User talk:Number 57/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 18

Crystal Palace F.C.

Crystal Palace F.C.

I'm sick and tired of the way you and your fellow warder squad totally disregard other peoples edits. I said i was just putting one sentence about the amateur club as although not official, it is deemed to be part of the club's history. It deserves to be mentioned in the intro. I don't care if you lock or protect this wiki page from now on, because i won't be making any more edits on it, it was totally unacceptable, i was trying to appease. It deserved one sentence, just one fucking sentence, but you and those other twats spoil it for everyone Fastcrystal (talk) 07:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Category:Elections in Hyōgo Prefecture has been nominated for merging

Category:Elections in Hyōgo Prefecture has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, there's a weird issue on two articles: 2002 Costa Rican general election and 2014 Costa Rican general election in both the name of the nominee and in the second the name of the running mates do not appear in the infobox for reasons unknown to me. Thank you. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 00:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dereck Camacho: I've fixed it. You were missing the code | type = presidential from the presidential section of the infobox. The reason it partially worked in some articles is that the "candidate" parameter was used. When "nominee" is used, it only appears if the type is set to presidential. Cheers, Number 57 09:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

1958 Costa Rican general election

Hi Numbers, by reasons unknown for me the 1958 Costa Rican general election can't be linked in wikidata to its Spanish counterpart as all other are. The Wondering if you can help. The Spanish name is "Elecciones presidenciales de Costa Rica de 1958". --Daioshin (talk) 23:18, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Daioshin: I've fixed it. The problem was that there are two Wikidata entries for the election (1958 Costa Rican general election and Costa Rican presidential election, 1958, and the English one was attached to the first and the Spanish to the second. I've attached them both to the first one. Number 57 23:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanky you very much, you're very kind. --Daioshin (talk) 23:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Problems with edit warring

Hi, sorry to bother you with this, there is a problem on [Josip Broz Tito], User:Buidhe removed sourced content and is now edit warring. Can You please look it up. I have tried to start a discussion but the user in question just keeps edit warring. I have made a report [1] Thanks in advance --Tuvixer (talk) 08:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

• Tuvixer You already posted to the edit warring noticeboard. Please do not WP:FORUMSHOP in future. buidhe 08:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

This was not forum-shopping, but asking for advice. --Tuvixer (talk) 08:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Number 57

Thank you for creating 2020 Oregon State Treasurer Election.

User:Elliot321, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for adding the page. Just an fyi for the future, you might want to use more specific categories like "2020 Oregon elections" instead of "2020 elections".

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Elliot321}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 03:15, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Elliot321: I didn't create this article. I created a redirect at that title when moving it to the correct title. It seems the original article was merged into 2020 Oregon state elections and PortlandOregon has recreated it at the wrong title... I will do a history merge to sort it out. Number 57 08:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for your help (seems like the software to review newly created pages got confused, sorry about that). Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 16:26, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

knesset

look about Uriel Busso and Eliyahu Hasid. nowqtoday they coming so maby the officar line take little time but they are member. 21:40, 21 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:6500:A038:379A:C0C8:67A5:1056:5F70 (talk)

look hear [2]. 2A01:6500:A038:379A:C0C8:67A5:1056:5F70 (talk) 21:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

1953 Yugoslavian election

Hello. Since you created articles on Yugoslavian elections in 1950 and 1958, would you be interested to create 1953 Yugoslavian parliamentary election as well? Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 03:43, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sundostund: I've made a start; will try and find some more details to expand it. Cheers, Number 57 22:38, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Serbian parliamentary election

On 24 June 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Serbian parliamentary election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 01:58, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Guam

I’d rather stick with precedent here. And the guidelines mention nothing about subnational states or territories - just countries. Guam is a U.S. territory and should follow the same guidelines as U.S. states such as 2018 Ohio gubernatorial election. Of course you could also apply the guidelines to US states as well but there’s the fact that some US demonyms are pretty ridiculous and you’d end up with “Hoosier gubernatorial election” for Indiana. Kingofthedead (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kingofthedead: The precedent for US Territories (as opposed to states) is to use the adjectival form where there is one – i.e. American Samoan and Puerto Rican.

There are some places that do not have adjectival forms, or very awkward ones, and we have avoided using these (for example, Liechtenstein or the Solomon Islands). I think that for US states, adjectival forms should be used where there is a non-awkward one (Californian, Texan etc) but not when there isn't.

Although it mentions countries, the guideline isn't restricted to national level elections/referendums; one of the examples given is a subnational unit (the Faroe Islands). It is widely applied to subnational votes e.g. 2011 Welsh devolution referendum, 2009 New Caledonian legislative election, 2010 Réunionese Regional Council election etc

Also, just to note the guideline was amended some time ago to switch from "demonym" to "adjectival form" as in some cases this can be different. Cheers, Number 57 10:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Kiribati election

Hi. You can see the complete and official results on the site of the Ministry of Justice. A copy of that is on Facebook official site: https://www.facebook.com/MOJKiribati/ At my knowledge no secondary source described the complete results, Island by island. Yours. --Arorae (talk) 13:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Malawi elections

There are numerous speculations about the results of the Malawian general elections. There are multiple "results" circulating everywhere about the presidential election. The MEC data that shows huge lead for the President Mutharika has not yet been updated by the Election Commission, and it may be misleading and sowing confusion. The State TV and other channels are showing huge lead for Chakwera, whereas the outdated MEC data shows Mutharika commanding a huge lead. Violence and bickering about the results are already sowing confusion, and the data may further exacerbate it. Therefore I request you to update the data whenever you can, and remove the figures obtained from the premilinary results of only 11% votes are cast. Ongoing election data must be updated and posted very carefully, as these are very impactful. Ppt2003 (talk) 11:07, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

There are always multiple results circulating. It's our job to assess which of those can be deemed reliable. If there are more complete figures posted by a reliable source, you are welcome to update them. Number 57 11:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear Number 57, Before reverting my changes and leaving warning on my talk page, be sure to check the facts. The Adjectival form of (North) Macedonia is Macedonian. You can check the official government website for the official info: https://vlada.mk/node/16897?ln=en-gb or you can even read on Wikipedia. There isn't such adjective as "North Macedonian". I hope you will work on your mistakes. Greetings

Why isn't my code working?

Hello. I was trying to edit the 1963 Moroccan general election general election page, but the infobox I tried to implement only displayed one of the houses. Here is my code:

1963 Moroccan general election

17 May 1963

House of Representatives

144 seats in the House of Representatives 73 seats needed for a majority

Party Leader Vote % Seats FDIC Ahmed Bahnini 34.8 69 Istiqlal Allal al-Fassi 30.0 41 UNFP Mehdi Ben Barka 22.5 28 Independent 12.6 6 This lists parties that won seats. See the complete results below. President of the House of Representatives after Abdelkrim al-Khatib Popular Movement

House of Councillors

120 seats in the House of Councillors 61 seats needed for a majority

Party Leader Vote % Seats +/– FDIC Ahmed Bahnini 102 Istiqlal Allal al-Fassi 9 UGTM 3 Other parties 2 Independent 4 This lists parties that won seats. See the complete results below. President of the House of Councillors after M'Fedel Cherkaoui FDIC

Only the House of Representatives is showing, not the House of Councillors. Please can you have a look to see where I went wrong?

Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 13:03, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Much appreciation for the effort you put in creating the T.A. Marryshow page. Robertgombos (talk) 01:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020

• News and notes: Progress at Wikipedia Library and Wikijournal of Medicine

• Community view: Community open letter on renaming

• Gallery: After the killing of George Floyd

• In the media: Part collaboration and part combat

• Discussion report: Community reacts to WMF rebranding proposals

• Featured content: Sports are returning, with a rainbow

• Arbitration report: Anti-harassment RfC and a checkuser revocation

• Traffic report: The pandemic, alleged murder, a massacre, and other deaths

• News from the WMF: We stand for racial justice

• Recent research: Wikipedia and COVID-19; automated Wikipedia-based fact-checking

• Interview: What is wrong with rebranding to "Wikipedia Foundation"?

• Humour: Cherchez une femme

• Opinion: Trying to find COI or paid editors? Just read the news

• On the bright side: For what are you grateful this month?

• In focus: Edit Loud, Edit Proud: LGBTIQ+ Wikimedians and Global Information Activism

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Black Lives Matter

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

GPinkerton

I wanted to inform you that I removed the EW block from GPinkerton, as I thought the chance of a recurrence of the behavior seemed low given thileir unblock request statements. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

How to add more than one "next election"?

Hello. On the 1950 Brazilian general election page, the next elections are the 1954 Brazilian legislative election and the 1955 Brazilian presidential election. Is there any way to add both of these to the infobox? Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 08:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Biographies of women from Guam

Hi there! I see you are writing biographies on women from Guam - great! I notice though that you are using Guampedia as the only/main source for these articles. I'm not familiar with this site, but I wonder if it's considered a reliable source on Wikipedia as it's a community-created information site? I wonder if you should check it out at the Reliable Sources helpdesk before continuing with your writing? And/or you could include other sources in the articles as well. On another note, you might like to join the Women in Red project as it is an excellent source of advice and help on writing new articles about women. You can search in the "search Wikipedia" function for "WP:Women in Red" to find their pages. All the best and happy editing! MurielMary (talk) 12:47, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello MurielMary. These are actually the only two bios on Guamanian women that I'm planning on writing – I'm currently going through all the first women to sit in parliaments of various countries and territories, and Torres/Untalan were the joint first in Guam.

With regards to Guampedia, it is a quite widely used source on Wikipedia (I used it some years ago to write some election articles). This description of it, including the listing of scholars/advisors who wrote it, would suggest it is a reliable source, as opposed to a crowdsourced site like Wikipedia. Cheers, Number 57 12:55, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Sounds like a great project to work through (first women to sit in parliaments around the world!). Good to know about Guampedia, very interesting! MurielMary (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@MurielMary: Thanks. I've been working up a list here that I will move to mainspace as a list article once complete (21 countries to go at the moment in terms of identifying the years, and a few others to identify the names). Number 57 14:13, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2021 in Iran

A tag has been placed on Category:2021 in Iran requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 19:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Firmino

I’ve started a discussion on the talk page whether to include or omit his title win and contribution. Since you removed it I’d be interested to get your input on this. Barton Dave (talk) 23:13, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

More than thirty parties

Hello. In the 1990 Brazilian legislative election, there would need to be 32 parties in the infobox for both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate. However, there are only 30 available in the infobox template. Should I not include the ones with the lowest seat number? Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 07:40, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility

Hi, Could you remove the protection please as I was going to add the shortcut basck, Community apparently thinks it's fine so I'll add it back, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 00:19, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Done. Cheers, Number 57 00:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:21, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

ʻokina

Hi,

To write the ʻokina on WP, the easiest way is probably with the template {{okina}}. You don't want ⟨‘⟩, which is a curly quotation mark, a character that generally isn't used on WP. — kwami (talk) 00:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Israeli election categories

Hi Number 57: I removed the category “2019 elections in Asia” which you subsequently reverted from the articles on Israeli elections in 2019 because those and similar articles by year are already in the categories I created: Category:2019 elections in Israel (etc) which is in both the categories “2019 elections in Asia” and “2019 in Israeli politics”. Hence listing the articles directly in “2019 elections in Asia” as well is superfluous and clutters up the Asia category. While two articles have little effect, the “2019 elections in Asia” category would be really cluttered if all the articles in “2019 elections in India” (say) and its subcategories were listed directly in the “Asia” category as well. Only a few main categories list (for various reasons) articles in subcategories also; e.g. articles in Category:20th-century Israeli women writers are also in Category:20th-century Israeli writers and the subcategories are identified as “non-diffusing subcategories”. Hugo999 (talk) 04:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't believe it's superfluous and it's certainly not cluttering the continental category. As I've told you before, I think continental categories should be non-diffusing for national elections (I have no problem with subnational elections being in a national category only, so cluttering would not an issue). I think this is helpful to the reader (it certainly is for me) to be able to see all the national elections in a continent in a year in one place. Removing them all to sub-categories is incredibly unhelpful IMO (hence why I've asked you not to do it at least once before) as it makes it harder to see how many countries had a nationwide election that year. Number 57 11:57, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Alliances

Hello. How would I deal with the 2010 Brazilian legislative election? Would I put the alliances or the individual parties? Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alextheconservative: I'd stick to the individual parties as it looks like they appeared separately on the ballot. Number 57 17:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, will do. Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 18:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Azerbaijani election

Numbers in theesse pages are fake im adding one-by-one because of it it takes time. Please do not delete CavidRasul (talk) 22:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 8

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2015 Croatian parliamentary election (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vojislav Stanimirović

Mambou Aimée Gnali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Moyen-Congo

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, Can you help me to create National Democratic Party (Bangladesh) Article?Because its won a seat in 1991.As per as i know that a party can have there own article if they won a seat in general election. EhsanAhmed (talk) 06:44, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@EhsanAhmed: It already exists at National Democratic Party (Bangladesh). Number 57 10:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks,i found that but now can i ask you a thing?can you help me to make all registered party of Bangladesh page?here is full list of registered parties: http://www.ecs.gov.bd/page/politacal-party-new EhsanAhmed (talk) 12:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@EhsanAhmed: I'm afraid I don't really have time to work on that at the moment, as I am trying to write articles on the first woman MPs in various countries. However, if you need any advice or tips on editing, I'd be happy to help. Number 57 12:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks,i was created a article about Zaker Party,but it got deleted i dont know why. EhsanAhmed (talk) 12:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@EhsanAhmed: I had a look at the history and an earlier version got deleted in April because it was written by an account named "Zaker Party" and was written in a very promotional tone. After you recreated it, the article was moved to draftspace because in its initial form, it looked like this. Just make sure the article is fully formed before publishing it, and that it has a couple of references. Number 57 12:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry

Sorry, I made a mistake, regulating you with an uw-delete1 template - really sorry for that. Hope you accept my excuse. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

July 2020

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that you recently removed content from 2016 Kosovan presidential election without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Are we meant to respect an editor who racks up ~12K edits in two months...but ~90% of them automated? No, I didn't think so. Ironically, it probably puts them out of the running for noob treatment too... ——Serial ^# 18:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

What exactly do you want to say ——Serial?! What kind of exact problem do you have with my edits?! Envy!? CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:04, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

——Serial Just what is wrong with auto edits? Just means that Waterford is good at detecting vandalism. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 19:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

No, it doesn't mean they're really good at detecting vandalism; it means that they're more intent on mashing buttons than getting things right. It's not surprising in the least that you would think otherwise, however. Vandalism fighting is important, but treating Wikipedia as a MMORPG instead of an encyclopedia benefits no one.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:24, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Ponyo, thanks for clarifying. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 20:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

First women elected to the Indonesian parliament

Hi Number 57. As you say, the 1955 Indonesian legislative election was the first democratic election in Indonesia - all previous legislative assemblies had appointed memberships. There is an elderly scanned document Hasil Rakjat Memilih Tokoh-tokoh Parlemen (Hasil Pemilihan Umum Pertama - 1955) di Republik Indonesia (Results of the People Voting for Parliamentary Members (Results of the First General Elections - 1955) in the Republic of Indonesia on the Indonesian legislature (DPR) repository website - http://repositori.dpr.go.id/100/. As it has photos of all the members, you could go through all four volumes counting... However, it also includes representatives who replaced elected members ("Pengganti anggota terpilih") for reasons such as the elected member being appointed to the cabinet.

