have broken them? Could you perhaps take a look? Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 15:35, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I've asked at WP:ANI for the help of a template editor to fix this. Nigel Ish ( talk) 15:53, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Goodness gracious, ANI for a template error? My apologies for not seeing the post 30 minutes ago but at least give me that long to see it. Primefac ( talk) 16:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

If I want to do a semi-automated task using AWB, impacting around 9000 talk pages (2000+7000 in two very closely related tasks), should I use my own account or should I create a AWB Bot account and seek consensus at BAG? Basically, I lack the skills for fully automating the process and would still be around when I make the mass changes via AWB. Thanks! — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 22:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) @ CX Zoom for 9000 edits you should use a bot account, and it should be a change that you can show prior consensus for. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Yep @ Xaosflux, there is. At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Public Art#Request for comment, it was determined that "WikiProject Public Art" be merged into "WikiProject Visual arts". The implementation was further discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Public Art#Conversion into task force. As such, a number of banners need modifications totalling to around 7000 pages ( Category:Pages using WikiProject Public Art banner). (The 2000 were double-counted by mistake) — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 22:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

That should make your WP:BRFA easy! Do one or two by hand and show that as an example of what you will do as well. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much @ Xaosflux, I'll read the BRFA instructions soon and proceed accordingly. — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 23:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hopefully you have not yet started yet, CX Zoom, as there is at least one if not two bots who are already approved for this sort of task. Will save you the hassle of running the BRFA gauntlet. Primefac ( talk) 07:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I was just about to start and saw the ping. Can you please point me to the said bot, so I can talk with the operator? Thanks! — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 07:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, one of them is mine, can't remember the other at the moment! Primefac ( talk) 07:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

That's cool. Basically, the bot would have to replace {{ WikiProject Public Art|Lorem ipsum}} (or its template redirects) with {{ WikiProject Visual arts|public-art=yes|Lorem ipsum}} for everything in petscan:23413558. For all "remaining" members of Category:Pages using WikiProject Public Art banner, the {{ WikiProject Public Art|Lorem ipsum}} should be removed entirely, and |public-art=yes be added to {{ WikiProject Visual arts}}. The edit summary may read that the it is due to merger of WikiProjects, and may backlink to the RfC linked above.Thanks! — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 07:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

As a side request, please change {{{public_art|}}} to {{{public-art|}}} in {{ WikiProject Visual arts}}, because hyphens are almost exclusively used instead of underscores in WikiProject template parameters. It was an error on my part, experimenting on sandbox. Thanks! — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 07:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Just to confirm, would you be willing to take up this task? — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 10:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure, just had no motivation to do much of anything yesterday. Primefac ( talk) 12:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Round one done, will get the others as soon as I remember. Primefac ( talk) 20:28, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I am requesting the deletion of this revision which features a link to an extremely graphic image. -- Pokelova ( talk) 02:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Done, thanks. There is a reasonable chance that if you email the oversight team for things of this nature you might get a faster resolution (though at 2am I might actually be your best bet...). Primefac ( talk) 07:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	pls i im a friend — KFC ( 🔔 • 📝) 07:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Primefac ( talk) 07:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

You're right. I'll be more careful next time.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries, these things happen :-) Primefac ( talk) 18:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

A few days ago you removed my name. I don't know why--I'm supposed to be automatically entitled as an admin, but for some unknown reason the purge function doesn't work that way for me, and I've said that before. I remain an active reviewer, tho less active than in the previous year. --I have restored my name. Please do not remove it again. I suppose I should point out that, by removing my name after I added it, you overrode an admin action by another admin without their consent. If you still object, please take it to a suitable admin board or do whatever is the necessary purge so it does work, and let me know. DGG ( talk ) 18:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Please don't assume malice, I simply forgot. Primefac ( talk) 19:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Primefac - this diff is why I'm here. I was doing my routine checks, and a long AFCH error dropped down which was a bit of a shock. I am not completely inactive - just not working as hard as I used to, and while I have slacked off at AfC because of things I've been trying to get done at NPP, we should probably keep in mind the fact that NPP reviewers are also reviewers for AfC. If the need arises for me to comment at AfC, I will not hesitate. Is there suddenly a specific amount of pages we have to review to be considered active, and what actually is expected of a volunteer to be "active"? Do they have to claim an article for review, or can they just review what is going on with batches of articles as I do? When I am teaching, AfC is sometimes part of the lesson for obvious reasons. My NPP tutoring activities will resume in February, so you are liable to wear yourself out removing and restoring me as active. j/s Atsme 💬 📧 11:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The current yardstick is "at least one review in the last six months", a check which I really only do every six months anyway. I go off the AFCH review history; yours shows no reviews since 2020 so you were moved to inactive. I do see that you made two comments in the middle of last year (tick the "Commented" box) but those are still outwith the 6-month window. If you wish to remain on the project that's totally fine (indicating an interest in participating is the first step towards participation, after all), just let me know. Primefac ( talk) 12:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please? I do check AfC, and contribute when I see a need. I think there still is an ongoing discussion about "offing" (is that the right word?) NPP reviewers who are just hat collectors, but then they actually have tools to turn in. AfC does not. I also occasionally get requests from other editors to look at their drafts and I visit with them on UTPs. Happy editing! Atsme 💬 📧 23:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac ( talk) 05:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

On seeing your response on Infobox Ship above, you might be the person to handle converting Template:Infobox aircraft begin and its daughters to a single infobox, probably at Template:Infobox aircraft It was originally built using the ships infoboxes as a guide. Another user had discussed doing this at Template talk:Infobox aircraft begin#Why does this exist?, but they appear to have lost interest in the project. If this is something you'd be interested in doing, please make a proposal at WT:AIR so we can get some input from the other project members without having to do a TFD. I have some ideas on some improvements that can be made to some of the parameters, but that can be done at a later date if necessary. Personally, I prefer a modular infobox system, but I realize I'm probably in the minority on that. As to when, there is no deadline, so even if it takes a couple of years to get done because you have other projects, that's OK. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 01:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm happy to implement whatever consensus arises, but I'm honestly not sure why you're asking me to start the conversation when it sounds like you are already familiar with the situation and interested in its outcome. Personally I would go the TFD route to get other opinions, but if you think AIR would be better then go for it. Primefac ( talk) 08:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I was mainly asking because you're more familiar with what it takes to do the conversions, and could better answer any questions that would arise. I was also hoping that not going the TFD route would be less confrontational. But what ever you think is best. BilCat ( talk) 09:03, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

(just as a note I re-threaded this, feel free to move back) Fair points. My only concern with posting to AIR is that it doesn't look like a super-active project, and if I post there I might only get a reply or two (in addition to yours), and while WikiProjects generally have a big say in what happens with templates and pages in their purview, I have found on a few occasions ( This and that for example) a reasonably strong local consensus can still be overruled by the community. While I do not expect that to necessarily happen in this instance, I would rather not go through the hassle of converting the template, only to find out after implementing that for some reason the community as a whole disagrees and I have to undo everything. Primefac ( talk) 09:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. BilCat ( talk) 20:23, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

