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.

RMaung (WMF) 15:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. Done! Sergecross73 msg me 16:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey Serge. I have a question about inserting boxart images into Wikipedia. How do we do that? Can it be from Nintendo's sites? I thought about inserting some images into pages that have an insert on the remakes of like the Mario & Luigi remakes. Any advice? Or is that only exclusive posting to admins only? Zacharyalejandro ( talk) 02:24, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Zachary. Images can be added by anyone, you don’t need to be an admin or anything. Wikipedia’s image policy is kinda complicated though. It’s one of the reasons I don’t upload images. So I may not be the best person to mentor you on this topic. You could ask for help at WP:VG though. Sergecross73 msg me 21:54, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	For your work on Skies of Arcadia, and being an all-around great admin to deal with. TarkusAB talk/ contrib 20:39, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. I appreciate your efforts as well. May we celebrate the return of Skies of Arcadia someday soon! Sergecross73 msg me 23:28, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I know there's not a lot of consensus for it. But I was wondering if you could delete the disambiguation page for N-Gage and have the N-Gage (device) drop disambiguator from its title. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 11:08, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

It kinda depends on what you mean by “not a lot of consensus”. If you mean, like 2-0 in favor of it, then sure. If you mean like, 3-2, then no, it should probably be discussed further. Let me know and we’ll take it from there. Sergecross73 msg me 17:59, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

It's just 2-0. i thought you needed 3 votes to consider it a consensus. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 05:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

No, there’s no hard rule really, it can just depend on the amount of opposition sometimes. If there’s none, then we should be good for now. Can you link me to the discussion? Then I’ll take care of it. Sergecross73 msg me 21:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for responding so late. I forget to check back on talkpages a lot. Here is the link: Talk:N-Gage#Is this necessary?. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 03:43, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Next time, actually read the linked MOS: "try to avoid using bold markup" and "Using a pseudo heading at all means you have exhausted all other options. It is a rarity." 184.71.94.130 ( talk) 19:32, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

How it was, is literally as it is in the “acceptable” column. And it’s how it’s done in countless GAs and FAs. Chill out. Sergecross73 msg me 19:45, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Again, READ WP:PSEUDOHEAD (don't just look at one table and assume you know what it says). It clearly says you shouldn't be using bold markup to show a heading. If you don't want a heading there, remove it completely, but stop using bold markup. You've been editing long enough to know better than this. 184.71.94.130 ( talk) 16:42, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey, what article is this on? I might be able to help work this out if I knew what page this discussion is about. -- Izno ( talk) 16:45, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Fear Inoculum (song) 184.71.94.130 ( talk) 16:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Drive-by comment: it doesn't look like a heading is necessary there at all. Readers will assume the credited musicians are the band when there are no other credits. Popcornduff ( talk) 17:32, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, in this specific context I wouldn't have any secondary heading. In the general case, Serge, the IP is right that this should be a real heading. The GAs and FAs should change accordingly. :) -- Izno ( talk) 17:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I don’t understand how this is supposedly so widely done wrong, or why the example given would suggest its do-able, but whatever, it doesn’t require a header at all. Sergecross73 msg me 18:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

People don't know that what they're doing is wrong, or they're basing it on a previously created page, or... you can fill in the blanks. -- Izno ( talk) 22:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey Serge! Been a while since we've talked, hope you've been doing well. Anyway, I just wanted to ask if you'd mind moving User:TheJoebro64/drafts/Dunkey to Videogamedunkey. I've spent a while working on this and think it's notable enough to stand as an article (I also asked Masem about it in July and he said he thought it'd survive an AFD), but the namespace is SALTed for vandalism. JOE BRO 64 01:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey! I’ve been well, and I hope you have been too. I’ve moved it. I’m trusting you on this one, as I don’t follow the Youtuber circles really. But getting coverage in the Washington Post is probably a good sign, so you’re probably good. Sergecross73 msg me 01:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Citation needed for that. Where are these masses of people who wouldn't consider the Nintendo Virtual Boy, home of games such as Mario's Tennis, Mario Clash, and Wario Land, not a Nintendo console? That aside, your reversion re-introduces a plain factual error into the article. Will you please consider yielding on this so we don't have to have an edit war over plain facts? Garrett Albright ( talk) 19:03, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

I’m familiar with it, I own one myself. But look no further than the source in the article, which notes that it’s never included when Nintendo reveals historical sales of all of their consoles. Nor does Wikipedia currently list it in its home video game console article. I don’t think readers are well served when Wikipedia editors bloat sentences with these rare obscure exceptions that are largely not-really-the-point of the general sentiment. I’d rather the wording be tweaked in other ways if you insist on doing something about it - changing the condition to something like “major consoles”, “primary consoles” or something like that. Sergecross73 msg me 19:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Administrator changes Barkeep49 Beetstra • KillerChihuahua • Kusma Arcadian • Extraordinary Machine • Xeno JamesBWatson → JBW Interface administrator changes Evad37

CheckUser changes Courcelles • SilkTork • Timotheus Canens Oversight changes Courcelles • SilkTork • Timotheus Canens

Guideline and policy news

• Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

• As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

• The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
• The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.