Historia magazine, which seems to be a pretty reliable source, has an article specifically on what you're looking for at https://historia.id/politik/articles/perempuan-dalam-pemilu-pertama-6k4qn ("Perempuan dalam Pemilu Pertama" - "Women in the First Election). The last sentence reads, "Dari 257 kursi di DPR, hanya ada 19 perempuan yang terpilih, yakni 4 orang dari PNI dan Masyumi, 5 dari NU, serta 1 dari PSI.", or "Of 257 seats in the DPR, only 19 women were elected, namely 4 from the PNI and Masyumi, 5 from the NU and one from the PSI." Unfortunately, 4+4+5+1=14 !

Slightly different numbers (17 women) are in the second row of the table on page 719 of an article from the also credible Jurnal Konstitusi - https://mkri.id/public/content/infoumum/penelitian/pdf/Keterwakilan%20Perempuan%20di%20DPR.pdf.

Confusingly, according to the Indonesian Central Statistics Agency at https://www.bps.go.id/statictable/2014/09/12/1172/anggota-dewan-perwakilan-rakyat-dpr-menurut-jenis-kelamin-1955-2014.html, there were 16 women out of 272 seats.

All this is the kind of inconsistency that drives editors on the Indonesian Project to despair. I'm not sure how helpful this is - the only thing we can be certain of is that a number of women were elected for the first time in 1955. Take care. Davidelit (Talk) 04:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi User Number 57,

It is clear you have a conflict of interest in guarding the page of Eniola Aluko fiercely to prevent further edits that are based on reliable sources that have been provided to add facts and context to what is quite clearly negative editing on her page. This is now the subject of legal investigation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LegallyWiki87 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Brighouse Town

Hi, I spent hours updating our wikipedia page yesterday just for you to delete it.... who are you? BrighouseTown (talk) 09:49, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Referendum infobox

Hello. Is there any way to combine this referendum into one infobox, or will I need to do two? Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 14:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alextheconservative: I guess you want to do something like what's to the right? Cheers, Number 57 15:08, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Great, that looks perfect. Thanks, Alextheconservative (talk) 08:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

2014 Liechtenstein pensions referendum

15 June 2014
Pensionskasse Win-Win
For   43.9% Against   56.1% Proposal rejected
Win-Win 50
For   49.7% Against   50.3% Proposal rejected
Preference vote
Win-Win 50   80.6% Pensionskasse Win-Win   19.4% Both proposals rejected by overall vote

Pointless?

Please tell me what is "pointless" about providing table captions for the blind. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:03, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Accessibility and table captions

In this edit you removed a caption from a data table in breach of MOS:DTAB "Data tables should always include a caption" and the very clear consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility #RfC on table captions. If you're unsure about the point of a caption, the discussion in the RfC should provide a good rationale.

I'd be grateful, therefore, if you would please restore a caption to that table. Thanks in advance --RexxS (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Rename 2013 Israeli municipal elections?

I noticed this election actually spanned from December 2012 to January 2014, with a 1st phase of regional council elections on 4 December 2012 (I couldn't find a 2nd round if there was one), then the municipal elections proper in two rounds on 22 October 2013 and 5 November 2013, then the 2nd phase of the regional councils starting on 24 December 2013 with a 2nd round on 7 January 2014. I know you edit Israeli election articles so wanted to run this by you to make sure I got this right. Sladnick (talk) 00:55, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

@Sladnick: I'd have separate articles for the ones in 2012 (if they didn't extend over year end) and a 2013–14 one. Cheers, Number 57 11:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

PS, also want to say thanks for all the good work you do filling in the years on templates! Number 57 11:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for editing me

Hi Number 57, thank you for editing the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eti_Atiya I would like to ask - why did you decide to add the education part into the biography section?

Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterSallerzi (talk • contribs) 11:55, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Because there didn't seem to be any reason for it to be separated out into its own section, and chronologically it fits into the rest of her biography. Number 57 13:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Gilbertese or I-Kiribati

Robert Louis Stevenson was the first English author to tell about the people of the Gilbert Islands. He arrived in this remote place on 12th July 1889, and he wrote “In the South Seas”. He call the people there the « Gilbertine », not the Gilbertese. In 1820, this archipelago was put on a map with the name of « îles Gilbert » by an admiral from Estonia. He was member of the French Sciences Academy (and the Russian too of course). When Captain Davies put the Gilbert Islands under the British Protectorate (1892), English people started to use « Gilbertese » but the people of the islands continued to speak about « te Aomata ». Because Gilberts (plural) was uneasy to pronounce in Gilbertese language, they started to say instead Kiribati (Gi-li-berts), no G, no L, no proper S, in Gilbertese writing. The very first appearance of this « Kiribati » word in a good dictionary was in 1953, by Father Ernest Sabatier ([3] fr:), a Roman Catholic, who wrote and published the [very first] « Dictionnaire gilbertin-français » in Abaiang (Tabwiroa). No Gilbertese-English dictionary had been published before that one. He first gave the definition and meaning of Kiribati in a foreign language: Gilberts or Gilbert Islands. The name of the people (all the peoples) is given by I- (ee) in Gilbertese. The I-Buranti are the French. The I-Tiaman are the German. The I-Matang all the people that does not speak the language of the Aomata. In 1979, the decision was taken to replace Gilberts by Kiribati (nearly the same thing to the ears of the Aomata), easier to write with the only 13 letters of their alphabet. In fact they do no change the name, only the writing.

From 1892 to 1979, there was not such thing as a citizenship. From 1916, all the people were subjects of the British Empire. 99% of the inhabitants of the Gilbert Islands were Gilbertese or I-Kiribati, same thing but the writing and grammar rule, and nothing in English says now that I-Kiribati should be the English word for the new citizenship. Do you say Bharati for Indian? Nippon-jin for Japanese? Or Italiano for Italian? I do not think so. Please do not hesitate to ask me about this first Chief Minister: he was the grandfather of my adoptive son. And I speak quite well the Gilbertese. Yours. --Arorae (talk) 16:48, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Most of the above doesn't seem relevant to this specific issue. Usually when something is renamed while someone is related to it, we use the latest name for it in their biography. As for the use of I-Kiribati, see Demographics of Kiribati#Nationality and the whole I-Kiribati people category tree. Number 57 17:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

not relevant for you. Consensus is not your own opinion. And Wikipedia is not a source.-Arorae (talk) 17:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I didn't say consensus is my own opinion. However, when there are disputes over changes, articles should to be kept at the status quo until there is consensus for change. I also didn't say Wikipedia was a source; I was pointing out that Wikipedia uses I-Kiribati as a demonym. I'm sure Aridd would be able to give more detail on this. Number 57 17:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Aridd is a great user but he does not have any special knowledge about Kiribati (he is just an amateur, in the noble meaning of amateur in French). My main domain of knowledge and activity is Kiribati as a member of the Société des Océanistes. But of course the fact that I have read all the [rare] books since the ones of Sir Arthur Grimble, could only show me that I know nearly nothing on this place of Earth. Lack of interest for the Cinderellas of the British Empire.

the National Stadium is officially the Reuben K. Uatioa Stadium but nobody calls it like that. It is not a stadium at all in fact just a field of sand and stones and dust. Thanks for your asking.-Arorae (talk) 19:40, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Charles Richard Swayne

Dear Number 57, I usually look First on sources before editing, especially on doubtful periods. British Museum writes here that Charles Richard Swayne was the first Resident Commissioner of GEI from 1892 to 1895, and many other books quote the same period (some write from 1893 to 1895 as he arrived in the Gilberts only late 1893). --Arorae (talk) 18:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

can you help update Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu?

Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu --Midrashah (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Midrashah: To be honest, I haven't been following it at all, so not sure I'd be much use. Cheers, Number 57 19:53, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Transcription of names of kibbutzim in Israel

You have deleted my transcriptions of names of kibbutzim in Israel, arguing that they are unnecessary as they match their article name. However, stress in a Hebrew is very important. And while the stress appears in all my transcriptions, it does not appear in any of the article names. For example, a person who does not know Hebrew may pronounce alúmot instead of alumót. The article name is Alumot, which means that the person who sees it and does not know Hebrew has no idea how it is pronounced stress-wise in Hebrew. This can lead to various misunderstandings, of course. Please reconsider. --SuzieMillen (talk) 22:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Very few (if any) people will understand that the text indicates how the words are stressed (I've never seen this used before for Hebrew), which means it's going to be largely meaningless and therefore unnecessary (particularly for something in such a prominent position). Number 57 22:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

My synagogue friends all understand the stress indication. The áéíóú is commonly used among Jews and others. You have also deleted my transcription dgánya for Degania. In this case my transcription gave the reader more than just stress. Otherwise, the reader would pronounce 3 or 4 syllables (de.gan.ya or de.ga.ni.a) whereas דגניה is actually pronounced with only 2 syllables (dgán.ya). Perhaps I should add that I know Hebrew and lived in a kibbutz. Please reconsider. --SuzieMillen (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Your synagogue friends are not representative of the general public. I know Hebrew and lived in Israel for several years (the reason I saw your edits is that I wrote several of the articles in question by translating them from he.wiki). Number 57 23:39, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your important translation work. SuzieMillen (talk) 01:45, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Gilbertese

Dear Number 57. My memory is not as good as I was younger, and I have completely forgotten your post on my page from… 2007. It was quite an offensive one (imho). Here it was: «==Kiribatian/Gilbertese== Thank you for your insult regarding my knowledge of Kiribati. Whilst I admit I do not know much about the Islands myself, I am rather an expert on English being a native speaker and a former teacher of the language, and I can tell you that no-one would use the adjective Gilbertese to refer to the country (if you don't believe me, check the Wiktionary definition of Kiribatian and Gilbertese). Obviously you are not an expert either, as the "official" demonym is I-Kiribati, so your theory of having been to a country making you an expert doesn't exactly ring true, does it? Number 57 12:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

No insult, please (it's my page). I am not a lier. And you do not know the exact meaning of I-Kiribati.--Enzino 15:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC) ».

After trying to improve many articles about Kiribati, I have seen many times the word « I-Kiribati » (Gilbertese demonym) used like an adjective or like a synonym of Kiribati — that is incorrect. As you should know « I- » means a people from and it is only used for demonyms like I-Buranti (French), I-Matang (“White” or people from Matang), I-Niutian (New Zealander) or I-Tarawa (person from Tarawa). When I saw a I-Kiribati Law category instead of Law in Kiribati or something near, I am certain that there is misunderstanding of the use of the demonym. But I have noticed that even if you are somehow rude in your manners — especially for an English teacher —, you should be convinced (not with my raw English), thanks for your rewording!, you have seen that If I could be wrong and make errors, I always try to understand the sourcés. By the way, I am VERY pleased to meet someone that have some interest in Kiribati and his history… Regards.-Arorae (talk) 22:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020

• Special report: Wikipedia and the End of Open Collaboration?

• COI and paid editing: Some strange people edit Wikipedia for money

• News and notes: Abstract Wikipedia, a hoax, sex symbols, and a new admin

• In the media: Dog days gone bad

• Discussion report: Fox News, a flight of RfAs, and banning policy

• Featured content: Remembering Art, Valor, and Freedom

• Traffic report: Now for something completely different

• Gallery: Photos of threatened species from iNaturalist

• News from the WMF: New Chinese national security law in Hong Kong could limit the privacy of Wikipedia users

• Recent research: Receiving thanks increases retention, but not the time contributed to Wikipedia

• Essay: Not compatible with a collaborative project

• Obituaries: Hasteur and Brian McNeil

• In focus: WikiLoop DoubleCheck, reviewing edits made easy

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Office 2020

Thank you for explaining why my edit was removed. I'm very new to Wikipedia edits and as such am still learning the ins and outs, what is permitted and what is not. I was actually trying to be informational and am not sure what sounded promotional. I think I've found a mentor, someone with more Wikipedia experience than I have who is willing to show me the ropes. In the meantime, I would appreciate any specific information, tips or pointers that you think would be useful. Office 2020 (talk) 07:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Dorking Wanderers

The article says that the capacity will be increased by 1,133. 2,000+1,133=3,133. Benjw 2005 (talk) 21:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@Benjw 2005: The article doesn't state that the existing capacity is 2,000. Sources on capacities are highly inconsistent, so there is no certainty that 2,000 was the starting point for adding a further 1,133. Capacities should only be added where a source is clear what the total capacity is. Adding two sources together is not appropriate.

While I've got your attention, why did you initially change it to 4,000, and then later to 3,133 using a source that contained no information on the capacity? Number 57 09:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I know that the ground capacity is 2000 because I can see it from my roof Benjw 2005 (talk) 09:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Your control on certain articles (Yours?)

You have never replied to my last message (about Kiribati), so I am quite afraid you will not reply to this one. Thanks for modifying the 1978 election article and removing what you think could be copyvio. But I am still not understanding your animosity towards what I am trying to do, since 2004 on Kiribati articles. I may be wrong but it is like it is very difficult to improve what you have done and started — without very unfriendly comments. I thank you again because you have did a huge work but I really think that more friendly discussion could help.--Arorae (talk) 10:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Arorae: The copyright thing is really concerning and quite separate to the Kiribati topic. I've seen this happen before - an editor has found to be making copyright violations over many years, and it takes a huge amount of effort to sort it out. It's really a very basic expectation of editors to know they cannot copy and paste text from other website, yet you're still making this extremely basic error after 16 years. It's hugely worrying.

