User talk:Psiĥedelisto/Archive2

Carceri Nuove

Thanks a lot for adding the two missing citations to the article! Actually, it was only one, because the original sentence had a semicolon in the middle. I forgot to add the citation at the end of the sentence, another editor changed the semicolon with a point, and they became two. Thanks again, Alex2006 (talk) 15:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Alessandro57: No problem! It just so happens that I have an article about a prison, Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center, sitting in the DYK queue right now, and I have another article about a prison on the way next month, Averoff Prison (Athens, Greece). Probably I'll keep writing about modern Philippine prisons as well. What I'm trying to say is, those of us (disturbed enough to) write about prisons need to stick together. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) 15:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Question from a relative wiki newbee

Hi, as you may know this is the first time I've gotten involved in wiki editing. Thanks for your thoughtful feedback on Gregory Katz deletion page. I had a question concerning WP:NPROF. I understand they are just guidelines, not rules, but there seems to be disagreement among the editors on whether meeting just one of the 8 criteria is sufficient to justify having a page. The "Criteria" section of the page begins with "Academics meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable." So it seems to be quite clear, yet several of the editors' comments seem to say otherwise. Any thoughts on the matter? Jkorsunsky (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jkorsunsky: You're going to have to forgive me, I'm simply out of my depth. I never went to university, and have no idea how to rate the relative importance of the "Chair of Innovation & Value in Health", or even what a "named chair appointment" is. Google is not really helping me understand if this chair is that. I'm sure XOR'easter and/or David Eppstein can help explain. I am mentioning them here so that perhaps they will see this and reply to you over on AfD. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) 22:46, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Psiĥedelisto! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Wikidata issue...wikidata:Wikidata:Project_chat the right place, or not?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to . The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center

On 30 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that months into the Philippines' coronavirus quarantine, the Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center remained grossly overcrowded, with only two pregnant women having been bailed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Wheely

Hello! Thanks again for your help with the Wheely article updates. I've responded to your most recent talk page comment here, if you're willing to take a look. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

@Inkian Jason: Don't worry, I haven't forgotten you. I do have follow-up questions. I read your arguments when you wrote them and don't remember being very convinced. Let me write a reply within the next few hours, okay? I've been working on some other projects:

Quo warranto petition against Maria Lourdes Sereno (Special:Diff/961630933) (rewrote 52% of all text including references, many of which did not change ) • Disini v. Secretary of Justice (DYK nomination) • List of Latin legal terms (Wikipedia:VPT § Is Special:Diff/961602526 kosher?)

I understand that you're paid by a company, but I also make COI WP:ER's on here (see Talk:QAnon, Talk:4chan and Talk:Fredrick Brennan for example), and my advice to you is, if you want to make friends here on Wikipedia, help review other editors' work; volunteer also besides just what you're paid to be doing narrowly. Your employer should help us build the encyclopedia generally, just my opinion. This isn't a policy, or even a guideline and I'm certainly not asking you for a WP:QPQ, but it's just some friendly advice. I appreciate the message, but I do read all pings, and you did correctly ping me I believe. Remember, if I'm ever moving too slowly in your view, you can open a new WP:ER, you're not bound to have me as the reviewer, and other editors are not bound by my opinions. Remember, editing Wikipedia is a WP:CHOICE. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:49, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Looking forward to your reply, Psiĥedelisto. I just wanted to make sure you saw that I replied, since some editors don't receive ping notifications. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 17:08, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

@Inkian Jason: Thank you for your patience. I am sorry to have kept you waiting. I found sources for most of the information, which I have put on Talk:Wheely. I think out of everyone on Wikipedia, you're quite unlucky in a way to have gotten me as a reviewer, because writing articles about subjects where most of the sources are in a language I don't speak, or don't speak well, is something I've done numerous times: Mariam Soulakiotis (Greek), Üllar Jörberg (Estonian), Davit Gabunia (Georgian), humorously enough I even wrote about a Russian, Vladislav Surkov. Even I think we can include a little bit 2channel, as Japanese is such a difficult language, and even though I'm intermediate, I sometimes find it harder because Google Translate is pretty much useless for Japanese even now. I'm sorry, I don't want to cause problems for you at work, but it's my (volunteer) job to push back on COI editors trying to get information removed. Hope you understand, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 23:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I've replied to your most recent comments on the article's talk page. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