Miscellaneous

• The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

RMaung (WMF) 20:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Already did mine! Sergecross73 msg me 21:43, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for all the work you have put into dealing with the IP editor at the BM article. It must be very tiring, and I have a lot of respect for you putting up with all of their nonsense. If only they would listen to your advice. Admins like you are very important to this project, and so thanks again. – Wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 21:26, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Wallyfromdilbert - Thank you, I appreciate it. I appreciate your efforts as well. Yes, the IP is exhausting, but I have a high tolerance for dealing with long-term issues like this (it’s why I invite people to ask me for assistance rather than relying on RFPP/AIV/ANI) so it’s no big deal either. Sergecross73 msg me 23:13, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

You do a good job dealing with them. I hope I can learn some of that level of tolerance from you. Aside from my comment today, I'll let you handle it. Btw, did you notice that the user previously claimed that "Our service provider sometimes changes our IP address when we power up the router" [1] and then later that "This IP address is assigned to a group of computers in a public library" [2]? – Wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 23:31, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Sergecross73, if this IP user is going to continue to list edits made by me while accusing me of acting in bad faith (even after you warned them [3]), is it appropriate for me to bring their conduct to ANI or RPP? I would have no issue engaging the user if they submitted edit requests with their changes and supporting sources, but their current actions on the talk page towards me seem like nothing more than continued harassment. – Wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 18:22, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

If you don’t mind, why don’t you just let it be restored for now. I’m pretty close to just archiving a majority of the page and instructing the IP to start over and stay on topic this time. You don’t have to answer it, just let it sit in the archives. Sergecross73 msg me 18:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I hope you will close it soon, as the IP has already said they are using the section to "continue presenting the evidence that your revisions demonstrate an extensive pattern of WP:NEUTRAL violations" [4]. I thought talk pages are not supposed to be used to compile supposed "evidence" against other editors with no intention of making improvements to the articles. – Wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 20:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Wallyfromdilbert - thanks for being a good sport. I’ve closed the discussions, and will send them to the archives shortly. In general, unless the IPs are specifically (and finally) doing an edit request that you oppose, feel free to not engage. I plan on keeping my answers much shorter and less frequent. Hopefully it’ll force them to either do thing they right way instead of rambling off-topic over and over again. Sergecross73 msg me 21:03, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Okay sounds good. Thank you. I'd even put the changes into the article if they made a specific sourced edit request, but I don't even what their suggested changes would be from the walls of text they keep pinging me with. – Wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 21:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Your quote on your reversion of my edit: "It sure is. But you need to, you know, write about it. Not just drop a bunch of mundane quotes in quote boxes."

That is a pretty snarky, unfriendly thing to say. Apparently you want to discourage people from editing Wikipedia. It worked.

Those quotes I left had the information I was looking for, along with some great refs. So I stand behind that edit, but I'm not going to fight about it. If you wanted it to be better, you could revise it to be better. Now, without that information, it is missing the thing I wanted to know about.

dfrankow ( talk) 03:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

My intention isn’t to drive anyone away, it’s just to discourage lazy editing like that. You need to write in your own words. Don’t just copy/paste a bunch of things others said. Wikipedia isn’t a WP:QUOTEFARM. Sergecross73 msg me 03:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

He’s completely wrong about this article has no evidence Metalcore is a fusion genre and it is it’s own genre the article has remained the same for years until he changed it Matt5804 ( talk) 19:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

See section above. Sergecross73 msg me 22:45, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Please do not interpret this message as anything other than a desire to bring our discussion to a peaceful conclusion. In regards to your thoughts here, I'm not sure if you made yourself aware of the entire situation before commenting. There is a long history in the article in question (and many other Black Sabbath articles) of editors attempting to add this genre without discussion, even after prior discussion has been against it, and that's important to know when you're evaluating and critiquing my decision to initiate discussion as I did. Additionally, the editor in question already clearly demonstrated a willingness to edit war over it, while also telling me to fuck off. And finally, this editor has already been warned multiple times over a period of months about adding genres without discussion, yet he persists despite knowing better. So I will make no apologies for choosing to initiate discussion rather than choosing the other options available. In light of all this, why on earth would you decide I'm the one who's being hot headed and needs to "cool down"? SolarFlash ( talk) 16:36, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I get the situation, I guess I just don’t personally get so riled up about basic content disputes with rude uncivil editors. I’ve been editing music articles for over a decade...and what youre describing is like a weekly occurrence in music Wikipedia. No one asked you for an apology. Just go hash it out with the guy on the talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 16:51, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