On the Kiribati side of things, the move of Bwebwetake Areieta was also poorly judged. There are zero hits online for the alternative spelling that aren't Wikipedia mirrors; the current spelling is the common one – again this is is something you really should know by now.

Regarding the 1978 election, thanks for adding the list of elected members – can you provide the source for it? Cheers, Number 57 10:45, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, I see Aridd has been reminding you about WP:V, another core policy that you really should understand. I see from that discussion that you are banned from fr.wiki. What was the reason for that? Number 57 10:50, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Can you please disallow people from editing colour of Bangladesh Nationalist Party/meta/color.Please EhsanAhmed (talk) 16:27, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry wrong link Template:Bangladesh Nationalist Party/meta/color EhsanAhmed (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@EhsanAhmed: There doesn't seem to be enough disruption to justify protection at the moment. If it continues, let me know and I'll review. Cheers, Number 57 16:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Allright thanks for fast reply and what about your first women no article? EhsanAhmed (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@EhsanAhmed: Been a bit busy (in real life) for that recently. However, if you have any idea who the 12 women elected in the 1954 East Bengal Legislative Assembly election were, that would be great. I have Shaista Suhrawardy Ikramullah as the first woman MP from Bangladesh (in the Pakistani Constituent Assembly), but she was not directly elected. Cheers, Number 57 16:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh I see EhsanAhmed (talk) 16:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Dereham Town FC

Hi,

I am aware from our conversation over a year ago that you look after many non-league football club pages. I have added a photo of the ground of Dereham Town FC; I hope this doesn't violate any rules on such, if so please let me know how I can rectify my error, the photo in question is one I have taken.

Thank you.

--Krancton21 (talk) 20:07, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Krancton21: No, the photo is fine. I just moved it so it appears at the top of the section on the club's grounds. Cheers, Number 57 20:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Worcester

When you turned Worcester into a DAB page, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS. The change broke 1,660 links, which will have to be fixed by hand. The DABfixers cannot keep up with the 400-700 new bad links created each day in the normal course of events, let alone a change which accounts for nearly 7% of today's total bad links to DAB pages; see WP:TDD#Table 1. Narky Blert (talk) 11:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

@Narky Blert: You obviously didn't look at my recent contributions. I fixed over 500 incoming links to the article. I also asked three other editors who took part in the RM and volunteered to help with fixing the incoming links to contribute, but it seems that only another 200 have been fixed since I made this request. Number 57 11:47, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

East Grinstead Town F.C.

That editor you reverted, User:AmSam13, was a sock. I'm going through their many contributions to separate the wheat from the chaff. There's a lot of chaff. A sock of theirs was User:Beevor54. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Francis Pott (composer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Sholl.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

US Cities/Plural PT

Hi Number 57. I just cited your closure of the recent move at Talk:Worcester in a discussion of why a user's stance that US cities should be compared to our policy on plural topics does not have the consensus to be in our policy on US city titles. I do not want to inaccurately summarize your views, so please let me know if you'd prefer I remove that.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:28, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Template:Football squad player

Hi, two things. Firstly, there is a rogue "|}" at the end of the template. Secondly, can you make it so that Template:Football squad player2 becomes a redirect to Template:Football squad player? Thanks, Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: I think I've fixed the |}. Not sure about redirecting yet. Number 57 16:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Not sure in the sense that you don't know how to do it, or not sure if we should even do it? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: I have not checked the compatibility of the code yet. Number 57 16:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok makes sense. It seems that Fs player2 doesn't use a "Fs player2 start", "mid", or "end", rather a wikitable, which complicates things. How do you think it can be solved? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 16:27, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: It does use start and end in some cases (see e.g. Toronto FC). The main issue I can see is the use of {{Fs player2 sort}}. If we redirected fs start and end2 to the main ones, the table would work, but the headings would be out of order (e.g. the nationality of the players appears in the last column). {{fs player}} needs to be reworked to able to accept both the normal input and the parameters used in {{Fs player2 sort}} before a wholescale transfer over could be done. In the meantime, to enable this, someone should go round and introduce fs start2 and fs end2 to all the articles missing it, as this will enable the transition once it's ready. Number 57 16:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Can you highlight this in WT:FOOTY? This way, it's more likely to find an editor (or more) who would help us out in this. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 16:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: Will leave a message there later (I'm about to go off to do something for a bit). I'd imagine there may be some comments about the change made to the squadlist, so worth keeping an eye out for that and referring people to the RfC outcome if they aren't happy with the changes. Cheers, Number 57 16:45, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I'll do that. Also, could you also explain the situation to Frietjes? She's pretty good with templates, so she should be able to give us a hand. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 16:58, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

1940 Mandatory Palestine v Lebanon football match

Hey, as you have participated in the peer review, I wanted to let you know that I have nominated the article for FA, in case you wanted to comment. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 18:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Name Change

Hello, Just read your message. Could you please clarify what you meant by "whatever the person's most common name is in English – this is not necessarily their full name" and which article/s you are referring to??

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaafusuaga Samalaulu Fonoti (talk • contribs) 01:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019 Indian general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United Democratic Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Option 1 (b) or 3 (b)

Hi, can you please answer the question on WT:FOOTY regarding 1 (b) and 3 (b)? Thanks, Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Change to Template:Football squad player

Hello,

In the change that you made to {{Football squad player}} template the two columns that were side by side are now appearing one below the other when there is a wide entry that used to wrap. Thus extending the squad listing and having a middle set of headings at the {{fs mid}} point. You can see the effect on this article. Keith D (talk) 22:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Keith D: The two columns remain side by side on the PC version. They only become one below the other on mobile view. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 22:45, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: I have the problem on a laptop not on a mobile. Keith D (talk) 22:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Keith D: Ah strange. I suppose you see two columns side by side when there isn't a "wide entry" (like here)? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 22:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

This is a change that wasn't apparent in the testcases. I think it is something to do with what Tholme did in Template:Football squad start/sandbox and/or Template:Football squad mid/sandbox, but I can't work out what. It was a requested change as a result of the RfC, but I'm not sure this implementation really works, as it leaves a gap in the middle of the table when it switches to a single column. Cheers, Number 57 22:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Keith D and Nehme1499: I think I've fixed it in the sandbox. Does it look ok the in testcases? Number 57 23:13, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

The test cases look OK. Keith D (talk) 23:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Keith D: Do you want me to make the change? Or was the narrowing to a single column actually helpful? It was a requested outcome of the RfC, but I am unsure whether this is a satisfactory implementation of it due to the gap and repeated heading. Number 57 23:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Ah no, now it shows two columns side-by-side on mobile view. I think the idea was for it to be dynamic (side-by-side on PC, one above the other on mobile). Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 23:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, there is no way to differentiate between mobile and PC views. It's either always side-by-side on both, or one-below-the-other on both. Number 57 23:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

It was working on my end. On my phone, the columns were one below the other. On my laptop, they were next to each other. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 23:32, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

You can make the change. The single column is not very helpful as it doubles the length of the squad list. Keith D (talk) 23:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Keith D: Done. Number 57 23:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. That solves the problem on the article that I found it on. Keith D (talk) 23:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I think this last change should be reverted. The whole point was to use two tables that when there are enough width will be shown side by side. When there is not enough width (on narrow screens like mobiles), the tables will be shown one over the other. This was done by using two tables with display:inline-table set. Tholme (talk) 16:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tholme: The problem is that it didn't work properly. The second column of players didn't merge into the first, it just appeared beneath it, with a gap between the two tables and the header repeated. This wasn't a satisfactory solution as far as I can see. Number 57 19:55, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree that having it merged would be the best, but I think it is very difficult to make it work like that. The header is repeated in both cases, but you do not have to scroll sideways and having the tables squished. Repeating the header also have the added benefit that on small screens you can see the header when scrolling. Have you looked at the result for both cases on a mobile? Tholme (talk) 20:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

To be honest, I am less bothered about the header than the large gap, which makes it look like a new table starting again. Number 57 20:27, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, I think the gap should be fixable. I will try in the sandbox and see if I can make this work. See also the comments on Template talk:Football squad player. Maybe we should continue the discussing there? Tholme (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Managed to get rid of the gap, but as it is two different tables they don't match up. This probarbly looks even worse... One table in one column is probably the best. Tholme (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tholme: The result of the RfC was to have a responsive template (which could adjust to a single column on narrow screens), and if this was not possible, to retain the two column system. I wonder whether it might be possible to build a more agile table using a Lua module? Number 57 21:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think what you've done is too bad. The 'not matching up' issue could effectively be hidden by removing the background to the table – then all you'd see was that the 'player' heading was a different length (as everything else is a set width, the other columns all align. Number 57 21:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, I wonder whether it's possible to resolve by making the 'player' column heading fill whatever the remaining width of the table is (if the two columns are nested inside another hidden table. Ages ago I made a version where this heading width issue is solved, but I couldn't fix the problem of the columns being too far apart when they were side-by-side. Perhaps you could look at that as a potential solution? It is here. Cheers, Number 57 21:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tholme: Just pinging you again in case you didn't see my last two comments. Cheers, Number 57 21:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I have changed the background to be transparent, getting it to fill the remaining width I do not know how to achieve. Tholme (talk) 20:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit war

Hi number 57 , I wanted to say that you don't know politics in Belarus and I'm saying this as belarusian, you don't even know results of belarusian presidential election 2001. so if you don't know real results you put some wrong information? weird british man.. I wanted to stop this edit war and if you don't have information about results of election then I have. Check Central Election Comision archive. http://rec.gov.by/sites/default/files/pdf/Archive-Elections-PRB2001-Results.pdf

Cadbury Heath FC

Hi, you just left me a message about CHFC. I'm a club official at the football club and have to say that I find it more than a little irritating that you have felt the need to edit/undo the changes I made to our Wikipedia page yesterday. I notice from your bio that you want to encourage information being shared that isn't commonly known - yet you've stopped that happening for our club page. Not everything needs to have a link to a source - countless pages I view on Wikipedia contain information that isn't referenced. We are a small football club in Bristol, the reason for updating the page is to make sure our club info is as up to date as possible for use by our fellow clubs for match day programmes etc. Ask yourself what possible benefit do I gain by making false claims about club honours and player appearances etc and honestly what difference does it make if they're not referenced. I suggest you look at the page of every other non league club in England if you want to continue your mission of editor for Wikipedia. If you feel that strongly about everything then footnote my "claims" as unsubstantiated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:858C:9E00:89F2:5F94:EBD9:DDAF (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I left a note on the talk page of the IP address you were using earlier to explain the reasons, including pointing out that your undoing was also removing some corrections, links and sourcing. One problem with not having an account is that you often miss these messages.

You are welcome to add the information about Boon if you can provide a reliable source stating that he is the record appearance holder. Any information added to Wikipedia has to be WP:Verifiable by other editors and I could not find any such source (your website notes his number of appearances, but does not state it is a record). You are correct that not everything needs a source – but information that is likely to be challenged, which I think this falls into as a claim with specific numbers, does. Because other articles fail this test does not mean it is ok for the Cadbury Heath one to as well. I have several hundred non-league club articles on my watchlist and I would remove similar information being added to any of them without a source.

Also, as a club official, you should not be editing the article – this is a WP:Conflict of interest. You are welcome to make suggestions of how to improve the article by leaving messages on the talk page. Cheers, Number 57 19:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Notability

Hi number 57, what are your bases to determine this article is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia? what you know about the sport or the sacrifice these young guys do to be part of a team? and you to come and determine this is not sufficient enough to be in wikipedia? you are prevent all the handwork this guys go through to be rewarded by having a page with information on them. you are not contributing in anything and should find something better to do with your life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RICHARLOPEZ (talk • contribs) 23:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

The notability guideline for footballers (WP:NFOOTY) requires them to have played in a fully-professional league or have won a cap for a senior international team (futsal does not count towards this). You can see a list of fully-professional leagues (the ones identified so far) at WP:FPL. Number 57 23:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Not worth being part of wikipedia

Regarding my updates of Bashley FC.......Well if you can't update and amend data as it changes then wikipedia will die off. A ground name change is only valid if you build a new stadium !! what rubbish... seating capacity you rely on a source of 8 plus years ago and not one of 2 days ago....you have beaten me and proved to me wikipedia is worthless and I will not log on ever again... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bashrob (talk • contribs) 20:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2020

• News and notes: The high road and the low road

• In the media: Storytelling large and small

• Featured content: Going for the goal

• Special report: Wikipedia's not so little sister is finding its own way

• Op-Ed: The longest-running hoax

• Traffic report: Heart, soul, umbrellas, and politics

• News from the WMF: Fourteen things we’ve learned by moving Polish Wikimedia conference online

• Recent research: Detecting spam, and pages to protect; non-anonymous editors signal their intelligence with high-quality articles

• Arbitration report: A slow couple of months

• From the archives: Wikipedia for promotional purposes?

• Obituaries: Marcus Sherman, Jerome West, and Pauline van Till

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

About the parliamentary election infobox

The reason why I included non-ethnic parties into the minority parties (which are useful to some parties when certain bills are being passed: see here and here) category in the 1990 Romanian general election was because I was prompted with a warning stating that past the 11th value group, the infobox would only take the last value. Apparently, it shows all values normally, as according to your edits (like this one). Thank you for your interest in election articles! - Victor P. (talk) 12:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Victor P.: I think that warning pops up when you inadvertantly have two parameters with the same number (so if you accidentally use |party11 twice). I believe the infobox accepts an indefinite number of parties. Number 57 12:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Need an opinion re: Swiss constituency names

Hi! I would like to seek your opinion re: Swiss constituency names prior to 1919. The issue is that these constituencies were officially known by their numbers and were assigned to fixed areas in Switzerland only known through an unofficial name. Complicating this is that Switzerland has changed the assigned numbers on each constituency. Also, prior to the 1851 elections, these constituencies did not have a federal-assigned number and some were not numbered or named by their respective cantons. I would like to ask how do you think we should proceed with this in terms of naming. Thanks. --Migs005 (talk) 06:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Migs005: A good question. I actually have some excerpts from the Gruner book, as I accessed it in the British Library some time ago, but never got round to transcribing the results. I think it would be best to go with the numbers (e.g. Zurich 1, Zurich 2) where they exist. For the ones with no official numbers, I would just use the description in the Gruner book (he seems to have labelled them 'Fribourg 1, 2 etc). Number 57 11:23, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I guess that would make sense. Many thanks for this.--Migs005 (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Montenegrin parliamentary election

On 2 September 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Montenegrin parliamentary election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 03:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Elections by year

Template:Elections by year has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Jamaican general election

On 9 September 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Jamaican general election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 07:25, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2007 East Timorese parliamentary election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fernando de Araújo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:10, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Winchmore Hill F.C.