(Yes please fix infobox aircraft. Fixing it cleans up one more template for MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do#Infobox.) Izno ( talk) 08:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

siiiiiigh Fine, I'll file a TFD after breakfast. Primefac ( talk) 08:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

:) Off to bed for meeeeee Izno ( talk) 09:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Primefac, I want to say that I do appreciate your input on the TFD, even if we disagree on the optimal solution. I tried to be upfront about what the problems might be with getting WPAIR to support a new infobox. You went against my request to discuss it first with the project, which is your right. I hope you understand better now why I made that resuest! :) Anyway, I hope you don't take any of our disagreements personally, because I don't. I also do not think that you were hostile, and I've said that in the TFD a!so. My comments about hostility were not directed towards you. Again, I do appreciate your work on templates, and so do respect you and your opinions, even when I disagree with them. Cheers. BilCat ( talk) 11:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I haven't taken anything personally, and I figured any pushback from AIR would be along those lines anyway, which would have been a non-starter for me, which is why I went straight to TFD. I don't mind disagreeing with folks, as long as we do it nicely :-) Primefac ( talk) 11:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I filed a complaint at ANI and I was hoping that you could take a look. The user is causing a fair bit of damage quite quickly so thought I'd ask to speed things up. Many thanks! Cpotisch ( talk) 13:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

This looks to have already been dealt with. Primefac ( talk) 14:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Yep, just saw. Thanks anyway! Cpotisch ( talk) 14:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Primefac, I will defer to your experience, but was it really necessary to block User:Anonymous Elementary Schooler for a name violation? The name looks fine to me.

I read the username policy again, and looked at the name -- I don't see the problem. Would "Anonymous Gas Station Attendant" also be not OK under this policy? I don't think either one implies shared use, for example. David10244 ( talk) 10:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, it was a soft block, but you also revoked TPA, which I think is unusual. Tganks. David10244 ( talk) 10:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

We have a duty of care to protect the private and personal information given inadvertently by users editing Wikipedia. Most often this presents itself as phone numbers, email addresses, and the age of editors who are under the majority (which the WMF classifies as anyone under 16). By having a username that implies that the user is well under that age, it broadcasts to the world that they are a youth, which immediately presents problems from a Child protection standpoint. Since the user in question had not made any edits that were necessarily suppressible under WP:OSPOL, I did not feel that an OS block (which is what we normally give in these situations) was appropriate. They are more than welcome to edit Wikipedia, just not under that username.

As far as pulling TPA goes, the user has no need to request an unblock, and thus there is no reason for them to be editing their talk page; they should create a new account if they wish to continue editing. Primefac ( talk) 10:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@ Primefac, you are absolutely right, I wasn't thinking about the age thing. And the TPA block makes perfect sense. I should not have doubted you (but I just missed the age issue). David10244 ( talk) 14:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I'm always willing to explain my actions, especially if they are non-standard. Primefac ( talk) 14:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I have a proposition regarding the Olympics by country navigational boxes for the Olympic Games from 1912 to 1936. I think it would be better to place the countries alphabetically after continent and names which they have. For example Egypt competed under the African continent or Germany under the European continent or Japan under the Asian continent. Or Brazil under the American continent. Or New Zealand under the Oceanian continent. Yours sincerely, Sondre 88.90.219.186 ( talk) 15:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Given how few countries participated during that time period, I don't see it as strictly necessary, but you are more than welcome to make the change. Primefac ( talk) 16:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I know that during the games in 1912 it was only 29 nations which participated it was also the case in the 1920. In 1924 it was 44, in 1928 it was 46 in 1932 it was 37 and in 1936 it was a 49 countries. But per continent the number of nations was much smaller than it is today I think Europe had more countries participating than the others and an America also had many nations which participated. Africa only had two or three nations and Asia only had 5 at the most and Oceania only had two. That change would be possible to make if there were more nations present but by now it is not a necessity. 88.90.219.186 ( talk) 17:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The Russian Olympic Committee flag at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. What happened to it when it appears for Russian Olympic Committee athletes at the Tokyo Olympics 2020? 100.2.114.167 ( talk) 03:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

It was deleted (three times [1] [2] [3]) for not being free to use. Primefac ( talk) 07:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Is it because of controversy when Russia invading Ukraine in 2022? And they they will not used the flag of Russian Olympic Committee? Tell me more about it in the details. 100.2.114.167 ( talk) 07:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is apolitical. The images were deleted because they are non-free content, and so using them could constitute a copyright violation. Primefac ( talk) 07:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

And I'm sorry about that. The flag of Russian Olympic Committee will not used that like at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, right? I understand the copyright according to laws. 100.2.114.167 ( talk) 07:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The flag is not being used, because it was deleted. Primefac ( talk) 07:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Primefac, hope you are having a great day. Could you ECP protect Kongu Vellalar per WP:GS/CASTE. It has a history of POV pushing by different socks and another user has come up now. Thanks. - SUN EYE 1 19:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac ( talk) 19:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

???? -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 10:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Filer messed up the filing, and when I fixed it the subst dropped my name everywhere. Clearly I missed one! Primefac ( talk) 10:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Clerk fixed. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 10:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Re this (maybe I should have explained it in more detail), but basically The Best Damn Tour was created yeeears ago and then was deleted/redirected. However, years later it was later recreated as The Best Damn World Tour, but the name of the tour is actually The Best Damn Tour, so The Best Damn World Tour should be moved to The Best Damn Tour, but I think that the history should still be kept, hence the merge request. —  Status ( talk · contribs) 18:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

If it's a name change, then it's actually WP:RM/TR that you need, but since I'm already informed of the request, I can move it. Primefac ( talk) 18:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, mind moving my bot from the "enabledusers" to the "enabledbots" section of the check page? That way my bot can run the task. Thanks. Sheep ( talk • he/him) 14:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I would have assumed that AWB would work regardless. Shows you what I know. Done. Primefac ( talk) 15:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Can I query why I’ve been removed from the AfC review list recently per [4]? It’s somewhat confusing because I’m currently a somewhat active NPR. It’s also somewhat annoying to not be notified of the change, even if just through a ping in the diff. Could you explain why I’ve been removed from the list? Thanks, Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 18:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

NB: I forgot that probation has slightly different rules, however it would be nice to know why I’ve been removed from the list. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 18:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Active reviewers are those that have made at least one review in the previous six months, and you have not made any reviews since June '22. Being active in other areas of Wikipedia, even NPR, does not mean that one is active on AFC. I generally assume that probationary members that stop being active are no longer interested, so I simply remove them from the list outright.