For the record, at no point was I "riled up" in any way. I dealt with the situation in a way I thought would prevent it from escalating, and that's all I did. SolarFlash ( talk) 18:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Well regardless of your intention, your comments come off as very aggressive or mad, which generally aren’t a way to de-escalate a situation. No need to argue further, either take the advice or don’t. Sergecross73 msg me 18:59, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

So on the We Came as Romans page, a user named Matt5804 is breaking the rules regarding the lead sentence on the band page. I changed the sentence from "... is a metalcore band" to "... is a hardcore punk band" as the latter genre encompasses ALL cited genres. I've been told about this rule on the Converge page in the past. In addition, this user only created an account just to mess up the article. Can you please deal with him.-- ULTRA-DARKNESS ^{:) 2 CHAT} 16:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

You’re not wrong, but I’m only seeing...1 revert over the course of three days? I don’t think you need to escalate this to me yet. You’re going about this fine. You just need to be patient and assume good faith. The editor is extremely new. Keep me posted if it continues to be a issue though. Sergecross73 msg me 19:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Serge, he's reverted it twice again and is blaming me for disruptive editing although he's the problem. I'm actually following the rules. I've been on Wikipedia for years and I know how things go. ULTRA-DARKNESS ^{:) 2 CHAT} 20:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Matt5804 and UltraDark - please discuss on the article talk page and come to a WP:CONSENSUS. Here’s my two cents: Do the approach seen at bands like A Perfect Circle or Tool (band). Choose something generic like “rock” for the opening sentence, and then add all the intricate genre stuff to a “musical styles” type section (with sourcing.) Sergecross73 msg me 22:45, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

So I've started a section on the WCAR talk page, and if no consensus is reached in three days, I'll change the genre to "rock". Not a controversial decision on my part since the band's self-titled exists, which is mostly an alternative rock album with only five songs on the track listing contain screamed vocals. ULTRA-DARKNESS ^{:) 2 CHAT} 00:27, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I've given three days notice, yet Matt did it again. I'm not dealing with him any further. I need help on this one. ULTRA-DARKNESS ^{:) 2 CHAT} 00:09, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

I’ve issued him a stern warning to stop and discuss. That being said, you need to do your part to stay calm and assume good faith. Some new editors just dont understand all the rules and protocols of the website. Some people think it’s okay to just declare music whatever genre they dictate. He’s like...less than 10 edits in. He may just be new and headstrong. Sergecross73 msg me 00:12, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sergecross73, I'm the guy that reverted your edit on the Static-X page. You mentioned that the manual of style says that dates of death should not be included in the member dates section, but I was unable to find where it is mentioned, is there any chance that you can point it out for me? as I said I have seen a lot of pages that have this, and would appreciate the clarification so I can delete it where I see it. I'm a fairly new contributor but I'm determined to make sure that my contributions have a positive impact. thanks Nial Ist ( talk) 14:51, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Let me get back to you on that. I’m fairly certain of it, but I can’t recall where I read it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Pretty much the subject, but i've always wondered where we post info on film/ tv/ video game casts of shows. Starbeam2 ( talk) 22:33, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry to undo so much if your work, but please see WP:GAMECRUFT point #11. Wikipedia doesn’t include voice casts in articles. Thats probably why you were finding so many popular articles that didn’t have them. Anyways, just wanted to let you know so you don’t waste any more time on that. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 22:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello Sergecross73,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Black Satellite for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Willbb234 ^Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 09:29, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Willbb234, Bbb23 - I only created the redirect for this a ways back, not the article itself, but I don’t believe this was handled correctly either way. The source from Billboard (magazine) should have discounted an WP:A7 right off the bat. Secondly, if notability wasn’t found, the redirect was still legitimate, as it was a plausible search term and mentioned and reliably sourced in the redirect target. Sergecross73 msg me 13:45, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome to do whatever you think best with the page.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:47, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry if I made a mistake. There's an awful lot to do when reviewing so I do make mistakes. Regards, Willbb234 ^Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 17:31, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

No worries, and thank you both. I just wanted to discuss before taking action to prevent edit warring or wheel warring. And yeah, I get it, I used to work on CSD stuff too, and I know there’s a bunch of things to check, and it’s easy to make mistakes after reviewing hundreds of non-notable articles. And I concede that it’s notability is indeed questionable, and that article wasn’t quite ready. I just didn’t think it it was A7 level. Anyways, I’ll probably just restore/recreate the redirect. Sergecross73 msg me 17:53, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Redirect restored. Sergecross73 msg me 22:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Administrator changes GermanJoe • Girth Summit • Kees08 • Nosebagbear DESiegel • GB fan • MSGJ • Voice of Clam • WilyD DeltaQuad • Fang Aili • Pakaran Bureaucrat changes DeltaQuad • Pakaran Interface administrator changes MSGJ

CheckUser changes L235 • Mz7 • SQL • ST47 Ivanvector DeltaQuad Oversight changes L235 • Mz7 • ST47 • Stwalkerster • The Blade of the Northern Lights • Xaosflux DeltaQuad • DGG • Julia W

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.