Thanks for fixing it up, I put that on my back-burner to sort it, but it seems you've already done it. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 13:22, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification sir

I will make sure that I change, thank you. Abubakar Balarabe (talk) 23:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

If I find an account with born 21 November 1960 how can I fix it? Can I arrange it like this (November 21, 1960) ? As you taught me. I want to give well presentable contribution on wikipedia. Thank you very much sir. Abubakar Balarabe (talk) 23:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your advice sir.

Sir, you can notice that from my contribution, i started reducing promotional contents from those pages that have tags of promotional contents or advertisement. What advise can you give me for that? I really appreciate your effort in making wikipidia standard. Abubakar Balarabe (talk) 10:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I truly want to contribute to wikipidia

Whatever page I edit, I will make sure that I contribute withing wikipidia policies in order to avoid being punished. I want to be just and fear in my contribution as a new user. I know that whatever I do is under your eyes. You see what every body does. I am very happy that you called my attention, you are indeed very kind administrator. Please, if I have any correction on my pattern of editing please sir let me know. I am very happy for meeting you. Abubakar Balarabe (talk) 10:47, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

"Next Cantabrian parlamentary election" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Next Cantabrian parlamentary election. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 21#Next Cantabrian parlamentary election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Paul_012 (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Bernio Verhagen

Hi Number_57,

I can see that you have declined the new article about Bernio Verhagen. However, you have not provided guidance regarding how we should move forward with the article. Bernio Verhagen has received intensive media attention in many countries on several continets for almost a year now but I understand that you believe that he is only notable for one event. Based on the guidelines, it is my understanding that an article should be created about the event in such a situation. Could you please state whether the article about Bernio Verhagen should be changed to an article about the "Event related to Bernio Verhagen" in order to get approved?

I really hope that you will be able to help with this.

Best regards,

Vandurt (talk) 17:05, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

There is no way to move forward. Neither the subject nor the event appear to be notable enough for an article. Not everything in the news is article-worthy. Number 57 17:24, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I am very surprised to hear this. Could you please elaborate on this? This event has received continuously media attention for almost a year (including several long reads) in maybe 20 different countries and a documentary about this person/event has been made and aired in television. Thus, the issue (1) has received in depth coverage in the media during a long period of time, (2) has received attention in many different geographical regions and in many different languages, (3) several news paper opinion articles have been written about the event, (4) has received attention beyond the normalt new cycle. Have you read all the articles and seen the documentary? Please provide some argument and let me know how you have reached this surprising conclusion. Vandurt (talk) 17:49, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Number_57. Never mind the above. I just noticed that someone else has created an article about Bernio Verhagen which has already been approved even though the other article was created long after mine(???). You can access it here Bernio Verhagen. This other version seems to be a direct translation of the Danish version of the article which I have drafted. I guess this shows the inconsistency in wikipedia's approving bureaucracy . I hope that you have changed your mind and that you will not nominate the other Bernio Verhagen article for deletion. Vandurt (talk) 18:08, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Hey Man how can i delete my wiki account?the reason why i want to do is Personal causes. EhsanAhmed (talk) 13:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@EhsanAhmed: See WP:VANISH. Number 57 14:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2009 Namibian general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Popular Democratic Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Opinion re: Luxembourg election articles

Hi! I was adding results by constituencies in several Luxembourg election articles and I noticed that in the results summary, percentages are listed down based on constituency percentages according to the source. Tried checking out the per constituency percentages and found that it's hard to connect the percentages in the summary and the per constituency results (assuming there's any connection). I was thinking of revising the summary percentages based on the total number of votes regardless of their participation in a constituency as is the usual case in election pages (best example would be Singapore election articles). I've actually made the mistake of revising the summary percentages without looking at the note but has since reverted them back to their original values. I would like to hear your opinions first on this matter whether to stick with the original values or to change them. Many thanks.Migs005 (talk) 02:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Migs005: These percentages are officially-published. They are calculated by dividing the party vote in each constituency by the number of seats available, then summing these figures to the national level to calculate the percentages. The idea is to give a true reflection of the vote share, rather than one that is distorted by voters being able to cast more votes in some constituencies than others.

I had a long and rather frustrating discussion about this issue at Talk:1974 Luxembourg general election with an editor who was determined not to understand and who repeatedly claimed government sources were not official.

I am open to either way to be honest. Now we have {{Election results}} that automatically calculates the percentages (which I had planned to start adding to Luxembourg election articles), it might be better to use the raw percentages in tables where it is not calculated automatically. Number 57 08:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out that discussion. The calculation now makes more sense. But I'll just leave it to community consensus on what happens with the percentages. There is another issue I've noticed re: Luxembourg election articles. It seems that on earlier elections, the publishing of official results tend to be inconsistent on the various newspapers I've been looking as sources. This usually leads to the summary and the by constituency results having small discrepancies. The 1922 election in particular saw the Luxemburger Wort publishing incomplete results for the Nord constituency (compared to a more complete summary from the Escher Tageblatt source that I ended up citing).Migs005 (talk) 09:18, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

confirm shahin abbasian

Please confirm Shahin Abbasian's article. I have solved all its problems — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyvanansarii1 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Keyvanansarii1: I have returned the article to draft space as you have not resolved the key problem – there is no evidence that he passes WP:NFOOTY as he needs to have played for the Iran senior national team or the Persian Gulf Pro League to be deemed notable. Number 57 13:06, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

• Special report: Paid editing with political connections

• News and notes: More large-scale errors at a "small" wiki

• In the media: WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later

• Featured content: Life finds a Way

• Arbitration report: Clarifications and requests

• Traffic report: Is there no justice?

• Recent research: Wikipedia's flood biases

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

• Special report: Paid editing with political connections

• News and notes: More large-scale errors at a "small" wiki

• In the media: WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later

• Featured content: Life finds a Way

• Arbitration report: Clarifications and requests

• Traffic report: Is there no justice?

• Recent research: Wikipedia's flood biases

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Problem with referendum wikitables

Hi, Number 57. I think there is a problem in how these referendum hand-made wikitables are made and used. The recent edits I did on 2006 Italian constitutional referendum made me think about this. The table reports the YES and NO percentage (from the template), which percentage is only for "Valid votes" which can't (probably never) be 100% of the "Total votes" - in that article is 98.88%, not 100%.

Actually, I think the problem is taking the the data from the template which is used for building these wikitables: the template automatically counts in percentage only YES and NO votes, that's why - in the 2006 referendum as example - it transforms 98,88% into (61.32+38.68) 100%. Excluding the 1.12%.

So only "Valid votes" (YES and NO) should be counted as "Total" in the wikitables, and "Invalid/blank" should not be added. This way though the "Registered voters/turnout" will give a wrong number as it counts the "Total votes" - even the "invalid/blank" and not only the "Valid" (YES and NO) ones. This creates en evident dissonance. I don't know if I made myself clear, sorry. Lone Internaut (talk) 13:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

If you're using the wikitable format, the invalid/blank should be included, but the percentage not detailed. This means the total votes row is correct for the sums above it.

An alternative is to use {{Referendum}}, which would display the result in the same way as the infobox, although it doesn't do the calculation automatically, so you have to enter the percentages yourself. Number 57 14:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

{{Referendum}} should be definitely used instead of hand-made wikitables. Thanks for the help, goodbye. Lone Internaut (talk) 04:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Template : Indian Elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Indian_elections&action=edit

I had added a new set of links which point to a totally different set of wiki pages. Please do not unroll that change. Your comment : 'don't need two sets of links' is wrong. Please tell how you will go from : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Gujarat to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Bihar. You could not. That is why a new set of links was added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.35.196.22 (talk) 15:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Having two sets of links is unnecessary. Please discuss the matter on the template's talk page and try and gain consensus for your change rather than forcing it in via reverting. Thanks, Number 57 15:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Election templates of US states

Hello. I'm turning to you as you are quite well versed in election template. I was wondering why the US states seem to be the only subnational entities to completely lack their own election template. Do you happen to know why that is? It's quite frustrating trying to search through the different elections and referendums without them. Maybe there's a project started somewhere. I would be eager to help.--Aréat (talk) 01:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Aréat: I think you're looking for Category:United States election year navbox templates? Number 57 08:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! So there isn't none of them, just only a few. Well, that's still a bit better.--Aréat (talk) 11:24, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Aréat: It seems most states use a siderbar instead (or in addition) to the footer template (see Category:United States election year templates. Number 57 11:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

PS, not sure if you worked it out, but if the {{Election results}} table has a colour for a party that isn't entered manually, it means it's calling one from a meta template, so you can edit if there if you need to. Cheers, Number 57 11:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I hadn't figured it out indeed. I had asked about it on the discussion on my page, and didn't push for an answer back then. I will use the meta template in the future. Cordially.--Aréat (talk) 11:42, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Aréat: Sorry, I must have missed that. Number 57 12:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

No problem.--Aréat (talk) 12:05, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Chris G. Hollins

Thanks for reviewing the above-referenced article. Just a quick question about WP:NPOLITICIAN which says it includes Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage which Mr. Hollins has recieved. There are at least 23 seperate sources for that coverage and more are popping up every few hours. With that information, would you consider reconsidering your position? Also, as to WP:COI, the parameters state Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships. No such relationship exists between Mr. Hollins and I. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14A:700:8AB0:5CD1:C99F:A3F3:6BDC (talk) 01:34, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I believe there is plenty of coverage to justify an article. Please see my response here. I created Christopher Hollins based on the material in the draft. --David Tornheim (talk) 07:35, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing my mess-up!

I am updating the 2015 election data within the constituency pages and I could not get the BPP link to work for the life of me. I thought made the necessary changes to fix the problem, but apparently I created another issue. Thank you for fixing things! Mlaliberte (talk) 13:44, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Statue of Cristiano Ronaldo

Hello, Number 57. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Statue of Cristiano Ronaldo".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

82.5.99.187

Can user:82.5.99.187 please be blocked ASAP for vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 13:53, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: Done. Number 57 13:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

2020 Northern Cypriot election

Hello! Thank you very much for the wonderful work you've been doing lately re. elections in Northern Cyprus. I'm hoping to get the article on the 2020 Northern Cypriot presidential election to ITN after we get the results on the 18th. I'd really appreciate if you could have a skim read of it and let me know if there's any major aspect that I'm missing out on or major problems that I can't spot atm. Thanks a lot! --GGT (talk) 00:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@GGT: Looks good – I've made a couple of tweaks to the intro and a slight reordering. I'll have a more thorough read through later. Number 57 12:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Halesowen Town F.C. Formation

Hello,

While I appreciate and like most of the changes you have made to my additions on the Halesowen Town F.C. page, I do not agree with your decision to change the 'founded' date in the information box. I think it is wrong to state 1870s more generally because it is either 1873 or 1877. There are no other options, so 1870s is too vague. Furthermore, other football clubs, such as Port Vale, use exactly the same terminology to describe their contested formation dates. Therefore, please do not continue to revert to your edit - it is wrong.

Kindest, Ben — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benbullock55 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Benbullock55: As the formation date is disputed between two dates in the 1870s, stating that the formation happened during the 1870s is clearly not wrong.

When you undid the edit (now twice), you undid the numerous other corrections, formatting fixes etc. Hitting the undo button without looking at what you are undoing is known as a "blind revert" and is considered very poor practice. Please stop doing this.

While I have let your edits stand, please be aware that it is also considered extremely poor practice to insert references to a book that you have written, as this is a clear conflict of interest. Number 57 17:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

My apologies, I was under the impression I was only reverting the one change. Nevertheless, I still disagree with the 1870s alteration. It is not that it is 'wrong', but it is needlessly vague, especially when other clubs use the same terminology I did. I hope it is obvious that I am not a wikipedia person; I did not mean to cause offense or create a conflict of interests. None of the edits I have made are out of self-interest, just love of the club. Please consider changing the 1870s date, I think it would be more purposeful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benbullock55 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Benbullock55: I haven't seen the Port Vale article, but I personally don't think the wording "disputed" and "speculated" – particularly the latter – is terribly encyclopaedic. In the absence of being able to explain fully the various claims in the space available, I think it's safer to put something that is certain. Number 57 17:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Saint Vincent

Hello. Just to add to it : the debates in the House of Lord before the termination of Saint Vincent link with the UK indeed mention there was no referendum (last paragraph). [4].--Aréat (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Aréat: Cheers – really odd that so many sources make reference to one. Number 57 15:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

2020 Moldovan presidential election

Not sure how you start a talk page properly. Just pressed the "talk" button.

My arguments were given there below:

There are more than 2 candidates. You can't place them all there. It would be unfair to place only 2 there.

Please revert your changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandu7ip (talk • contribs) 11:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sandu7ip: The solution is to add the others; I have added Năstase and Usatîi as a start. Number 57 12:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: I have added the rest in the order they appear on the ballot.

1973 Zambian general election

My only intention with the change I made at 1973 Zambian general election was to follow the consistency with other articles on Zambian elections. If you look at it, you will see that, pretty much, every election article starting with 1968 Zambian general election contain that parameter. Should it be removed from all those articles? – Sundostund (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sundostund: Yes, I think that would be a good idea. Cheers, Number 57 08:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Council elections in Clwyd

A tag has been placed on Category:Council elections in Clwyd requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Council elections in West Glamorgan

A tag has been placed on Category:Council elections in West Glamorgan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:51, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Liz: The categories were emptied without discussion, so I have reinstated the contents and advised the editor in question to take them to CfD. I can't remove the speedy tag (as the creator of the categories), so maybe you could. Cheers, Number 57 14:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

ALEH Negev update edit

In keeping with your comment upon my attempt to update the ALEH Negev page, I redid the edit, including sources for all statements, and uploaded the changes to the Talk:ALEH Negev page. This is the direct link to the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aleh_Negev As I am new to Wikipedia, I want to make sure I am doing this properly before attempting additional edits/uploads. Thanks so much for your help.Office 2020 (talk) 09:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Office 2020: I will take a look at some point in the next few days, but just a quick bit of advice: The text is unsuitable for Wikipedia in its present form. It looks like what might be written on the organisation's own website, not a neutral encyclopedia. For example, terms like "state-of-the-art", "professes to bestow a continuum of care in a warm, home-like atmosphere" and "and provides jobs to hundreds of area residents in a variety of fields", "reaches out to the entire spectrum of Israeli society" and so on are clearly promotional in nature.