ANI report

Thanks again for your patience and sorry for misreading. I have taken a number of actions to safeguard against the violation you've brought to ANI's attention. Thanks for looking out for Wikipedia's vital interests! El_C 02:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem! I'm glad it got worked out. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 02:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

CHAZ NOTE

Not sure if the proper venue, but I had previous issues with the tagging party re:Deletion or odd tagging. No explanation on talk page, on viable topic. My conclusion was attempt to delete was to create new article to take credit for later, this second incident follows the same pattern. Justifications do not seem to hold water, and rule citations seem unwarranted in both issues. Hope helpful. Could be something else. 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Green_rush' Jzesbaugh (talk) 05:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jzesbaugh: Thanks for this heads up. I always WP:AGF, but I will keep in mind your experience with this editor. Certainly, their WP:DRIVEBY tagging was totally unwarranted, and against the procedure at WP:DISPUTED. Especially since so many experienced editors are watching the page right now, to not even ask first for certain sources to be removed, and tag on that basis, with no rationale in either WP:ES or talk, was uncalled for. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 05:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for my first wiki honor. I did my honors thesis on digital psychology, a very emergent field. I've also been an admin of some smaller very contentious groups, it lends shall we say certain insights the layman will never know. I consider this an extreme honor from someone who has been at the forefront/frontlines of the emerging digital mind, and likely seen more of the dark and light than most ever would hope to. Thank you. If you have not I'm sure you can add great value in insight in to the emerging psychology of digital behavior. If you have already I would enjoy reading some of your conclusions and analysis. Be well fellow editor. Jz (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jzesbaugh: Insofar as my personal opinions are concerned, I believe:

• 8chan is a terrible website
• 8chan ought to be permanently shut down,
• QAnon is a dangerous, far-right, extremist movement
• QAnon serves only to prop up 8chan, and other far-right extremist grifters, financially

I agree that these are indeed insights which the layman will never know. The American layman is happy to shrug their sholuders and say "free speech", while only listening to those currently benefiting from these platforms and not those, such as I, who can afford to be neutral, as no part of my income derives therefrom, yet having all the experience of those who do have a COI. I've always believed that in Wikipedia terms, re: 8chan at least, I'm an advocate and not a WP:COI editor. However, out of respect to my fellow editors, I make WP:ERs like everybody else when I want 8chan changed, because indeed, advocates have a COI, if not in facto, then at least in essentia.

Please don't view this as an attack, I just want us all to be clear on what I believe about the horrible site I founded in 2013, and that I'm not particularly delighted to be called by the name people called me there. Indeed, editors can't help but know who I am. For better or for worse, I am notable, obviously; no WP:AfD against my article (post-2015) will ever succeed. Nor should it, our policies are clear.

I hope you got something out of this rambling!! Thanks for the comment. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 20:00, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