Regarding notifications, there is not an easy way to ping the 50+ individuals that get shifted to inactive/removed when I do activity checks. Primefac ( talk) 18:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Huh, that’s funny, I directly recall making reviews late last year, does the tool you use to determine the review count account for reverted reviews, because it’s either that, or I never finished the reviews. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 19:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, as I believe it goes off edit summaries, but it does not look at deleted contributions. You did review a draft on New Years' Eve, so I will re-add you to the list since that puts you into the active group. Primefac ( talk) 19:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

There's a bot currently going absolutely insane doing no-op edits to old talk page comments, for which I have left a comment at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#User:MalnadachBot_is_running_amok. The user running the bot pointed out that you apparently approved this at some point: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SheepLinterBot. Can someone clean up this mess? – jacobolus  (t) 00:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

MalnadachBot and SheepLinterBot are two different bots, with separate bot tasks and approvals. I will respond at the BOTN thread later to avoid decentralised discussion. Primefac ( talk) 06:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).

Administrator changes Gimmetrow Bjelleklang Bob the Wikipedian Leithp WhisperToMe 100 inactive admins

CheckUser changes BDD Bradv Donald Albury Maxim MusikAnimal Oversighter changes BDD Bradv Donald Albury Maxim

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the administrator policy now requires that prior written consent be gained from the Arbitration Committee to mark a block as only appealable to the committee.
• Following a community discussion, consensus has been found to impose the extended-confirmed restriction over the topic areas of Armenia and Azerbaijan and Kurds and Kurdistan.

Technical news

• The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 24 February 2023.
• In December, the contentious topics procedure was adopted which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period. There is a detailed summary of the changes and administrator instructions for the new procedure. The arbitration clerk team are taking suggestions, concerns, and unresolved questions about this new system at their noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
• Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.

Hi, I was just reviewing a draft on mobile and I found that you've moved my mobile account to inactive reviewers. Though I've not reviewed very much articles on mobile but this is sometimes helpful to me and convenient when I'm not on my system. ;) ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 16:17, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Shifted back. Primefac ( talk) 20:05, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Template:Canadian party colour has been nominated for merging with Template:Party color. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. ValenciaThunderbolt ( talk) 22:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Primefac. I've a question related to moduling. Hope you can help me with.

What would be a better way to check if a module exists? (In the context that I'm checking if exists and then loading it for data, else falling back to load template since not all datasets aren't moved to the module [subpages] yet.) I'm using this:

local function moduleExists(m)
	if package.loadedm or package.loaders1](m) or package.loaders2](m) then
		return true
	end
	return false
end

And then doing mw.loadData(...) Thanks for your help! — DaxServer ( t · m · c) 22:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Going off of the code in Module:Main if exists (lines 14-15), it looks like if you make a mw.title.new() call, and then check to see if title.exists, that will return a boolean that you can then pass to your if statement before you loadData. That being said, I'm just basing this off what others have done - give it a try and see? Primefac ( talk) 12:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! — DaxServer ( t · m · c) 12:41, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

I've one more question. Is there an API to query the Module invocation status, like the transcludedin for pages https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=transcludedin&titles=Template%3AInflation&tilimit=5 ? — DaxServer ( t · m · c) 09:44, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

No clue, I don't really do anything with the API so I wouldn't even know where to start. Primefac ( talk) 09:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

AFAIK, all Mediawiki features that apply to templates also apply to modules, i.e., replace titles=Template%3AInflation with titles=Module:Section_sizes to get results for the module, as most things are symmetric across these two namespaces, if not all of them. — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 11:08, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @ CX Zoom. That seems to work :) Altho I don't understand why https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=transcludedin&titles=Module%3ASection_sizes&tilimit=5&tinamespace=828 says it was transcluded in the same page, but that's not a problem for me [atm] — DaxServer ( t · m · c) 12:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I randomly chose some modules and this is common to all of them. I suspect that is because of the way MediaWiki shows documentation on modules. If you click edit on Module:Sandbox/CX Zoom/TestPage1 (which is completely empty), and go to the "Templates used on this page" option at the very end of edit window, you will find that there is one self-transclusion, and one transclusion of its /doc page (which is not even created yet). — CX Zoom[he/him] ^{( let's talk • { C• X})} 16:54, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps it might be because the code is displayed on the modules? (I think that's what you meant by documentation?) Thanks for your help! — DaxServer ( t · m · c) 17:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

...for not overreacting to my overreaction. I appreciate your rephrasing, and although I think I had a point, I'm not sure why I had to be such a whiny idiot about it. Sorry. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 16:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

No worries, these things happen. Primefac ( talk) 17:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Good evening,

When being accepted onto the WikiProject AfC, does Probation mean I can add myself to the list of Participants?

Thanks, Wikieditor019 ( talk) 16:37, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

You are already on the AFCP list. Primefac ( talk) 18:40, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for helping me find the proper template for pulling data from other pages. This will help keep articles up to date by users only having to update the information in one place. W4otn ( talk) 22:40, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

You're very welcome, and thanks! Primefac ( talk) 07:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

You recently added the United Cup to the Template:Infobox tennis biography. I'm not sure if someone asked to do this but it was never vetted by the project and I doubt it would pass muster. It is for longstanding events with major significance. There are plenty of tennis tournaments and the United for all we know could be gone in a couple years just like the ATP Cup. I would have reverted it myself but the template is locked, so could you please undo the addition? Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 03:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Goodness, I see user Pppery added the Laver Cup results too. That was definitely voted down as not mush more than a exhibition event, so I'm not sure who requested it. That should also be gone. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 03:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if someone asked to do this - you seem to have found the request.

could you please undo the addition - yes.

...user Pppery added the Laver Cup... - no, they didn't? It's not currently in the template Primefac ( talk) 07:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

You are correct sir. It was only in the documentation (which I corrected). Thank you. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 07:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah, didn't think to check there. Reminds me, someone added a bunch of stuff to a (different) /doc and then asked for a TPER (which I declined)... might need to go revert that original change... Primefac ( talk) 08:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I was puzzled by your revert of the "most popular majors" list at Austin College that I had added, so I started a thread at the talkpage. Feel free to weigh in. Thanks. Banks Irk ( talk) 23:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Administrator changes The Wordsmith Fuhghettaboutit Spinningspark ( deceased)

CheckUser changes Callanecc Oversighter changes Callanecc

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F10 (useless non-media files) has been deprecated.
• Following a request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria ( P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
• A request for comment is open to discuss making the closing instructions for the requested moves process a guideline.

Technical news

• The results of the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey have been posted.

Arbitration

• Remedy 11 ("Request for Comment") of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been rescinded.
• The proposed decision for the Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case is expected 7 March 2023.
• A case related to the Holocaust in Poland is expected to be opened soon.

Miscellaneous

• The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
• Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
• The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.

Please be advised that Dmorale29 has started a WP:ANI thread, as it relates to off-Wiki conduct and your decline of Draft:DC. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:59, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Primefac ( talk) 07:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Take note of this date! Alert the media! Using the letter f as a gerund, twice, the same comment? On IRC? For shame! Where are the civility police when you need them? Heavens to Betsy! Now I must mark your username off my list of flawless role model wikipedians. BusterD ( talk) 08:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

In this edit you changed all the generated urls in {{ starbox reference}} to be https urls, but for Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia (EPE), the https fails. "http://" urls appear to work. This is the only problem one I noticed, but that was just a quick test of the more common references. Lithopsian ( talk) 16:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. Primefac ( talk) 17:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I see that you undid and redacted this edit because it did not meet BLP policy. However, I took a look at the WP:BLPCRIME section and the addition seems to meet the requirements there? Nor did I see the source blacklisted at WP:RSP.