Please cut back the text so it is purely factual and avoid the use of positive adjectives. Number 57 15:28, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@NUmber 57: I understood that if terminology is footnoted for source, it can be used. Many of these terms or phrases are quoted in specific articles that are footnoted in the text. Is that still problematic? I'm trying to get a hold on what is or isn't acceptable in Wikipedia. Thanks so much for your help!Office 2020 (talk) 08:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1992 Republic of the Congo presidential election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Independent.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Seychellois general election

On 28 October 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Seychellois general election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 19:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

ashington

{{start date and age}} this is year format but page locked, fix please

Hello. This isn't a requirement for articles, and personally I think it is unnecessary. Number 57 18:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Most abroad clubs use it so dont revert my effort at least! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.137.2.188 (talk) 19:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Then please stop adding it to articles. Number 57 19:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020

• News and notes: Ban on IPs on ptwiki, paid editing for Tatarstan, IP masking

• In the media: Murder, politics, religion, health and books

• Book review: Review of Wikipedia @ 20

• Op-Ed: Anti-vandalism with masked IPs: the steps forward

• Discussion report: Proposal to change board composition, In The News dumps Trump story

• Featured content: The "Green Terror" is neither green nor sufficiently terrifying. Worst Hallowe'en ever.

• Traffic report: Jump back, what's that sound?

• Interview: Joseph Reagle and Jackie Koerner

• News from the WMF: Meet the 2020 Wikimedian of the Year

• Recent research: OpenSym 2020: Deletions and gender, masses vs. elites, edit filters

• In focus: The many (reported) deaths of Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Politician's DOB

Hi N57 - hope you are well. I don't know if you're able to help find a WP:RS for the date of birth of Rob Roberts (politician)? As you can see from the article's edit history, this has become a bone of contention. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:35, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: Unfortunately I'm not aware of any. Unlike many national parliaments, the UK one does not publish dates of birth as standard on its MP profiles. Number 57 09:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

No problem - thanks for your help. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Vincentian general election

On 11 November 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Vincentian general election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 13:05, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including Anna von Gierke, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Chalfont St Peter AFC

This has been raised with you before. The squad list is sourced and on several other clubs at step 4-6 these are updated on Wikipedia. Thus it makes no sense as to why it was reverted. Please refrain in future from doing this or you will be reported to the site for unwanted reversions.

Who do you think you are [[User talk:Number 57|. Your level of arrogance knows no bounds. I have refrenced players/managers as i have said to you 5 times.I have also asked as to why it cant be used as it makes no other logical sense. If not please provide how details on how it can be refrenced so it stays in place? If you revert again, you will be will be reported and blocked from editing. Please refrain from reverting once again as previously mentioned.

Number 57== Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. ==

Number 57== Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion == Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. for Chalfont AFC Reversion edits

Removal of graphs

Hello Number57,

Recently you have removed some graphs added by me, as for as I know in the 2018 Luxembourg general election and the 2017 Liechtenstein general election. You reasoning is "not sure what graphs add." What gives you the authority to make that judgement? I know that you are an Administrator, but what is a better reasoning for those removals? Also, should not Wikipedia provide a variety of ways to view information?

Also, in consistency, for the 2013, 2009, 2004, 1999, 1994, 1989, 1984, 1979, 1974, 1968 (and so on) Luxembourg elections, there are popular vote and/or seats graphs. Why not 2018? For the 2013, 2009, 2005, 2001, 1997, October 1993, February 1993, 1989 (and so on) Liechtenstein elections, there are popular vote and/or seats graphs. Why not 2017?

Since I am not an Administrator, I will not put those graphs in. But I would like a better reasoning.

Thank you,

Jason594

My status as an adminstrator is irrelevant – this is me acting as an editor. I removed the graphs as I think they're not a useful addition to articles; IMO they take up space and don't add anything to the information contained in the table. I tend to delete them whenever I see them being added, or when editing an article that contains them. I have previously brought this up at WP:E&R and most editors who responded agreed, although admittedly there was not much participation in the discussion. Cheers, Number 57

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs

Thank you for your recent articles, including Anna von Gierke, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. This can be also done through this helpful user script: User:SD0001/DYK-helper. Let me know if you need help, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus: I used to do DYKs, and had over 40 featured, but at some point I got tired of going through what is a bit of a laborious process, so gave up on them (although as you can see a bit further down that list, I still make a note of the more interesting ones – certainly a bit more interesting than some of the dull stuff that seems to make it through the DYK process... Number 57 18:33, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Try the linked script, it makes the process less tedious. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:23, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Psagot

The template \Infobox Israel village\ states quite clearly on the template page, "This template is meant for Israeli villages" and Psagot is not an Israeli village. We have just had an entire discussion on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_September_21#Template:Infobox_Israel_municipality resulting in the deletion of that, which was also being improperly used for some West Bank settlements.

The proper template is the one I put, then editors need to fit in there whatever it is they think should be in there.Selfstudier (talk) 18:08, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

It clearly is an Israeli village. Are you denying Israeli settlements are Israeli?

Did you actually look at the impact your change had on the article? Virtually all the parameters in the infobox disappeared. Making disruptive changes for POV reasons is not a good look. Number 57 18:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Psagot is NOT an Israeli village. This discussion being pointless, I will take it to the talk page of the article.Selfstudier (talk) 18:25, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

This makes no sense. Are you saying it's not an Israeli settlement? Number 57 19:47, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Belizean general election

On 15 November 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Belizean general election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:00, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Presidential election

I think we should add the presidential election in {{{Lebanese elections}}} not matter if it's direct or indirect. It's an election, and in Lebanon. Maudslayer (talk) 12:08, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

These templates are only used for direct elections. Hence why presidential elections are not included in {{Italian elections}}, or the pre-2013 ones are not included in {{Czech elections}} or {{Turkish elections}}, or why only the two direct elections are included in {{German elections}}. Number 57 12:54, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Merge proposal which you may be interested in

Please see Tfd, where I proposed to merge Template:Lang-he-n into Template:Lang-he. Debresser (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Page moves

Thanks for sorting this. Looking at their countributions, the same user has made other page moves which should be reversed. Valenciano (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Valenciano: One step ahead of you! Number 57 17:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

acceptable uses of deprecated sources

Hi, I see you've left a comment here User_talk:Amigao#Telesurv about this. I'm now proposing a change to the guidelines here, feel free to share your opinion. Alaexis_¿question? 20:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Former Suffolk parishes

I have started some drafts for former civil parishes in Suffolk such as Draft:Hadleigh Hamlet, Draft:Hazlewood, Suffolk, Draft:St Nicholas South Elmham, Suffolk, Draft:Henham, Suffolk, Draft:Withersdale, Draft:Monks Risbridge, Draft:Warren House, Suffolk and Draft:Hardwick, West Suffolk so if you have any information for those you could add it. Also last year Rougham, Suffolk and Rushbrooke, West Suffolk were created. I know that you last created current parishes in April 2013 but I'm aware you have still been editing them sometimes. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

@Crouch, Swale: Thanks for the message. I don't think I have anything useful – the only source I used as standard was population estimates from the county council (which won't cover these defunct parishes) and tended to pull the rest off village websites if they had anything useful in them. I have a book of place name meanings, but I see you've already got that in the articles. 2013 was when I left the county; how time flies... Cheers, Number 57 17:46, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Russian Constituent Assembly members

Hi. Noticed you are creating articles on Russian Constituent Assembly members, great work. When I worked on the RCA articles some time back, I really struggled with having good sourcing of elected members and eventually got stuck on this point. Notably the election never had an official result, but different writers choosing to include or not different district results. For the elected members, there was a number of members accredited for the first (and only) session of the assembly but there are many others that could have been considered elected. Some appears to have been included after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly (when the rump assembly regrouped as an anti-Soviet opposition formation). Ideally I'd prefer only to have accredited members listed as members, but I can only find a original document listing of the members, no WP:RS. --Soman (talk) 00:27, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

@Soman: I'm afraid that's my lot – I was just doing articles on the women who were elected. This site contains an A-Z of Assembly members (also detailing their parties and constituencies), if this is of use. Number 57 17:39, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks. So, my concern is specifically with the Hrono site (using material from Protosov's research), I used it for the lists but then in some constituencies the number of 'elected' members vary very much with the number of seats initially allocated. For example, comparing with the Soviet era historian Spirin the Protosov numbers are much higher. --Soman (talk) 18:33, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2020

• News and notes: Jimmy Wales "shouldn't be kicked out before he's ready"

• Op-Ed: Re-righting Wikipedia

• Opinion: How billionaires re-write Wikipedia

• In the media: Relying on Wikipedia: voters, scientists, and a Canadian border guard

• Featured content: Frontonia sp. is thankful for delicious cyanobacteria

• Traffic report: 007 with Borat, the Queen, and an election

• News from Wiki Education: An assignment that changed a life: Kasey Baker

• GLAM plus: West Coast New Zealand's Wikipedian at Large

• Wikicup report: Lee Vilenski wins the 2020 WikiCup

• Recent research: Wikipedia's Shoah coverage succeeds where libraries fail

• Essay: Writing about women

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Help

Important person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tzahi_(Zack)_Weisfeld — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.12.195.208 (talk) 16:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

moved by User:Politicsfan4

Hi,

I had been watching the move log when I noticed the user rename a page to 2018 Guam general election. and I saw your name in the page logs. Should they all be reverted due to WP:NC-GAL? Starzoner (talk) 04:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

@Starzoner:

Hey,

I moved the page names because elections in the United States do not use demonyms in their page titles, for example, the 2018 governor election in Alaska is named "2018 Alaska gubernatorial election", not "2018 Alaskan gubernatorial election". Using "Guamanian" in the title is not consistent with other American election naming conventions. Politicsfan4 (talk) 05:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

@Starzoner: Yes, this set of moves was incorrect. Contrary to the claim by Politicsfan4, US territories do use the adjectival form in their article titles – for example 2020 Puerto Rican general election or 2020 American Samoan general election. I've moved them all back. Cheers, Number 57 12:16, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: I was unaware of this, thank you! Politicsfan4 (talk) 16:50, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Seems a little inconsistent. There should be a clearer guideline here instead of just precedent. But I'd go with the territories having the same guideline as the rest of the country. It was originally titled "Guam gubernatorial election" after all and I think Number 57 is the one who changed it and has vigilantly opposed any effort to switch back. Kingofthedead (talk) 21:32, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Over-revert

Careful undoing improvements when reverting, as here. Cheers! -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@JHunterJ: Apologies, no idea how I did that. Cheers, Number 57 16:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Unecessary Symbols?

Hi. Thank you for fixing up the general elections pages (especially making the 2020 table smaller). However, I noticed you removed the increase/decrease symbols for being unecessary. Is there a reason for this because I have seen them be used in most election tables for other countries (example). I also changed the colour for the MRTKL to be a HEX code rather than the meta/color. This is because the meta/color appeared blue while the actual MRTKL page has a purple colour which is in line with the party logo. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 16:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

These symbols are used on some articles, but definitely only a minority (I have several thousand election articles on my watchlist and the vast majority do not use them). I don't think they are a positive addition and I find the use of the {{Steady}} template particularly unhelpful as to an uninformed reader, it's not clear what it actually means (is it zero, or is it N/A?)

Regarding the MRTKL colour template, for some reason the infobox of the article on the party did not use the template; I have now added it, so there is consistency. If you think colours in meta templates are wrong, you can edit them. This template is at Template:Revolutionary Liberation Movement Tupaq Katari/meta/color.

Also, as you'll have seen from my edit summary at the 1997 election article, please never say something is unknown in Wikipedia's voice. It is unknown to you and me, but presumably someone out there knows it. Something can only said to be unknown if we have reliable sources saying it is, rather than simply being unable to find the answer ourselves.

A few other tips:

• Numbers in results tables should be right-aligned
• Please use meta colour templates where they exist; this ensures consistency across articles if a colour is tweaked
• I would advise avoiding adding footnotes to tables if the point can be made in other ways. For example, in the 1997 article, the results table isn't really the place to say that the parties contested the previous election together. This could instead be mentioned in the campaign section.

Also, something I've just realised that is quite concerning – you changed the 1993 election results for a few candidates and sourced it to a book published in 1983. What is going on with that? I have restored the original source and its numbers. Number 57 17:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

PS, it seems you're using Visual Editor. This isn't very good when editing tables, as it can make a bit of a mess of the code. I would advise editing the code if you can. Cheers, Number 57 18:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the assistance, my main focus so far has been on biographies not electoin tables. I use both the Visual Editor and Source Editor. As for sourcing, I see the issue. I used Carlos Mesa's book Presidentes de Bolivia: entre urnas y fusileswith the version I'm using being the third edition published in 2003. However, the original book was published in 1983 and that was the edition cited. Thank you for pointing that out and it has since been corrected.Krisgabwoosh (talk) 18:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Also, another point – red links are not 'dead links'. It's perfectly acceptable (and even encouraged) to have redlinks to topics that are notable but not yet written about. Parties that win seats in national elections are almost always going to be notable, so the links in the 1993 election article are appropriate. See WP:REDYES. Cheers, Number 57 18:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah, very well. Thank you very much for your assistance (and patience). Cheers! Krisgabwoosh (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

On another note, now that I have corrected the source date for Mesa's book, there is the issue that the numbers in the 2003 edition are indeed different to Nohlen. The following differences are:

• Nohlen: AP - 346,865, UCS - 226,816, ARBOL - 30,867, EJE - 18,176, MKN - 12,627.
• Mesa: AP - 346,811, UCS - 226,819, ARBOL - 30,864, EJE - 18,123, MKN - 12,681.