References

No sweat. I completely understand the need to make those disclosures. I think the 'digital cult' mentality is something science needs to better understand. I don't think scholars have cracked into it yet. But Jung talked about a need to be in a secret club, or have secret knowledge being a part of group identity and formation. I didn't know the extent that some were possibly using this psychological phenomena for profit. There are some inklings where indicators that NRA leaders may care less about guns(Some also have well reasoned concerns), and more about power structures and triggering cult like behavior for financial or power gratification. Defiantly something that seems to translate well online. Thanks for sharing - that does add something to my research. Jz (talk) 20:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jzesbaugh: Oh yes, I've successfully, by calmly following the WP:ER policies, trying not to let my opinions get in the way, and WP:AGFing/hunting down WP:RSs, gotten WP:NPOV upheld in many Watkins/8chan-related articles. You, and anyone, can see my efforts: Talk:8chan#Russian hosting, Talk:4chan#Neutrality issues in history section, Talk:QAnon#COI WP:ER, Talk:Fredrick Brennan#COI WP:ER. I've had the pleasure of working with some very professional editors through these WP:ERs, like GRuban, Edelsheim, GorillaWarfare and Goszei. (Thank all you guys! Sorry to ping you, just think it might be rude to mention you without doing so...) Honestly it's upheld my belief in the fundamental value of this project to the world. So even if by the letter of the law, I am not a WP:COI editor, but rather "merely" engaging in WP:ADVOCACY, (which is not really much different, except in a way editors like me, obsessed with law, can appreciate!), the COI ER process, in my estimation, works so well, there's no reason for me to need to challenge the state of affairs, but rather commend the COI ER implementers who've worked with me, as I'm doing here. You know, when you first read the ER process as a newbie, you can see it as intimidating and perhaps only written to give COI editors a "legit track" that's never supposed to be used so as to have an excuse to ban COI editors for not following the "legit track". (E.g., much like the American immigration system's racist notion that illegal immigrants in that country just aren't "law-abiding" because they fail at the complex process, except on a smaller scale.) However, the COI ER process really does work. I've even started doing some implementation of COI ERs to WP:QPQ in a way all those who've taken time on my often times very complex requests. But yes, unfortunately, we here all understand that Wikipedia is not a WP:BATTLEGROUND, but this is really not too well understood outside. And when I ask people I know what they think Wikipedia's policies are, I often get very funny answers! Just try it: "What makes a source suitable for Wikipedia?" I've heard, "being online", "Wikipedia doesn't require sources", "whatever the next person decides", et cetera. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 21:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

References

@Psiĥedelisto: Thanks, to me it seems just keeping neutral about a given topic is the core guiding principal. Working on the CHAZ article has been my first ongoing event, so very fun to explore the topic as the political drum beats around it. Thanks for helping out and rekindling my interest in Wiki. Already saw my first attempted edit war instigation related to trying to use it as a soapbox. I'm surprised that people don't read the policies carefully. Thanks for the award, I changed my signature in celebration. Cheers! Jz (talk) 22:16, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #2 – Quick updates

Read this in another language • Subscription list

The new features include a toolbar. What do you think should be in the toolbar?

This edition of the Editing newsletter includes information the Wikipedia:Talk pages project, an effort to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. The central project page is on MediaWiki.org.

• Reply tool: This is available as a Beta Feature at the four partner wikis (Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian Wikipedias). The Beta Feature will get new features soon. The new features include writing comments in a new visual editing mode and pinging other users by typing @. You can test the new features on the Beta Cluster. Some other wikis will have a chance to try the Beta Feature in the coming months.
• New requirements for user signatures: Soon, users will not be able to save invalid custom signatures in Special:Preferences. This will reduce signature spoofing, prevent page corruption, and make new talk page tools more reliable. Most editors will not be affected.
• New discussion tool: The Editing team is beginning work on a simpler process for starting new discussions. You can see the initial design on the project page.
• Research on the use of talk pages: The Editing team worked with the Wikimedia research team to study how talk pages help editors improve articles. We learned that new editors who use talk pages make more edits to the main namespace than new editors who don't use talk pages.

– Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Philippine communism articles

Hi Psiĥedelisto! I'm not sure you've noticed me before but for a while now I've been a bit frustrated about the state of Communism related articles in the Philippines. Mostly in two ways: first, that the tone of the communism-specific articles seem so divorced from Mainstream Philippine history, either because the tone is skewed to the left or the tone is skewed to the right; and second, that the ideological delineations between different factions (national democratic, social democratic, reaffirmist, rejectionist, and... I dunno how to classify the cordilleran groups) are usually obscured in the telling. I seem to have problems figuring out how to do a thematic cleanup, partly because I'm not part of the Philippine left myself and thus don't know the language and sources so well, and particularly because my specific interest in documenting the Marcos era sort of focuses my perspective towards that specific period in history. Anyway. The reason I'm messaging is to ask if you have any ideas for how the Communism related articles in the Philippines can be made more expansive, more accurate, and more comprehensible to the general public. I guess I'm saying I want to follow someone's lead on this and also share my input (sort of like a mini wikiproject), and you seem like a good editor to reach out to and ask for ideas. Anyway., ayun. This is me not knowing what to do next and asking for suggestions. Thanks! - Chieharumachi (talk) 03:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I mostly write law articles, so be aware of that. But right now, I think there are a few major problems with Communism in the Philippines:

• Not enough citations.
• MOS is being ignored, many of the section titles without proper nouns should be lower case.
• There is far too much focus on history and scarce little background context. What do Filipino communists believe? How do they relate to the modern Philippine left? Are Anakbayan communists? How about Akbayan? National Democracy? Of course, the answer for all three is no, or not strictly, but many people consider them communists, so we need to address this.