After seeing the edit get redacted above I took a bit more caution with this one, however the person has gotten back to me on their talk page suggesting that it is not defamatory. Does it meet policy? I'm about to apologise to them and self-revert, but I just wanted to confirm with you before doing so. AP 499D25 ( talk) 01:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

My revert was not due to an issue with BLPCRIME, but with BLPPRIMARY.

Regarding your edit, to call it defamatory is wrong, but for what it's worth is a reasonable removal because it's a hack comment that does not lend itself towards a neutral summary of his life. Primefac ( talk) 13:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

@ Primefac Thanks for acting upon copyvio of User Shinakho @ article Avret Esir Pazarları.

But you seem to have hidden my subsequent edit too which is nothing more than an addition to Bibliography section. I suppose that is more likely to be inadvertent and you may revisit the same. Or was there really any mistake on my side? Bookku ( talk) 10:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

The offending text was added in Special:Permalink/1143792349, but was not removed until Special:Permalink/1143856812. Thus, the text was in each of the intermediate diffs, which included the edit you made. Your edit was fine, but since we cannot hide parts of a page the full page (and thus the full diff) needs to be hidden. Primefac ( talk) 10:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks for explaining. I did not know technicalities. Bookku ( talk) 11:44, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Ten years ago I created Template:LCAuth. Five years ago you protected it. [5]
Minutes ago I added to the talk page a new section Template talk:LCAuth#Template message. Proposed change of template message will probably preempt some misunderstandings: eg, as expressed by User:BrillLyle on the template talk page, 2016; as expressed by User:MSGJ at User talk:P64#LCAuth, 2023.

(I haven't contributed much to Wikipedia since 2015, and I have spent less time in the back pages keeping up with the project(s). I know, only because it's obvious at a glance, that Talk pages are mainly ignored nowadays. But there is nothing urgent here. I can wait a year or five.) -- P64 ( talk) 04:44, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

In order to facilitate your request I have added a {{ TPER}} notice, which should result in more eyes on it. Primefac ( talk) 07:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey Primefac, sorry about nominating this page for speedy deletion under the G12 rationale. I misclicked and meant to do so as G13. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Ah, that makes a bit more sense. Thanks for the update. Primefac ( talk) 14:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello. It seems that you are one of the primary maintainers of the Infobox country template. I have a feature request of adding ISO 3166 three letters country code.

Could you please consider this? /info/en/?search=Template_talk:Infobox_country#Provide_ISO_3166_code-3_data_(three-letter_code)

Regpath ( talk) 06:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if "primary" describes my maintenance status for that template, but I'm rather swamped with this at the moment. If I get a chance I'll take a look, but you might be better off sandboxing your proposed changes and throwing up a {{ TPER}}. Primefac ( talk) 20:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Primafac - I made a comment on the talk page of "arbitration evidence" to make the point that a single editor (or group of editors) can dominate the content within an article or groups of articles. Additionally a group of editors can use noticeboards in tandem. The editors can be quite convinced of facts or objectives. Rather than look at "diffs" I am suggesting look at "sames."

Regardless as to whether or not the facts are true or false; The "sames" work in a way that is contrary to a fair collaborative process.

This was a finding in the European Mailing List arbitration of 2009 - the current arbitration is a redux along similar lines.

I would like to enter this type of study in evidence (add users beyond three).

I figured I would clear this possibility with you to get your feedback.

https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py?users=Volunteer+Marek&users=GizzyCatBella&users=Piotrus&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki

Regards Flibbertigibbets ( talk) 02:48, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Been away, will look soon. Primefac ( talk) 16:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Anyway, I just "revisited" some of my perceptions... based on conformity with existing rules, processes, and guidelines - I personally don't see that there are grounds for an arbitration as stated. On the evidence talk page there are some interesting comments which speak to a larger issue. Flibbertigibbets ( talk) 17:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

In this edit you gave the intrawiki link February 2023. Even being optimistic about enthusiasm in editing Wikipedia, I suspect that the climate emergency will have been reversed (by the year 2100 or so) long before we reach that many edits in Wikipedia (the error message is misleading: the oldid is in the future rather than being a revdel'd oldid). Boud ( talk) 17:00, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, pipe somehow ended up in the wrong place. Primefac ( talk) 17:09, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Mind splitting the file into File:Kokoda Track Memorial Walkway Centre Piece (1).jpg, File:Kokoda Track Memorial Walkway Centre Piece (2).jpg & File:Kokoda Track Memorial Walkway Centre Piece (3).jpg? -- Minorax^{«¦ talk¦»} 12:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Been away, will look soon. Primefac ( talk) 16:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Just as a followup, the other versions have been deleted as no license was given. I have left a note for the uploader that if they want a different version they are welcome to do so at a different file name. Primefac ( talk) 20:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with your actions taken here. It is not at all clear that including the name violates BLP and there is no consensus to that effect. Elli ( talk | contribs) 19:45, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree this smells of a supervote. ■ ∃  Madeline ⇔ ∃  Part of me ; 19:47, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. In thinking further about the matter, it can still be discussed without the controversial content being included in the question. Please do not seek to re-add it. Primefac ( talk) 20:31, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Asking here since you created Template:Family name hatnote. Would it be feasible to create a similar template with the same functionality, but with the message formatted as a footnote (wrapped in {{ efn}}) rather than as a hatnote (as in Category:Explanatory footnote name templates)? You're probably aware that there are concerns among some editors that name clarification isn't an appropriate use of hatnotes, and such a template would provide an alternative for where there is local consensus in support of using footnotes instead. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 21:57, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Feasible, yes, and actually the way I created the hatnote template means it would likely require very little work.

My concern, and I am approaching this genuinely from a "consensus" standpoint (i.e. I have no particular thoughts on the matter), is that if this hypothetical efn template is created, then there will be wars raging over whether to place the note as a hatnote or as a footnote. I doubt it would rise to the levels of the WP:ARBINFOBOX case (or its successor) but it would probably be good to hold a centralised discussion about what to do with these hatnotes. If consensus from this discussion says "ditch 'em" then I'll convert the existing template. If it says "article by article" I'll create your proposed template. If the people say "no", then I guess I don't have to do any work :-p

Let me know if that sounds reasonable. Primefac ( talk) 06:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

The latest discussion I'm aware of is Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 188#Method of surname clarification from a year ago, and from what I see there very much seems to be no consensus. I don't think a new discussion is going to fare any better, though a significant minority there did suggest to allow either on a case-by-case basis and I think that seems to be the best compromise solution right now. I'd understand if you don't see it that way though, and it's okay. It can always be manually done anyway. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 15:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. If I get some time I'll see about putting something together. Primefac ( talk) 14:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I've run across an odd issue, and have no idea how to track it down, or even where to report it. See Talk:Jazz Chisholm Jr.#The Bahamas link hover image graphic is a medical image, not a flag of the Bahamas, which should be self-explanatory. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 17:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