Which source do you believe would be best? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 18:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Nohlen is used througout the article series, so probably best for consistency? There also appear to be many more sources using the same figures as Nohlen[5] compared to the Mesa ones[6] The PDBA and this paper also agrees with Nohlen, although the former appears to have a typo in the AP figures. Number 57 18:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

That's probably best. The third edition was published in 2003 and I do not own copies of subsequent editions to see if the numbers have been revised.Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

On Mohun Bagan A.C. and ATK Mohun Bagan FC

There is still confusion going on. The new merged club actually have the same logo and jersey of Mohun Bagan A.C.. The owners itself declared that its the continuation of Mohun Bagan. But they act differently on social media. But technically its a new club. But considering the comment from the owners its better to retain the clubs history in the new article.

The iconic green and maroon colours of the Mohun Bagan jersey retained. This ensures that the brand entity is upheld of the century-old club.[7] Poppified (talk) 17:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Please leave me out of this dispute. It's clear that there are three clubs and therefore three articles are required. Number 57 17:20, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

sorry. I am trying to stop this dispute at earliest.So sorry on disturbing you.Thanks Poppified (talk) 17:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014–15 FC Winterthur season

Hallo, you participated in this discussion in its early stages. Therefore, I would take the liberty to ask you if you would like to review 2014–15 FC Winterthur season again. In the meantime, I have added texts and citations. Perhaps you would like to add a new comment, and perhaps with a couple of suggestions, to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014–15 FC Winterthur season discussion page. Your opinion would be appreciated. Thank you very much for your participation and please feel free to delete this message from your page, if you so wish. Thanks again and kindest greetings from Switzerland --Huligan0 (talk) 22:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Ghanaian general election

On 10 December 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Ghanaian general election, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Somali presidential elections

Template:Somali presidential elections has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. jp×g 21:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

For helping look through 2021 Somali presidential election. This is the first article I've written in serious depth about an election, and boy is it more complicated than I thought it would be!! You seem to know what's up with elections, so I appreciate the help. jp×g 01:00, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

East German elections

Hello. I am aware that you are not a fan of articles on indirect elections. But, having in mind that most of articles at Template:German presidential elections are about indirect elections, I think that articles on East German presidential elections (held in 1949, 1953 and 1957) should be created and added there, for the sake of consistency. Cheers, —Sundostund (talk) 01:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Colwyn Bay

I have twice added details to a page only to have it deleted twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AW76 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@AW76: Yes, because (a) it was unsourced and (b) it's not generally a good idea to have squadlists for clubs playing at low levels, as they are not updated frequently enough. Also, a match report is not a suitable reference for a squad – it only shows the players used on matchday. Number 57 17:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

First of all I had sourced it from their most recent game. Low level? It’s the second tier in Wales end the squad has been up for most of the year before I actually removed it due to uncertainty over when the season would start. Up until then I had been updating it on a regular basis. AW76 (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@AW76: As I said, a match report is not a suitable source for a squad. If the club doesn't list the current squad here or the league website doesn't have it, I think you are stuck. Number 57 18:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Well once they do - which I know they will be doing once the league season gets underway - I will update the page. AW76 (talk) 18:53, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 Romanian legislative election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Green Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Everything okay with you?

Regards to the wiki page - Kaido Koppel that was rejected by you. Could you explain a bit more what makes you think this page is "not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia".

Your comment: Fails WP:NFOOTY as has never played or managed in a fully-professional league. Number 57 11:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

He has never played or managed in a fully professional league? Okay, maybe you do yourself a favour and read again what this page is about, he has played and he is managing in a fully professional league. Really, it's not that difficult.

Best wishes! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herthaaltedame (talk • contribs) 22:47, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

The Meistriliiga is not a fully-professional league – see Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues, where it is listed under 'Top level leagues which are not fully professional'. Number 57 22:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

So you saying it fails Fails WP:NFOOTY, lets take a closer look:

Players are deemed notable if they meet any of the criteria below:

1. Have played for a fully professional club at a national level of the league structure. This must be supported by evidence from a reliable source on a club by club basis for teams playing in leagues that are not recognised as being fully professional. 2. Have played in a competitive fixture between two fully professional clubs in a domestic, Continental or Intercontinental club competition. 3. Have played FIFA recognised senior international football or football at the Olympic games. 4. Pre-professional (amateur era) footballers to have played at the national level of league football are considered notable (no other level of amateur football confers notability).

1. You can see from the page and from linked sources that he has played in fully professional clubs in the league. 2. So if two fully professional teams are playing in Estonian Meistriliiga(Championship), then it also meets the criteria. I am happy to provide you links to match protocols. 3. He has not been on the pitch but on the registered squad in the international level - U21. 4. Not really sure what is meant by it.

And he is a manager of a fully professional football team, there are only few bottom teams that are semi-professional. As far as I understand, if one of the criteria is met then it meets WP:NFOOTY and he meets pretty much all of them.(Just not sure by the meaning of point 4) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herthaaltedame (talk • contribs) 23:00, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

You are confusing WP:FOOTYN (which is not a guideline) with WP:NFOOTY, which is. He does not pass the guideline's criteria, which only grants notability to senior international players/managers and Players who have played, and managers who have managed, in a competitive game between two teams from fully professional leagues. Number 57 23:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

But yet what I referred to provides the person a notability in all categories so there is a conflict on what is notable and what is not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herthaaltedame (talk • contribs) 23:17, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

No, there is no conflict. There is only one notability guideline: WP:NFOOTY. What you have quoted above (from WP:FOOTYN) is what the guideline used to be many years ago (it was changed to refer to fully professional leagues in 2007 or possibly earlier) and is only stated there for reference, hence the highlighted text above it stating The player section of this notability guidance has been superseded by WP:Notability (sports), and is included below for information only as a record of the previous guidance that the Footy project came up with. Number 57 23:25, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

That's unfortunate, what a great page I created for an up and coming manager, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herthaaltedame (talk • contribs) 12:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I assume then that even with WP:GNG guideline there is not enough publish this wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herthaaltedame (talk • contribs) 18:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't appear so. You would need non-routine coverage of him (i.e. not just stories about transfers, joining new clubs, match reports etc) for WP:GNG to be met. I see you have declared a conflict of interest with the subject and that this is your only contribution to Wikipedia. May I ask why you are so keen to get an article on him published? Number 57 18:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Template reverts

Might I remind you that consensus isn't a vote, and that giving people two weeks to voice their objections after pinging the wikiproject is far more in line with what we expect conduct wise than using one's admin bit to revert things based on personal aesthetics. The current template causes horrible and unfixable issues on fairly easy-to-hit cases and it was a mistake that I ever brought these changes over during the template rewrite (which I did myself, over the space of months). I don't appreciate having my time wasted like this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

The 'fix' causes horrible issues with the Senior career section, as can be clearly seen at Template:Infobox football biography/testcases#Wrapping_of_long_columns. I have left a message on the project talkpage requesting more input. Are you seriously moaning at me for using my admin powers to revert (which I didn't anyway, as the template is only protected to template editor level), when you presumably thought you had used yours to implement something there was clearly no consensus for? Number 57 16:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I gave it two weeks. I don't really expect to have to summon a Papal conclave to get a template updated. The wrapping is unfortunate, but literally everyone else on the encyclopedia lives with it, and it can be overridden in pathological cases with {{nowrap}}. If everything comes down to an ILIKEIT pileon then we'll never improve things. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I've suggested an alternative solution (changing 'Playing position(s)' to 'Position(s)'), that gets the Maradona example to almost exactly the same width as the template below (it's a better match width-wise than the version with the nowrap function removed). This is also consistent with other sports infoboxes (which only use 'Position(s)'), and should knock a good chunk of the width off infoxes like Ali Daei's. Number 57 17:33, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Right. Well, let's see if we can work out an acceptable compromise. Cheers. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't appear so. You would need non-routine coverage of him (i.e. not just stories about transfers, joining new clubs, match reports etc) for WP:GNG to be met. I see you have declared a conflict of interest with the subject and that this is your only contribution to Wikipedia. May I ask why you are so keen to get an article on him published?

Would be hard to provide much coverage from non-routine, as he is a football manager and this is his profession and where he works. It just felt a bit frustrated putting in quite a few hours of effort(my first ever Wiki page, so ran into obstacles), to realise it's not meeting the criteria, just because some of his opponents in the league are semi-professional(bottom teams) and looking at what player have their pages, not just in Estonia but I mean more in general, just because they played one U19 match in their career for example. This person, firstly I know him a bit personally, and though I would be interested to make one, as I work in sports data industry myself, so collecting numbers, etc is fun for me. But it's not about personal reasons why I created it. He is probably one of the most promising football managers in the Estonian league right now, if you google you can see he is being covered quite a bit, some shows he has been invited(football-focused). Even though the league here is categorised as "semi-pro", the majority of it is not, they do this for living. This person in topic has been invited in past mulitple times to Bundesliga teams to coaching and also in Premier League(Spurs, Fulham etc.). Anyway, I respect the rulebook here, otherwise, there would be probably too many unnecessary personal pages, but I guess there could be improvements made, especially how smaller football(sports in general) can get recognition. Thanks and sorry for the initial subject name. Merry Christmas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:FC:D71E:5D14:4984:4BBE:DF5:F50F (talk) 13:28, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

William Groves, Australian educator

Regarding inclusion of William Groves (educator) in Category:Australian educators, [8][9] - the article is in Category:Australian National University faculty, which is a subcategory of Category:Faculty by university or college in the Australian Capital Territory, which is a subcategory of Category:Faculty by university or college in Australia, then Category:Australian academics, which is in Category:Australian educators, thus per WP:SUBCAT, the article does not need to be in Category:Australian educators directly.

Is there something wrong with the category hierarchy? Should one of the categories in the chain be removed from its parent instead? If so, which one? Mitch Ames (talk) 22:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

@Mitch Ames: Yes, I don't think this hierarchy works – I would say Category:Faculty by university or college in Australia should not sit beneath Australian academics (which is stated to be for people of Australian nationality), as not all faculty at Australian university will be Australians. If I can compare it to football, a category like Category:Chelsea F.C. managers is not a subcategory of Category:English football managers, as not all Chelsea managers have been English. Instead we have a top level category Category:Football managers in England, beneath which we have the nationality category (for English managers) and the club categories (for managers of all nationalities) as separate trees. Cheers, Number 57 22:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

The big problem with these sort of conversations - it really should be at the Australian notice board (regardless of how inactive it may seem at times) as far too often australian category structures and relationships are discussed and dispensed with in dark corners over the last ten years and more, in terms of trying to find others even interested in the subject can be like (think of any metaphor of an impossible task)... well in the sense of at least seeing if there is any interest at all... JarrahTree 00:38, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to add something to WP:AWNB, linking to the discussion here. Likewise feel free to constructively comment on the actual issue at hand - the cat structure. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:08, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs

Thank you for your recent articles, including Irena Kosmowska, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. This can be also done through this helpful user script: User:SD0001/DYK-helper. Let me know if you need help, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including Irena Kosmowska, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Number 57, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Starzoner (talk) 17:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays! Starzoner (talk) 17:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Polish United Party politicians

A tag has been placed on Category:Polish United Party politicians requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020

• News and notes: Year-end legal surprises cause concern, but Public Domain Day is imminent

• In the media: Concealment, data journalism, a non-pig farmer, and some Bluetick Hounds

• Arbitration report: 2020 election results

• Opinion: How to make your factory's safety and labor issues disappear

• Featured content: Very nearly ringing in the New Year with "Blank Space" – but we got there in time.

• Traffic report: 2020 wraps up

• News from the WMF: What Wikipedia saw during election week in the U.S., and what we’re doing next

• Recent research: Predicting the next move in Wikipedia discussions

• Essay: Subjective importance

• Op-Ed: An unforgettable year we might wish to forget

• Gallery: Angels in the architecture

• Humour: 'Twas the Night Before Wikimas

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Sir Dawda Jawara.

Sir Dawda Jawara was actually knighted before The Gambia became a republic in 1970, therefore, 'Sir' is actually part of his name as an honorific - and he remained known as 'Sir Dawda' right up until his death in 2019. - (124.197.55.28 (talk) 01:24, 28 December 2020 (UTC))

It doesn't mean we use it in articles. Number 57 17:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1999 Salvadoran presidential election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francisco Flores.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Niger Election Results Table

Hey, I was able to power through and get all 30 candidates into a results table. Not sure if this helps, but you can copy the code from my Sandbox page as provisional results are now trickling in. User:Sputink/sandbox#Niger. I wont have time to proof it, but should save you time with all the table code. Sputink (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Number 57: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. Starzoner (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

I wish you a prosperous 2021! Starzoner (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Wishing you a happy 2021!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Number 57: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. Hhkohh (talk) 16:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Burkina Faso

Recently I updated Burkina Faso National Assembly election results from the corresponding article in French Wikipedia. Could you look for some more info to add? Regards, Ppt2003 (talk) 10:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Next Slovak parliamentary election

Again, placeholder images are not generally considered a good idea.

Why?

--178.143.104.222 (talk) 16:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Image placeholders, in particular ("As of 2020 all placeholder images have been removed from the main namespace."). Number 57 16:24, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

---

I understand. Thanks for the explanation. I have one problem with this page. Colors are poorly displayed in the page information table. These are written correct in the source code, but appear completely different. Don't know where the problem is? Or could you look at it?

--178.143.104.222 (talk) 16:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I think I've fixed the issue. If not, can you point me to what it is? Cheers, Number 57 17:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs

Thank you for your recent articles, including Maria Moczydłowska, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. This can be also done through this helpful user script: User:SD0001/DYK-helper. Let me know if you need help, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including Maria Moczydłowska, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Citations

In most articles I edit, there is no established format of references; different formats are used within the same article. In the Bezalel Smotrich article I most recently edited, most references use the {{cite web| format, but a few do not. I'm changing those, so all references will look the same. Is that a problem? Wikipedia:Citing sources says that "imposing one style on an article with inconsistent citation styles" is helpful. Aquila89 (talk) 20:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Well, you started the Smotrich article, and you didn't use the {{cite web format. But now, most of the citations on the article use that format. Should all that be changed? Aquila89 (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Nohlen book

• Thanks, #57, for the link, which I will throw in. I've seen so many election articles that recite Dieter Nohlen without guide to check that I thought it was more of a crutch to attribute everything to him. Mandsford 21:45, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for creating so many of the election articles. They are a go-to for everything I'm looking to verify for specific events. I started the "months of the 20th century" project 11 years ago for the early years of the century, from January 1900 onward with the same objective of providing accurate information. Mandsford 22:51, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Members of the First Legislative Yuan

Template:Members of the First Legislative Yuan has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Primefac (talk) 11:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

What are you doing?