• The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).

• A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.

Is there a rule or guideline when editors start accusing other editors of something over and over without proof? Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 16:07, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

WP:ASPERSIONS is probably what you’re looking for. Sergecross73 msg me 16:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

thank you. Its not exactly what i had in mind. But i still think its useful, so i'll keep an eye on it. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 16:14, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm not requesting for your vote, but could you assist in moderation/intervention WP:VPM#Request for Comment - 1 November 2019 - Is WP:ANIME subordinate to other projects?. I completely understand if this is coming out of left field though. i dont want you to get mixed up in pointless banter. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 17:23, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

I ended up commenting, as I don’t like it when people try to muscle in on WikiProject’s authority like that. My comment there, as well as this conversation, shows that it wasn’t canvassing though, as I had no idea of your stance going into it. Sergecross73 msg me 17:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for being understanding. I'm not trying to cause any more conflict about this so i'll probably step away from it for a while. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 18:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

I really want to step away from this debate now but i dont know how. every time this user accuses me of something new. And its quite honestly amazing. I've never seen an editor lack this much self-awareness that they accuse me of the very thing they're doing. Anyways, what do you recommend i do at this point? Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 20:39, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I think you can step away and be just fine really - it’s not looking like there’s going to be a consensus in that other editors favor unless things really change up there... Sergecross73 msg me 22:46, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

You're right. I still have some projects from last year to finish up on. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk) 08:53, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Toriko episodes#List of Toriko episodes#No removal of content no reverting each other please.... Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 08:08, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I’d comment...but it looks like things are mostly wrapping up now? Sergecross73 msg me 02:15, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

• https://thehardtimes.net/harddrive/sonic-fans-now-drunk-with-power-demand-big-the-cat-be-added-to-the-film/

JOE BRO 64 01:55, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Bahaha, I’ve actually had a couple people send me that now, and it cracks me up every time. That aside, I try to make an effort to not be part oftoxic, entitles fanbases...but wow, the original movie trailer was sooo bad, and I like the new one far more. The old model haunted my dreams and ruined my childhood... Sergecross73 msg me 02:15, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

I didn't like the original design, but I didn't even realize how bad it was until the new trailer came out. Ugh, it's not the teeth that really bothers me, it's the eyes... how far they were spaced and how weirdly human they looked. Oh, and the oh-so-subtle Puma product placement with his muscular-ass legs.

The director of Cats must feel awkward right now. JOE BRO 64 02:33, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

I can't see how anyone would think otherwise. The IP seems more interested in their own rants on the talk pages than in substantiating any claims, one way or the other. From a neuropsychological standpoint, it's kind of telling, but I agree that from an interactive standpoint it's just disruptive. I don't think feeding the problem is going to help. I never was good with barnstars or templates, but perhaps this hand-written Thank You will suffice. Zaereth ( talk) 03:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I very much so appreciate it. Sergecross73 msg me 10:50, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Article hierarchy clarification. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 22:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Looks like this one closed before I got to it too. Sergecross73 msg me 00:51, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Someone at this article keeps changing pansexual to bisexual without sources and tried to change the title of a source to be Gay instead of Queer. Help :c - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 19:01, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@ Abryn: I left the user a warning, I don't think page protection or a block is appropriate yet. Let me know if it continues. -- ferret ( talk) 22:03, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@ Ferret: Will do, thank you. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 15:44, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@ Abryn: As info, he's on an edit warring + socking block. I'll probably protect if another sock crops up. -- ferret ( talk) 00:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for helping. I would have helped with this, but I‘be been busy lately, and ferret is on top of things. Sergecross73 msg me 00:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I started a discussion on Talk:All the Small Things. Statik N ( talk) 03:06, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I’ve responded. It appears you’re not pushing against this further? Sergecross73 msg me 14:56, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 07:36, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Wow, 7 years already, I hadn’t realized... Sergecross73 msg me 12:48, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

-- User:Martin Urbanec ( talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Con you this to this other page because it has unnecessary disambiguation. ~SML • TP 18:12, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Done. Sergecross73 msg me 19:02, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks ~SML • TP —Preceding undated comment added 20:05, 1 December 2019 (UTC)