@ BilCat, WP:VPT#Incorrect preview images. Izno ( talk) 17:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! BilCat ( talk) 17:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I saw it when checking notifications and will do that, but am likely to be tied up for the rest of the day (PST) with a RL deadline. What I am here to ask is how urgently you need those links fixed. By the evidence deadline, obviously, but is this more urgent than GizzyCatBella at the Collaboration article? I have also been meaning to ask whether anyone actually cares about 2018-2019 edit wars or content disputes at the Collaboration article. I think that academically, the fact that objections to content discussed as blood libel were being dismissed may explain a great deal about the passion of the disputes, but I don't know that they are actionable, don't personally think that they should be actionable this many years later, and was myself blissfully unaware of all of it at the time, so I could easily miss something. I think they may have preceded sanctions for some editors, for example. I do think I can find the part where people were complaining in edit summaries about references getting separated from their text, if that is relevant. LMK about that at your convenience. Like most of the other participants I think, I still find it unclear whether the committee wants to address whether real problems existed and why, or who needs to be sanctioned. Because most of the stuff I know about could be considered as either content OR behaviour. Or both. Elinruby ( talk) 21:09, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Had a look at that section now: are the links you want me to fix the ones to talk pages? Elinruby ( talk) 10:42, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Found the html comment. This is no longer an issue Elinruby ( talk) 23:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Administrator changes Aoidh KillerChihuahua

CheckUser changes Ferret

Guideline and policy news

• A community RfC is open to discuss whether reports primarily involving gender-related disputes or controversies should be referred to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

Technical news

• Some older web browsers will not be able to use JavaScript on Wikimedia wikis starting this week. This mainly affects users of Internet Explorer 11. ( T178356)
• The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
• A link to the user's Special:CentralAuth page will now appear in the subtitle links shown on Special:Contributions. This was voted #17 in the Community Wishlist Survey 2023.

Arbitration

• The Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case has been closed.
• A case about World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been opened, with the first evidence phase closing 6 April 2023.

		The (information removed) Barnstar
		Thanks for keeping Wikipedia free of sensitive information! The Oversighters are some of the best Wikipedians around! Zoe Trent Fan 🎤 💍 19:27, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Aww, thanks! Primefac ( talk) 19:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

In light of recent debate on modifications to Template:Infobox rugby biography, I've expanded it to include other issues that demand attention. As you frequently contribute to rugby union articles, please feel free to respond with your suggestions for improving the most recent discussion on the templates talk page. Kidsoljah ( talk) 18:40, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm keeping an eye on the discussion. Primefac ( talk) 19:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for trying to fix my problem with the menus running down the side of the screen. I finally found the answer: reduce the zoom to less than 150%. More details are on my talk page, but THANKS for trying to fix a non-issue.  :-) WesT ( talk) 00:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Always happy to help :-) Primefac ( talk) 07:12, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Prime, can you look into Draft: Prakash Neupane. Additionally, i have left some information on Talk page too. Have a good day. DIVINE ( talk) 19:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Are you asking me to review the page, or is there something specifically you would like me to look at? Primefac ( talk) 20:09, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I don’t know if it’s on your interest to review or not. As it has been so long and the mainspace is locked you can review it or you can look into sources if they are enough to prove notability. Regards, DIVINE ( talk) 05:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't really do reviews on-demand unless there's a compelling reason; this draft appears to have been improved since the last decline, so I feel that sticking to the normal processes is best here. Primefac ( talk) 05:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, thanks a lot for the response to the Socket SP6 request at WP:RFHM! Is it safe now to CSD G7 my sandbox if I wish to do so? —   AP 499D25  (talk) 10:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I can take care of that for you. Primefac ( talk) 10:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I thought phase 1 evidence was closed? Did I miss a memo? While I am here asking newbie questions, phase 2 is for rebuttals of previously submitted evidence? Do I have that right? Thanks for your time, Elinruby ( talk) 00:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, no, yes (and to answer questions from arbs), yes. Primefac ( talk) 08:34, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I accidentally rolled back your latest edit at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3/Proposed decision. I was able to self-revert, but I didn't think could edit that page. Does someone need to check my permissions? Donald Albury 15:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

( talk page watcher) @ Donald Albury: Well, you're not allowed to edit it; but if, indeed, you choose to defy the will of The Gods ;) you're physically able to do so—it's not protected. HTH! SN54129 15:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, case pages generally aren't protected, so stuff like this occasionally happens. No harm no foul :-) Primefac ( talk) 18:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

The idea behind leaving case pages unprotected being that they need to be open to Superclerk Bishzilla in case she wishes to make some improvement. bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 01:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC).

It makes sense. User:Bishzilla is the only person who can override WP:FRV, which seems to be the only option to appeal an arb ruling other than appeal to the recently desysoped founder. ​ TonyBallioni ( talk) 04:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Sigh. Please note that I'm completely against this superclerking notion. Completely. But the whole family is very difficult. As usual, apologies to all. Bishonen | tålk 09:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC).

Hi have reviewed a draft but facing problem using AFC helper. Kindly please help me out with this problem. Thank you NP83 ( talk) 17:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Whoops! Turns out I never added you. Fixed now. Primefac ( talk) 17:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

For me: "You have 12,920 pages on your watchlist". I am not sure if this relevant enough to post in the case, but I thought you'd appreciate the number. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh my! I was once briefly flirting with 10k when I realised that literally half of them were user talk pages that I never visited or cared about, so I removed most of them. Primefac ( talk) 07:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Good idea. I did a clean up of my list for similar stuff few years ago, it could probably use another. Few hundred of those are likely inactive accounts of my students I routinely welcome and such (although I am always curious if any of them will continue to edit Wikipedia once the class is finished...). Another big group is likely a result of auto-watchlisting of pages I create talk pages for during the wikiproject tag and assess process; however many such articles are not minitored by anyone, so it probably makes sense for them to say on my watchlist so I can notice the occasional vandalism on them (RCP usually gets most of it, but sometimes stuff slips through...). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:17, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

"what sticks"? [6] - It is a MOS. What WP:SPEEDY should be used? DePiep ( talk) 14:12, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I was referencing wikt:throw spaghetti at the wall; Ivanvector declined a G4 40 minutes before you tagged it. If a speedy has been declined (with that sort of decline rationale) then CSD is off the table and an RFD is necessary. My edit summary was to indicate that one should not simply keep attempting CSD categories until you get an admin to delete the page. Primefac ( talk) 17:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

(responding to ping) fwiw, DePiep wasn't the original tagger, that was ComplexRational. But I agree with rejecting DePiep's G6 tag - the criteria are specific and narrowly construed; there is no criterion for "doesn't meet the MOS" (and there shouldn't be because that is subjective), and G6 isn't a tag for "none of the other criteria fit". Your rationale would be a strong argument for deletion at RFD, but it should go through the discussion. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 17:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Indeed; if DePiep had tagged it twice I probably would have left a note on their talk page, as it was the timing was close enough that I assumed (incorrectly, but such is life) that the previous tag had been seen and it was an attempt to find a more suitable CSD criteria. Primefac ( talk) 17:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, a new RfD is the way to go, and MOS:NONEWELEMENTS may need to be updated to reflect the result of that discussion. And even so, that is a guideline, rather than a policy. ^Complex/ _Rational 18:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