North Korea does not have a parliamentary system.. it has an "Election of Deputies to the Supreme People's Assembly". The term "Election of Deputies" is more correct then parliamentary or general election.. Or are you saying that North Korea has a parliamentary system, is a constitutional monarchy or has Western/liberal democratic system? --Ruling party (talk) 19:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

And how are my "moves" disprutive? Aren't you're moves disruptive?? --Ruling party (talk) 19:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes.. But are any of those examples communist? No. So they don't fit the bill. --Ruling party (talk) 19:49, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

And North Korea doesn't have a parliament... --Ruling party (talk) 19:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

After a quick Google search. Vietnam officially calls its elections "Elections of the 14th National Assembly" (Laos the same) and the Soviets called it "Election of Deputies to the [number] Supreme Soviet" (see Russian WP). So communist matter.. They don't call their elections legislative, general or parliamentary because their system is neither legislative or parliamentary... --Ruling party (talk) 19:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

its not a parliament by any definition that I know off (and by its own constituion https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peoples_Republic_of_Korea_1998.pdf ) just like the United States Congress is not a parliament.. --Ruling party (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

So facts don't matter? This is communist! Truth matters. Especially when no one calls North Koreans elections parliamentary (not even themselves). --Ruling party (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Shmuel Toledano

Hi, you have just reverted my correction of his date of birth. Correct date is 16 December 1920, as advised by his son (when called today to congratulate him on his 100th birthday, and corrected that the congrats are one month belated...). The Knesset source used in ref is also one month off. I don't know a better source to a person's DOB than his own testimony. Thanks. Magister (talk) 18:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Magister: You need to provide a source that is WP:Verifiable – someone's word is not sufficient. You could also write to the Knesset to advise them they've got it wrong if you have sufficient proof (this has previously resulted in them making a correction). Number 57 18:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

42.98.152.51

Can 42.98.152.51 (talk · contribs) please be blocked ASAP. She is persistently vandalizing, and she just came off of a 2-week block within the past 24 hours. CLCStudent (talk) 12:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: Done. Number 57 13:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Monke123444

Can user:Monke123444 please be blocked ASAP for vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 13:13, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: Done. Number 57 13:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020–21 Central African general election

On 21 January 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020–21 Central African general election, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 01:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Heyho!

I saw you moved the National Assembly page back! See this and this.

As far as I know the Kingdom of Laos had only one chamber... --Ruling party (talk) 10:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

You're wrong. See e.g. this or this (p149–150). The constitution you provide also mentions the King's Council. Please stop the rash moves. Number 57 12:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

So scholarly article beat the constitution??? --Ruling party (talk) 14:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

The constitution does not say the National Assembly was the unicameral legislature. It describes the responsibilities of the King's Council, which are similar to other appointed upper houses, and its members are granted the same status as members of the National Assembly. Number 57 14:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I think you should stop being so sure of yourself and actually question the sources you have in front of you. YOu even wrote a section on you're user page on this kind of behaviour. --Ruling party (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

India local elections

I want to get a system down for titling the articles that can be applied to all states, because the way local elections are organized is set in New Delhi and so there's no reason to use a mix of different naming conventions. For the templates I had been differentiating panchayat vs municipal, because these are the two pillars of local government in India; in states where they are held in the same year I just used "local". But in those cases where the articles actually exist they tend to deal with only one or the other — for example the Uttarakhand articles, which are titled "local body" but only cover the municipal elections. On a related note, Walrus Ji did something to each of the India state templates a few days ago; I noticed you undid at least part of it on one of them. Sladnick (talk) 09:15, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sladnick: I personally think having all elections titled 'local elections' would be the way to go. In the UK we have elections to county councils, metropolitan boroughs, district councils,d unitary authorities and special authorities like the London Assembly, City of London Corporation and Isles of Scilly Council, as well as positions like city mayors and police commissioners all under 2021 United Kingdom local elections etc. Number 57 14:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Would it be okay if we name all the articles "local" (except where more specific ones already exist) but have separate lists on the templates for panchayat vs municipal? Because it is the Indian system to clearly differentiate them, and as more of these articles are beginning written that's the reality of how it's being implemented. Sladnick (talk) 22:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sladnick: Are the panchayat elections actually notable? From reading Panchayati raj, it looks like they are village councils? We have something similarin the UK (parish councils), but their elections are not deemed notable for the purposes of Wikipedia. Number 57 22:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the gram panchayat, village-level elections are only the lowest tier of the system. There are also zila panchayat, which are like the equivalent of counties, and then most states have an intermediate tier of panchayat samiti. The elections for all these posts are generally held at the same time; some states hold the village elections separate from the higher tiers, but even then it's coordinated state-wide so millions or tens of millions still participate in the voting. Sladnick (talk) 22:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Article on the system in India. Sladnick (talk) 22:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sladnick: As you know far more about the subject than me, I will defer to you on a decision. Cheers, Number 57 23:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

So

So I was waiting for a response so that we could resolve this, and you deleted our conversation?? --Ruling party (talk) 23:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Since you're not willing to act constructively and reach a common solution that will improve the article I will take this conflict to an administrator or a board of administrators (if that even exists).

Wikipedia is collaboration. If you change you made I'm always here, but if you're not interested I'm going to contact responsible stakeholders that can help us reach a conclusion that makes that article better. --Ruling party (talk) 22:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ruling party: I've provided you with evidence that your move and changes were not correct. What more do you want? If you insist you are correct as you did during the discussion over the North Korean election articles, you can start another WP:RM on the article's talk page. You could also use the WP:RfC process to request comments on whether the parliament was unicameral or bicameral. Number 57 22:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I provided you with the constitution and a third party source that you're position is incorrect. YOu are acting like my references don't count.

As for the North Korean election I am correct. The title of the page is titled incorrectly. North Korea does not have a parliamentary system and you know that as well. That argument proves however that you are in WP:BADFAITH towards me and are using it as an argument that to avoid having a proper discussion. --Ruling party (talk) 22:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't see what else there is to discuss – I don't have anything more to say than what I've already said (and I will again point out that the constitution says nothing about whether the parliament was bicameral or unicameral). Start an RM or RfC if you want other views on the matter. Number 57 23:02, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

It has to be the first constitution that fails to state that its parliament is composed of two houses... And you are again "forgetting" the other source.

I propose splitting the article, one about the National Assembly of the Kingdom of Laos and another about the Privy Council of the Kingdom of Laos. I'll try to write an article that is similar to the Prime Minister of Laos article.

Does that sound like a fair bargain? --Ruling party (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The article does not need splitting, as it is a valid article by itself. However, there is nothing stopping you creating additional articles on the two houses if they can be expanded significantly beyond what is in the existing article (although you should not use this an an opportunity to claim that the National Assembly was unicameral). The upper house is referred to as the King's Council in most sources, so the article title should be King's Council (Laos) if an article were to be created. Number 57 17:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm asking to split this article so we don't end up with an edit-warring and administrators that fix this for use. We make the current page a disambig page and we don't use the term "unicameral" and "bicameral". --Ruling party (talk) 10:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't support this. Again, if you want to make changes to the article, start an RfC or similar. I am not going to agree to your proposals. Number 57 13:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Norwegian National holiday

Hi. Norwegian National holiday is the Constitution day on May 17 (1814). The title you created is false. Please revert.--11piemontesibellitosti (talk) 00:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Basildon United F.C. managers has been nominated for deletion

Category:Basildon United F.C. managers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cupper52 (talk) 12:38, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Two-chances-system tournament

Hello!

Thank you very much for your quick revision!

I do confirm, that I am the author of the papers on the concept. I have written this papers in 2012 and 2013. This papers are now in the german national library. I have designed this Wikipedia-article just as a reference for another type of tournament. I have wrote it in a neutral manner. I would like to keep this knowledge alive, maybe somebody finds it interesting and useful.

Can you please explain me, what is the problem. What must I do?

Best regards --Mathecrat (talk) 20:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

The main problem is that the subject does not appear to have any notability. The only reference used in the article that mentions the idea is your book, and searching online, the only mentions of the concept are either websites selling the book, articles you wrote about it, or the German Wikipedia article you wrote.

Secondly, you have an clear WP:Conflict of interest with the subject and should not be writing an article on it. I would suggest you make this clear on the German Wikipedia, where the article is in mainspace. You can read about their rules at de:Wikipedia:Interessenkonflikt. Basically, you should not be using Wikipedia (of any language) to promote your ideas. Number 57 21:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you very much for your prompt reply.

Now I understand the problem.

Please delete my draft/article with all attachments.

Best regards --Mathecrat (talk) 15:28, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

PS: Maybe you can recommend to me on which web platform I could place this article?

I have deleted the draft. With regards to other websites, I'm afraid I don't really have any advice to offer. Number 57 15:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Mabel Coleman Reid.png

Thanks for uploading File:Mabel Coleman Reid.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry, this person know how to add ketchup. NYC Guru (talk) 15:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@NYC Guru: Er, what? Number 57 15:46, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

You prolly triggered this message because you uploaded the image first and then tagged it. Being you're experienced I would suggest you put a {{bots|deny}} on your talkpage but since you have an automatic archiver bot this would not be feasible for you unless you manually archive your talk text. Maybe for next time put the tag into the description box when you upload and this won't happen again. I've dozens of new editors get hammered by these auto messages that it make it look like the a someone copied and pasted the message 5-6 times. NYC Guru (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@NYC Guru: Actually, I forgot the tag until the bot reminded me :) TBH I don't recall receiving any of these types of messages that was incorrect (another one I trigger occasionally is linking to DAB pages). But, yes I agree it can be overwhelming for new users. I wonder if the bot can be configured to combine such messages. Cheers, Number 57 17:12, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

No problem. And after taking a look at your userpage, I remember these, too. NYC Guru (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2021

• News and notes: 1,000,000,000 edits, board elections, virtual Wikimania 2021

• Special report: Wiki reporting on the United States insurrection

• In focus: From Anarchy to Wikiality, Glaring Bias to Good Cop: Press Coverage of Wikipedia's First Two Decades

• Opinion: Wikipedia's war against scientific disinformation

• In the media: The world's press says "Happy Birthday!" with a few twists

• Technology report: The people who built Wikipedia, technically

• Videos and podcasts: Celebrating 20 years

• News from the WMF: Wikipedia celebrates 20 years of free, trusted information for the world

• Recent research: Students still have a better opinion of Wikipedia than teachers

• Humour: Dr. Seuss's Guide to Wikipedia

• Featured content: New Year, same Featured Content report!

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2020

• Obituary: Flyer22 Frozen

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

2021 Kosovan parliamentary election

Hello :) I wanted to talk about the opinion polls of 2021 Kosovan parliamentary election page. An user removed Vjosa Osmani List from the table of the polls and I am against that edit. Yesterday I got an message from Lëvizja Vetëvendosje office that communicated to me the confirmation about the coaliton with Vjosa Osmani List. User:WalterII is deleting a lot of edits and I think this is not right. - Kreshnik Prizreni — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kreshnik Prizreni (talk • contribs) 20:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The issue is that you cannot use something that has been told to you privately. Information on Wikipedia needs to be WP:Verifiable by other editors. Number 57 20:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Iulianrusse33123

Hi there. You blocked Iulianrusse33123 (talk · contribs) in December for disruptive editing. They're back at it again. :-/ Robby.is.on (talk) 21:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Court of Policy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fort Zeelandia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry about that

Sorry just wanted to be able to sort the counties by candidate vote share. can you add that function to the table? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:447:C200:460:CD68:6AD1:EAE:1870 (talk) 01:23, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

It seems they can only be sortable if the table is not collapsed. If you remove "collapsible collapsed" from the class, it will be sortable, but then the table is displayed in full. Number 57 01:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Women in Red Barnstar
		By writing hundreds of succinct biographies of women parliamentarians throughout the world and including them in your List of the first female members of parliament by country, you have made a really significant contribution to Wikipedia's coverage of women.

--Ipigott (talk) 10:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Recognition of Kosovo

Hello dear, I hope you are doing well. Today I checked the page of Kosovo and it is a fight of edits and reverts because of a recognition from the state of Comoros. A official letter from Comoros was sent to former foreign minister of Kosovo Behxhet Pacolli last week and the letter contains important information about the recognition. They say that Comoros still recognize Kosovo as an independent country. At the time the statement of withdraw from Comoros was not an official call from the state. It was a letter from the foreign ministry of Serbia. Please help me end this fight. (P.s you can find the letter in Behxhet Pacolli's Facebook page and in source links at Wikipedia) Kreshnik Prizreni (talk) 05:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Kind request for assistance

Hi, I am trying to figure out how many Knesset members voted for/against the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law‎. The legislative history of the bill is here and I think the final vote might be on page 2396 or 2397 of this pdf[10] but I'm not sure, since I don't speak Hebrew. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. (t · c) buidhe 22:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Buidhe: As far as I can work out, the outcome of the vote is not in the record. The final record of the discussion at the top of page 2397 was:

We will now vote on the whole law.

Voting

The Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 1950, with the wording of the committee was adopted.