That's not the way it works, CR. MOS change has a different route. DePiep ( talk) 21:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I was not "attempting", I added a new tag with a different motivation. You removed it, with this accusing BF attitude, without acknowledging that motivation (even now). DePiep ( talk) 21:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

As I said, I made an assumption and that assumption was incorrect. If you want to consider that bad faith, then you are welcome to, but I would not characterise it at such. Primefac ( talk) 07:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

• re you all. G4 says "This is for uncontroversial maintenance, including: ...". Nonconform MOS here is undisputable, so reasonably fits. We don't use "but the MOS is wrong". Very disappointing. - DePiep ( talk) 21:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

  As soon as Ivanvector declined the first CSD, it ceased to be "uncontroversial". Primefac ( talk) 07:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

  No, only "uncontroversial" for that reason (i.e., G4). Other speedy reasons are not disqualified then. See also 1st decline esummary. Also, you maintain "keep attempting" and spaghetti, which by now is from misunderstanding into BF. Point is that you should have considered the (new) argument not your misunderstanding. DePiep ( talk) 07:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

  Ivanvector's decline indicated that speedy deletion was not appropriate, so regardless of criteria a new RFD will be necessary. Primefac ( talk) 07:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, the draft was actually created by two accounts with similar names. One is almost certainly a sock/meatpuppet of the other, but don't we still need to reflect that in the edit history of the target? Uncle Spock ( talk) 07:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I was looking at a few different histmerges, I must have been looking at the wrong pair of history when I did that. Thanks. Primefac ( talk) 07:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi :)

I saw you reverted my edit on Module talk:Political party.

The reason I made this edit was that I was afraid people thought it was a solved matter, due to the reply I recieved. However, the reply was just an opinion, and I'd like to discuss it with others, because I really believe I have a case, and that the reply (which only came from 1 editor) was in the wrong. So that's why I removed my topic, and re-wrote it, in hope that some other editors, would give their opinion.

Do you have any idea how I can discuss this in other ways. I see i.e. you replid to other cases, but you didn't reply to mine.

Have a nice day - Regards, thomediter :) Thomediter ( talk) 13:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

If you think a matter is not solved, just add a new comment at the bottom of the discussion. You should not remove an entire discussion just because you do not like the answer, or think something could be better explained. If you want to make it really clear you're wanting to start a new discussion on the same topic, use a level-three header (i.e. using === instead of just ==) to create a subsection. Primefac ( talk) 16:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I want to improve the deleted article The Longest Marge, improve it ( here) and publish it. I don't think it was deleted correctly. Simpsons Wiki is under CC BY-SA 3.0 license. By this logic, Not It should also be deleted. Thanks in advance. Patrik L. ( talk) 12:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I have seen this, and am looking into the matter. In the meantime, my somewhat snarky response is just to copy the Simpsons Wiki page verbatim (giving appropriate attribution) and work on it in your sandbox. Primefac ( talk) 16:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Page undeleted. Please make sure you give proper attribution if/when you decide to work on this. Primefac ( talk) 09:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

In the summary here, "only 10 of those discussions were within the topic area" - the word "those" is incorrect. It's not a major issue, but I thought I'd point that out. For the period "though July 2020" that would be, I think, agreed twice and disagreed once. My sample was for all of GCB's AfDs ( 250), not just the 47 "though July 2020" from FR's evidence. So I'd suggest changing the wording to "only 3 of those discussions within that time period were within the topic area. By April 2023, GCB had participated in ~250 AfDs, and by that time the number of AfDs within the topic area both Piotrus and GCB both participated in was about 10.". _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:22, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I had missed that point. I have clarified the summary. Primefac ( talk) 20:13, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI I think the stats are off this month. My CU count lists one, which is really weird given how CU works. Checked my own log for April and I see 8 (still not huge, I know, but shows a potential problem with whatever script you use.) TonyBallioni ( talk) 04:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, there was a point where you only made one check. Not really sure why I missed the other 7. Fixed, thanks. Primefac ( talk) 07:24, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Administrator changes Spicy Ale jrb Dbachmann DGG ( deceased) Jimbo Wales

CheckUser changes Jimbo Wales Oversighter changes Jimbo Wales

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.

Arbitration

• The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.

Miscellaneous

• The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.

Hello, could you please remove my rollback rights? I don't really have a need for them anymore. I asked HJ Mitchell to disable them, but he hasn't been active in a while. – Material Works 19:56, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac ( talk) 20:12, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. – Material Works 20:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Don't know what the issue was there. Uploaded the image again to Wiki Commons.

Thanks for the assist! Amanda scott ( talk) 11:03, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome :-) Primefac ( talk) 14:17, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you recently blocked Cinedigital9699, Moviehunter9699 and Medhanshch for socking. A couple of the drafts they were working on, Draft:Bhuvana Vijayam (2023 film) and Draft:Hello Meera (2), were declined at the same time, but have now been resubmitted to AfC by an IP which I suspect is related to one of the blocked accounts. Could you please take a look? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 10:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I doubt that I'd be able to connect the IPs to the accounts (from a technical perspective) but it is pretty likely that they are the same person/people as the blocked accounts. Primefac ( talk) 14:35, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Do you want to discuss at WT:FRAT or on the talk page? If the second, I'll leave a note at WT:FRAT. Naraht ( talk) 13:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

I mean, we discussed the matter last year but didn't really come to a consensus about it. Primefac ( talk) 14:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Split from #Help with Module talk:Political party above

Translation 2A02:9B0:4005:62B1:3ACD:9865:3984:18C7 ( talk) 03:29, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Not quite sure what you mean. Translation with/for/of what? Primefac ( talk) 06:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick and polite response. SilverMatsu ( talk) 08:23, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Always happy to help. Primefac ( talk) 08:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For hearing the most difficult case that the ArbCom has had in years and posting the proposed decision on time. Robert McClenon ( talk) 20:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Awww, thanks! Primefac ( talk) 20:13, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey there. From what I noticed, the pre-2022 revisions of Kim-Joy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) are no longer there. Can they be undeleted/restored? George Ho ( talk) 12:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Your request was already declined in Special:Diff/1124397875. Primefac ( talk) 14:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Please undelete GTSQ. The page was created in September 2022, which is IMO too old to be considered recently created (pages older than about 3–4 months almost never are) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I will, but I will ask (as I always do) - are you objecting purely on principle, or do you really think that an RFD is going to result in a different outcome? Primefac ( talk) 05:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Primarily on principle, but also the fact that the redirect was approved at new page patrol indicates that someone thought it was acceptable. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Fair point. Primefac ( talk) 13:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey! I was thinking about making a request to perform an AWB task to replace the usages of {{ Infobox aircraft type}} and {{ Infobox aircraft career}} with Infobox aircraft. Should I? Except for {{ Infobox aircraft engine }} as there was a current ongoing discussion about including this in the Infobox aircraft or not. After reaching a conclusion, we can do the remaining work for that. All the parameters would remain the same no matter which design is chosen, so I think a replacement task can be done. But I am not sure if this is the perfect time, so need your suggestion. Tnank you very much. Prarambh20 ( talk) 20:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I am keeping an eye on things, and if/when the discussion determines that replacement can be done I will do so. If I happen to miss it feel free to update the WP:TFDH listing for the templates. Primefac ( talk) 20:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