The only figures provided for votes are those on Bar-Yehuda's proposed amendments to sections 10 and 11 (which were rejected by 24–19 and 21–18 respectively) on the previous page. It may be the case that the vote was unanimous or passed by a show of hands. However, I would recommend asking a fluent Hebrew speaker like Ynhockey to double check. Number 57 22:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Correct, it doesn't say who voted how, or even how many for or against, for the entire law. The translation given by Number 57 is correct. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! (t · c) buidhe 15:08, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 11

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1980 Bolivian general election

added a link pointing to Carlos Valverde

2020 Vanuatuan general election

added a link pointing to People's Progressive Party

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2021 Liechtenstein general election

On 13 February 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2021 Liechtenstein general election, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 17:11, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

RE: Brentwood

Judging by the dates, I should assume the 764 figure is for the 'new' club, with the 4,000 figure v Northampton being a part of the club that was absorbed into Chelmsford City in 1970. That being said, it'd probably be a good idea to have both figures in the records section. NouveauSarfas (Talk page) 23:45, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Re:

I calculated them using Webster/Sainte-Laguë method. You may also find the numbers in [11] and [12].(Just google "Vetëvendosje 56") It is fine that you to delete them since the result is not final.--Mike Rohsopht (talk) 17:45, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for all the fantastic content you've been adding about women in politics worldwide! It's much appreciated :) Dsp13 (talk) 16:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Edgware Town F.C Honours list revert

"Honours are still typically listed separately as a summary, or were you just being disruptive to make a point?)" - No. If a section that has no references in has the list in a previous section why repeat the information twice. The honours in the history section is effectively a prose list with an actual list repeating it. Given the style in MOS:LIST. Either move the honours from the History section to the Honours section or remove the Honours section. Sciencefish (talk) 12:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

This how football club articles are typically written. See Arsenal F.C. or Manchester United F.C., both featured articles. Number 57 12:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Re: Cuban Presidents

I will make the necessary changes in my own words, thank you for the feedback — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorgec1027 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I made the necessary changes to the article of "Miguel Mariano Gomez" Let me know your thoughts, I was hoping, after getting your feedback, to make the same changes to the other articles on Cuban Presidents (Jose Barnet, Mendieta) in line with this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorgec1027 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2005 Tanzanian general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mariam Omar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Mkiki mkiki wa siasa Tanganyika

Hey there, just making sure you saw this in case the ping didn't go through. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Looks like I'm indeed having issues with pinging people. So just making sure you saw the suggestion here as well. Cheers, --Usernameunique (talk) 22:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Usernameunique: Thanks – and yes, I didn't get your ping again. I have asked at the fr.wiki equivalent of RX. Thanks again for your help, and hope you get the pinging issue sorted! Cheers, Number 57 22:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Wallis-et-Futuna

Hi, Following your message on fr.wiki "Verification en bibliothèque", please find here a link to download the full article from Le Monde. Unfortunately,as you will see, the two elected women are mentionned, but not there name... There has been an other article some days later, but centered on the new president. The article is here. Best regards --Croquemort Nestor (talk) 05:17, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Croquemort Nestor: Many thanks for providing it, really appreciated. Cheers, Number 57 09:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2021

• News and notes: Maher stepping down

• Disinformation report: A "billionaire battle" on Wikipedia: Sex, lies, and video

• Opinion: The call for feedback on community seats is a distraction

• In the media: Corporate influence at OSM, Fox watching the hen house

• News from the WMF: Who tells your story on Wikipedia

• Recent research: Take an AI-generated flashcard quiz about Wikipedia; Wikipedia's anti-feudalism

• Featured content: A Love of Knowledge, for Valentine's Day

• Traffic report: Does it almost feel like you've been here before?

• Gallery: What is Black history and culture?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

on October 28, 2020 the ban that was imposed on me on certain topics expired. I would like to know whether there are any other restrictions left that I should be aware of. Could you please inform me on that? Nbanic (talk) 07:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Bolehall Swifts

So yet again you are deleting work that’s takes my time to input, I reworded the bulk of the source I received the information from, but you just cannot help yourself, you have got on a reverting spree so much so that you have referenced everything to a website that no longer exists, you need to look at what you are doing if you are desperately following everything I do in the hope of reverting my work. Skippo10 (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

You didn't reword it – huge chunks were copy/pasted word-for-word (which you have previously been warned not to do) – simply changing the occasional word in a sentence does not make ok. Also, the text you were copying was written in a tone unsuitable for Wikipedia. The reason I spotted your edits is because the article in question is on my watchlist. Number 57 17:11, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Well it’s a matter of opinion isn’t it, will you be adding the correct references to make up for your error in deleting off what I had done? Skippo10 (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

The fact that you didn't reword it is not a matter of opinion. But yes, I have already repaired the reference. Number 57 18:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Well I said I did, you said I didn’t, so that’s an opinion isn’t it Skippo10 (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

A few examples of your "rewording" below (some sentences are identical; others have one or two words changed, highlighted in turquoise. You even copied across the grammatical error "sort after"). If you don't think this is a copyright violation, you should not be editing Wikipedia. Number 57 19:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Source text	Skippo's "own" wording
the name of its’ estate and that of two local teams who were successful in the area, and the birds which by coincidence came every summer to fly high above its original headquarters the Amington Inn	the name of its’ estate and that of two local teams who were successful in the area, along with the birds which by coincidence came every summer to fly high above its original headquarters the Amington Inn.
Swifts first played their games in the Tamworth & Trent Valley League, winning the League Shield and the Agnes Durham Cup in 53/54	Swifts first played their games in the Tamworth & Trent Valley League, winning the League Shield and the Agnes Durham Cup in the 1953–54 season
It was 1956 before the Swifts won their next major trophy and that was the Coleshill Charity Cup, and then went on to win a number of local charity competitions, but not until 1976 did they first win the Fazeley Charity Cup which is traditionally played on Good Friday.	It was 1956 before Bolehall Swifts won their next major trophy and that was the Coleshill Charity Cup, they then went on to win a number of local charity competitions, but not until 1976 did they first win the Fazeley Charity Cup which is traditionally played on Good Friday.
The late Mick Hill was the Manager who brought them the first victory in that most sort after local competition	The late Mick Hill was the Manager who brought them the first victory in that most sort after local competition
Two pitches were established there, a tea bar and dressing rooms were built, with most of the work being done by locals. It was August 1961 when the first competitive match was played on the Rene Road Ground and that was against Tamworth WMC	Two pitches were established there, a tea bar and dressing rooms were built, with most of the work being done by locals. It was August 1961 when the first competitive match was played on the Rene Road Ground and that was against Tamworth WMC.
The floodlights were officially opened some years ago by Mark Hughes then of Manchester United. New dressing rooms were built nearer the pitch with other social facilities enclosed. These too have been vastly improved in recent seasons by the Foothall Club.	The floodlights were officially opened some years ago by Mark Hughes then of Manchester United. New dressing rooms were built nearer the pitch with other social facilities enclosed. These too have been vastly improved in more recent seasons by the football club.

You may have more time than I do getting the old fine toothcomb out to access everyone else's edits, I think it is difficult to re-word most of that really, I don't see what the issue is myself, its not word for word, it just seems to me to be nit picking, but whatever helps you sleep at night fella. I'm more interested in trying to improve the articles of non league clubs than going round crying about things that are neither here nor there. Skippo10 (talk) 21:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

These sentences can easily be reworded. If you're unwilling to take my word for it that this is an issue and not 'nit-picking', perhaps Diannaa (who has previously given you a copyright warning) may like to offer a second opinion. Number 57 22:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Skippo10, the content is almost identical to the source, and is therefore a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy, a formal policy with legal implications. Please don't do this any more, or you risk being blocked from editing.— Diannaa (talk) 22:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

The big guns are in, okay I'm so very sorry for what I have done, I only hope and pray you will both be able to accept my sincerest of apologises for all the grief I have caused you, and I will really try to do better next time. Oh how trying to edit articles and bring more information to the public domain can be such a minefield, and one that comes with so many threats too. Skippo10 (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bolehall Swifts F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tamworth.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Just a quick question

do you agree with this edit? Idan (username is Zvikorn) (talk) 09:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

The capitalisation fix is correct and squad nationalities really do need to be sourced. To be honest, I think it would be best if the lists were simply deleted. Hardly any of the players are notable and non-league club squads change frequently (usually much more so than pro clubs). Number 57 09:15, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Number 57, as far as I am aware the nationalities were listed on squad websites. Also during the virus the squad has not changed and because it is Hashtag they would announce anything related on all socials. Idan (username is Zvikorn) (talk) 10:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hello, can this edit please be removed from public view? Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 19:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ashleyyoursmile: Done, but you might want to ask an WP:OVERSIGHTer, who can remove it completely. As it stands, all admins can still view the deleted revision. Cheers, Number 57 19:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) Ashleyyoursmile! 19:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Citation style

Giving the name of the article's author does not change the citation style. That's just adding more information. Giving the author's name is allowed in the citation style you're using. So the part I don't understand is why you are against making the citation better. WP:CITEVAR says: "The following are standard practice: improving existing citations by adding missing information". Aquila89 (talk) 15:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

The author of news website pieces is not part of the style as far as I'm concerned, hence why I never list it. 'better' is your own view on the matter and not one I share. Number 57 15:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

It's one thing that you don't list it, but you don't even allow others to list it? Seriously? Look at every single featured article, the author's name is always given when they cite news articles. Aquila89 (talk) 15:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

For news websites, I think the author of the piece is largely irrelevant and therefore not needed.

What is done on featured articles is irrelevant: "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style... to make it match other articles". Number 57 15:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

The author's name, as you yourself have admitted, is not part of the citation style, therefore I don't change the citation style if I add it. If you think it's not needed, don't add it, but do you really have to actively remove it? Are you planning to go through every article about every Israeli politician and remove the author names? Aquila89 (talk) 15:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

The first bit doesn't make any sense; if it's not part of the style, adding it is changing the style. To the second part, I review any changes that pop up on my watchlist (which includes several hundred MKs), and any I deem to violate CITEVAR, I will revert. Number 57 16:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

By "not part of the citation style" I mean that whether is there or not, the citation style doesn't change. Do you think the author of the article is irrelevant even if they're important enough to have their own Wikipedia page? Aquila89 (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

To the first part, it is quite clearly a change in style. To the second part, yes. Number 57 16:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Question relating to recent edit

Hey, i just wanted to ask, moreso make sure i know the reasoning, behind the removal of the image from List of Knesset speakers. the picture of Dov Shilansky is Present on his page, which is the reasoning behind its addition. in the case in which the image is not suitable for use on english wikipedia, id recommend its removal from the individual's page, otherwise, id like to make sure that im aware of the protocol or guideline responsible for determining which pages on a single language's wikipedia an image is or isnt suitable for use on Totalstgamer (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer: As you can see at File:Dov Shilansky.jpeg#Summary, the image is a non-free image, which means it is still under copyright. These are only allowed to be used on Wikipedia under limited conditions and in limited situations. For photos of people, this usually means only using it on their biography and not any other article related to them; the rationale in the summary section linked above details which articles the image is allowed to be used on (i.e. Dov Shilansky). Number 57 11:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I see. thanks for the quick answer, i've found an additional image available under creative commons, which will substitute the knesset photo on his page Totalstgamer (talk) 11:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

learn how it works

I got rights to contribute after any old block until its by rules so stop embarrassing 🙏 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.142.144.188 (talk) 03:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

2019 Uruguayan general election

Hi. The percentages in the results table are calculated by excluding the invalid/blank votes. The percentages in the newspaper source include invalid/blank votes (~4%). --Spaastm (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Corte Electoral results are the official and final results. It's a state institution. The results shown there are the final results. They don't publish percentages, just the raw number of votes for each parties. I've calculated the percentages separately. --Spaastm (talk) 19:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1999–2000 Guinea-Bissau general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fernando Gomes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hugh Fraser Ayson.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hugh Fraser Ayson.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

United Federal Party

Hi there, would you mind explaining why you repeatedly keep deleting information about this article? I study Southern African history and the party is clearly an important part of the Rhodesian era of Zimbabwean history that bizarrely is almost completely attributed to the far right Rhodesian Front. Is it due to the change in name from URP to UFP? If I were to add information the the URP, would you delete that too? Several sources state that it is virtually the same party that was founded in 1932, with the same members, leadership, policies and electorate, why did you delete it? Additionally, if you want to keep things to the Federal era, the breakup of the party and the lead up from 1958-1962 is an extremely important time in Zimbabwean history, why are you ignoring the history of the tensions between Todd, Whitehead, the NDP and RF? Did you even read and analyse any of the sources provided?

I'm happy to keep the article to the federal era, if that is your chief concern, but the leadup to the party's demise and the reasons for the end of that period are very relevant to this article. Keeping it as a stub, erases a crucial period in Zimbabwean history, that is scarcely told due to the dominant eras of Ian Douglas Smith and Robert Mugabe. I don't understand your gatekeeping of this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.232.213 (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree that the article should be expanded given the party's historical significance. However, there were issues with virtually all the text you added, detailed below (you'll see that I did read the sources, and that was one of the reasons for removing the text):

• "had dominated politics in Southern Rhodesia from 1932". This appears to be referring to the United Rhodesia Party, as the UFP was not established until 1957. You are welcome to add information to the URP article that concerns anything pre-1957.
• "it had gained the nickname, 'the Establishment'" This claim is sourced to this paper, which does not support it.
• "Tensions over the future of the Federation between the liberals and moderates within the party, represented by the figures of Garfield Todd and Edgar Whitehead, respectively, as well as mounting pressure from African nationalists (the NDP, later ZAPU and ZANU) and the hard-right segregationist Dominion Party (later renamed the Rhodesian Front), led to the UFP's defeat in the 1962 elections and its disappearance from the political scene altogether just two years later." I was considering keeping this text in, but it is sourced to here, which does not appear to support any of the various claims made in the sentence.
• "The UFP's policies can be compared to that of the United Party of South Africa or the mid-century Australian Liberal Party." Again, not supported by the source. Not is it clear why such a comparison is necessary – feels like it's being written for an essay rather than an encyclopaedic entry.
• "Today, outside of perhaps Todd and to a lesser extent Higgins, the UFP has largely been forgotten in contemporary Southern Africa." This just seems an odd thing to say – again perhaps appropriate for an essay, but not an encyclopaedic entry. Also, I can't see where or how it is supported by the source used.
• Your additions to the see also section were already listed in the text, and are a violation of MOS:NOTSEEALSO.

I hope that answers your question. I would suggest that it might be worth proposing amendments to the current text on the article's talk page so it can be discussed before being added to the article. Cheers, Number 57 17:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1958 Sudanese parliamentary election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page People's Democratic Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Tatarstan sovereignity referendum

Even the Associated press article mentions that the Tatarstan President did not want to secede from Russia, which is an obvious precondition for independence. Kostja (talk) 00:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021

• News and notes: A future with a for-profit subsidiary?

• Gallery: Wiki Loves Monuments

• In the media: Wikimedia LLC and disinformation in Japan

• News from the WMF: Project Rewrite: Tell the missing stories of women on Wikipedia and beyond

• Recent research: 10%-30% of Wikipedia’s contributors have subject-matter expertise

• From the archives: Google isn't responsible for Wikipedia's mistakes

• Essay: Wikipedia:The Free Encyclopedia

• Obituary: Yoninah

• From the editor: What else can we say?

• Arbitration report: Open letter to the Board of Trustees

• Traffic report: Wanda, Meghan, Liz, Phil and Zack

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2002 Pakistani general election

added a link pointing to Balochistan National Party

2018 Pakistani general election

added a link pointing to Awami Muslim League

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)