All right, then. Prarambh20 ( talk) 20:29, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

The user AnnikaCarina whom you blocked a year ago from the page Kajsa Ekis Ekman, is back again and trying to change the whole article into a slander page. The user seems to be engaged in an edit war again. Could you look into this please? Alinsky1 ( talk) 21:26, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I will take a look. Primefac ( talk) 05:54, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

I didn't know that song. I guess that video would be illegal in Florida or Tennessee now, with cartoon-Zappa dressed as a girl. Drmies ( talk) 17:45, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hah! No kidding. Primefac ( talk) 17:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for protecting Kajsa Ekis Ekman's page, the only problem I see is that you republished the defamatory version. You removed the information that she is one of the directors of the Swedish Observatory for Human Rights and republished a sentence stating that her book was criticized for relying on far-right fake news sources (as if this were true) and that she participated in the Swedish launch of the anti-trans group WDI. WDI is a women's rights group, not an anti-trans group, and Wikipedia cannot take sides in accusing them. Also, while it is true that her book was criticized, Wikipedia cannot claim that it relies on far-right fake news sources because that is false. The phrases should be neutralized so that Wikipedia is not the one accusing Ekman of being anti-trans or using fake news. This is a biography of a living person and all damaging material should be removed or redacted in a neutral way. As it is written, only criticism prevails and little is said about his career.

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Kajsa_Ekis_Ekman&diff=prev&oldid=1154755386 Gum2 ( talk) 00:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

See WRONGVERSION and discuss the matter on the talk page. So far the only person who is actively trying to defend their edits is the person that added this apparently problematic material in the first place. Primefac ( talk) 06:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Primefac,

An editor put a CSD tag on the talk page for this template and since you created it, I thought I'd ask your opinion on whether or not it should be kept or if there was a case for deletion. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:17, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It's a valid G8 since the page it was used on has been deleted. Primefac ( talk) 06:48, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I may have been overly terse. My only explanation is it was very late and I am lacking sleep atm due to some chronic pain issues. I could have worded it more politely and kept the general gist of the comment. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 09:24, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

No worries, I have not myself been in top form the last few days either; happens to the best of us. Primefac ( talk) 09:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Dear Prime,

Sorry to disturb you again as my AFC review request was rejected few weeks back by another administrator. I would like you to re-consider it again as i see there are many pending backlogs and just want to help out through it. When i was AFC reviewer before i was one of the most active member and reviewed all the pages wisely. As i am not interested with power and we all make mistakes sometimes because of which my abilities to review were pulledback so long back. Can you reconsider it? Even if it’s probation i’m happy to help :) DIV IN E 18:25, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I have no special authority or power over the AFCP request process, I just happen to be the admin that regularly patrols it. If you wish to contest the decline of your request, I would suggest taking it up with the admin that declined it; it is their mind that you need to change, not mine. Primefac ( talk) 10:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, could PrimeBOT be edited to not move the vital article template out of the Wikiproject bannershell [7]? This is a result of Wikipedia talk:Talk page layout#Vital tags should be placed with WikiProjects. Best, CMD ( talk) 15:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

That is part of the AWB genfixes, so if it's an issue please raise it at WT:AWB, as my bot will not be the only one making that change if the user is running AWB with genfixes on. Primefac ( talk) 19:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

From having run AWB pretty recently on several talk pages, I am pretty sure AWB only puts templates starting with "WikiProject " inside the banner, which I think is reasonable behavior. If VA should be in WPBS, it should be renamed to WikiProject Vital articles. Izno ( talk) 19:55, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Primefac,

Could you please remove my AfC rights? I enjoyed doing the January backlog but due to real life my activity has dropped and I am not interested in doing AfC reviewing in the foreseeable future. If things change though (which would probably be quite a while later) I might reapply. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 09:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac ( talk) 09:16, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

While, I just realised that per the new change I now have the AfC rights automatically as a NPP, so this worked out well... VickKiang (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

hello primefac just now i saw your edit on page Lourdes high school,kalyan you redirect the page and removed (w) this from it i have added this because it represents the location of that school w=West MICHAEL 942006 ( talk) 07:04, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

We do not add location information to titles, unless that location information is part of the official title or it otherwise needs disambiguation. It does not appear that either of these is true. Additionally, when you moved the page you gave zero reason for doing so, which also led me to believe that it was an error. Primefac ( talk) 07:21, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello Primefac, This diff in response to a TFD doesn't seem to have worked - it's left a huge Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page) on the rendered text, apparently because it's trying to use "nested references" without the refn template and the like. I checked a few other edits and those didn't seem to cause problems; it looks like it's only a problem when the template is already inside another reference. Unsure if this happened on other pages, but figured I'd mention it here as a case requiring special handling if there's any substitutions left to do. SnowFire ( talk) 22:13, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

It's hopefully the only outlier, I was manually running the bot on those edits but I figured I would miss a non-obvious one. Thanks for letting me know. Primefac ( talk) 05:39, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey! For template:GamesSport, Breaking links to the disambig. page. Is there away to direct it directly to the breakdancing page? Sportsfan 1234 ( talk)` Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 19:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I'll see about dealing with that tomorrow. Primefac ( talk) 19:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, understand that as of May 25, New Page Reviewers do not need to be on this list in order to use AFC and I am not listed in the reviewers list. Also there is an error stating that AFCH is not listed in my TW even after I had purge the cache. Kindly advice and pls help to restore my AFCH right. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 08:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Same for me; I'm unable to review drafts after this change: [8]. I'm getting an error message that I'm not on the list of AFC reviewers. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 15:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, any thoughts? Primefac ( talk) 15:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. Try deleting importScript('User:Enterprisey/afch-dev.js') from your common.js files. That is an old version. After deleting, go to Special:Preferences, gadgets tab, enable the "Just Another AFC Helper Script", and click save. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 15:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you; this worked for me. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 15:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Dammit, that's what I thought; I checked Cassiopeia's common twice and didn't see it... (but it is there) Primefac ( talk) 15:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

. Thank you for the help. This worked and restored AFCH. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 03:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello. There are five types of categories that need to be moved (if OP from BOTREQ doesn't post a notice to WT:FOOTY in couple of days, then I'll have to). Each type has around 150 non-recursive categories, on average. I have created five separate programs for these five types. My question is: would it be wise to file one BRfA for all of them, or should I file five separate BRfA's? In case I was not clear, or if you are interested, more details about the task(s) are at User:Usernamekiran/footballer categories. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

If I am remembering the correct BOTREQ, this is one task, i.e. "update a bunch of categories". Primefac ( talk) 19:37, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

yes, but there were certain patterns in the categories, so they were divided in five types e.g. "Footballers in <country>", and "<nationality> footballers" (I'm on mobile, so can't be sure of the numbers, but I think both of these types have around 140ish categories). So I created five different programs — one for each type. Do you think I should file one BRfA as they part of one "update a bunch of categories", or should I file them differently as there is (a very little) difference in the code, and the list(s) of categories would be very big. The reason I stalled the individual first BRfA of first type's program was that I wanted to run all the programs soon after one another. Maybe I should go with one single BRfA as this is basically one task, with negligible difference in the code. I apologise for using you as soundboard from time to time, but it happens automatically. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Always happy to help. I am not seeing a compelling reason not to file one BRFA. Primefac ( talk) 05:01, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

This template was suggested here but now it is a red link., Should anyone want to tag an article in this way, what should be done now?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Possible templates are listed at the deletion discussion. Primefac ( talk) 05:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I was thinking about a redirect.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I do not necessarily think that would be necessary or productive, as the entire point of that template was to say "this source is biased and thus bad", which as far as I am aware is not similar to any comparable templates. Primefac ( talk) 16:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, the only response I have to that is the same as when I asked for someone to correct his or her mistake in the Teahouse archives and that person didn't want to. It's possible no one else will see the problem.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:12, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

That is... a totally different scenario? The consensus of the discussion was to delete the template, not redirect it. If you wish to recreate it as a redirect, then you are welcome to, but I would not be surprised if it were then nominated at RFD (I'm not saying that it will be nominated, just that it is likely depending on the target and how similar they really are). Primefac ( talk) 20:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Since that would likely happen, there's no point in going to the trouble, given that it is unlikely anyone will see it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

You updated the protection settings for Template:Non-free_reduce in 2018. Is there still a reason to fully protect this? I count only 40 transclusions. The turn-around time for image reductions must be lower now. Schierbecker ( talk) 16:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Technically it's template-protected but you have a good point; I have reduced it to semiprot. Primefac ( talk) 06:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Primefac :)

When you have time, I wanted to hear if you look at the page Module_talk:Political_party#Edit_request_23_April_2023_Red_Green_Alliance_-_Request_for_a_color_change_to_Orange_(Solution_needed). I just wanted to hear if you saw what I wrote on the page I linked, asking whether the edit request can be performed now.

I understand you often make edits requested over there. I've argued with an editor over there, and now he refuses to speak with me. But I've had other editors agreeing with me about the request for a color change, but I fear that if I make an edit he will just revert it. So I wanted to hear if you could share your opinion on whether the edit request can be performed or not, and perhaps perform it if the request is granted - so that he doesn't keep on reverting my edits. Have a nice day :) Thomediter ( talk) 18:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I skimmed it, have not really had time to get into the details, but I will take a look when I get a moment. I genuinely have no opinions on the matter so any opinions I give will likely be with regard to consensus of the discussion. Primefac ( talk) 19:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Appreciate that you will look into it. Thanks :) Thomediter ( talk) 19:46, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

If I might add, we also had a discussion over at Elections and Referendums. This doesn't discuss the particular case of Red-Green Alliance much, but discussed whether we should base party colors on media color or logo color. The responses as of now all at the least argues that you can use media colors if it makes sense, which support my reasoning behind the edit request.

Cheers, thomediter :) Thomediter ( talk) 08:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Please nominate this article for deletion that fails WP:NACTOR, but completely no sources per WP:GNG. 112.204.206.165 ( talk) 10:26, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Brückner. Primefac ( talk) 09:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi,I am anonymous user. बॉट has also added a description of Bangladesh Congress President Shirin Sharmin Chaudhury as acting president, even though he has not served as president.Others have added English to the official language of Equatorial Guinea. Other notes were added that Muhammad Ahmad Mahgoub, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Sudan, had served as President after I confirmed that he had never served as President. please pay attention to बॉट. By the way, it has progressed to an editing war. Please give बॉट a stern warning. 240F:31:3402:1:44C6:DFA8:21CE:17C0 ( talk) 06:32, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Even as an IP editor, you are allowed to give warnings to users who are potentially acting inappropriately. If a user is edit warring, they should be reported to WP:AN3. Primefac ( talk) 07:12, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Administrator changes Ingenuity Ddstretch Prodego Resolute

CheckUser changes Courcelles

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
• As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

• Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

• Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.

Hi, following your edits on Template:GamesSport it doesn't show the pictograms for most of the sports. I mean for those the sport's name is matched with the pictogram. check this. I think it needs a little adjustment which I couldn't do myself. that needs your attention I guess. thanks. Sports2021 ( talk) 19:41, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't see there was no #default for the images. Should be sorted. I suspect there will be a rash of redlinked images, but that just means we can add them to the template... Primefac ( talk) 20:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes it has caused a lot of issues raised in CAT:MISSFILE. KylieTastic ( talk) 21:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Some of them are real errors that can be fixed by fixing a typo. I have fixed the easy ones. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 00:33, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

The {{ Import-blanktable}} was supposed to be merged with {{ Row hover highlight}} as decided last year. Why is it not happening now? George Ho ( talk) 00:10, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Unless I am mistaken, it is still being merged. What (or who) has indicated that is no longer the case? Primefac ( talk) 05:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I just assumed that the tag being still intact would be enough, but I guess. Actually, I was seeking a template or wiki-code doing sticky row headers, especially for mobile use. I just read instructions about sticky headers at Help:Table. -- George Ho ( talk) 07:53, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

The following templates are all listed as unused, but maybe they are rarely used. Do you know if any of these are used by the Arbitration Committee?

• Template:ArbComOpened/daycalc
• Template:Arb transition
• Template:Arbitration Committee Elections comment page
• Template:Arbitration Committee candidate/preload/discussion
• Template:Arbitration Committee candidate/preload/questions
• Template:Arbitration case status
• Template:Arbitration cases by status
• Template:Arbitrator fez topicon
• Template:ACE candidate page

Gonnym ( talk) 07:28, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

The preloads are subst-only so I'm not surprised those are unused. Will look into the others. Primefac ( talk) 11:26, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm curious why you didn't indef Einahr2 for block evasion. Have you looked at all of their mainspace edits they made while evading the block on Einahr? Toddst1 ( talk) 00:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I am thinking about it. I haven't had a chance to go through their contribs yet, and I am waiting to see their response to the block transfer. If you have seen something problematic let me know. Primefac ( talk) 06:51, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

You may remember warning this user back in 2017 about going overboard with spamming welcome templates. I recently noticed they are at it again after they posted an odd Wikilove message on my talk page. I'm not sure if this is worth making a fuss about, but a quick spot check indicated they weren't paying close attention to whether or not the accounts were new users. [9], [10], [11], [12]. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:28, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

I'll leave a note. Thanks. Primefac ( talk) 09:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)