In fact, perhaps the article can even be split into History of communism in the Philippines and then Communism in the Philippines, if you feel that's warranted. Good luck, Chieharumachi. Feel free to ask me follow up questions. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 03:47, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Psiĥedelisto. The idea of splitting the Communism in the Philippines is interesting. I'm not sure how that'll fit with all the other related articles on the subject, such as Communist rebellion in the Philippines. But I'll give it some thought. (If you look at those two articles, I think you'll get why people are so confused. But yes, thanks for the suggestion. It'll be very helpful in the long-term, I think. - Chieharumachi (talk) 02:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Certainly Chieharumachi, this is a topic I'm interested in. Thanks for bringing Communist rebellion in the Philippines to my attention...certainly it should be made a redirect to History of communism in the Philippines if you follow my advice. The addition of the word rebellion slants that article already to be only a historical timeline, and not really anything about what Filipino leftists/communists believe or want to achieve. Right now I'm focusing on Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates § Maria Ressa conviction (People of the Philippines v. Santos, Ressa and Rappler), but this will be resolved soon. Either I'll need to take it to WP:DYK, or I'll need to just give up on it and be happy I wrote a good article in the literal sense, even if it's never recognized by the Wikipedia community. I wonder, do you have access to historical newspaper archives in the Philippines? Do you have access to the Rizal Library or maybe Gonzalez Hall? I miss the Philippines a lot, but I especially miss going there. I'm happy to mentor you if you don't mind getting sources for me now and again The Philippines is still my preferred editorial topic. (User:Psiĥedelisto § Articles I have written (per XTools)) Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 02:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Navbox at Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

@Psiĥedelisto: Thank you for modifying the navbox to omit mention of anarchism. However, in my browser at least (Google Chrome for Windows desktop PC), the navbox is uncollapsed. Please, if it's technically possible, make this consistent with the other templates, which display collapsed. When only this newest navbox is uncollapsed, it appears to be WP:UNDUE, as if its content is more important than the other navboxes. NedFausa (talk) 21:05, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 21:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto: Thanks again. I commend you for your fine job on the navbox. I know you took offense when I complained about being sent on "fool's errands," and for that I apologize. I was impatient and stupidly failed to understand what you were telling me. I'll try to be more collegial when our paths cross again on talk pages. NedFausa (talk) 15:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you for apologizing. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 01:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for People of the Philippines v. Santos, Ressa and Rappler

On 19 June 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article People of the Philippines v. Santos, Ressa and Rappler, which you created and updated. 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 16:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

ITN

Though it certainly doesn’t make your frustrations with systemic bias on Wikipedia any less true, and I fully sympathize with your struggles getting your Phillippine case law articles (and other) articles recognized here, congratulations on getting People of the Philippines v. Santos, Ressa and Rappler posted on the main page! Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 16:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bzweebl: No, thank you for nominating it! Cheers, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 06:36, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Philippine Barnstar
	Thank you for your excellent work on articles related to the Philippines. Cheers! Polo (talk) 03:11, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Polo! Do you mind telling me what article this is for, so I can put the icon on my user page? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 06:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

It's actually for the ITN item you created, People of the Philippines v. Santos, Ressa and Rappler. Your article is comprehensive and well-written, which I must commend you for. It's a needed Wikipedia entry, thank you for putting it together. I went to write that in my message after finding out that you've also made many other quality Philippines articles. Regards, Polo (talk) 07:51, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Newsweek - reliable source

Hello, I noticed here that you said, "As regards Newsweek, please see WP:RSP, as of 2013, we no longer consider Newsweek a reliable source." When I went to WP:RSP, Newsweek is symbolically represented as "Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Generally_reliable". Could you explain? - AppleBsTime (talk) 13:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@AppleBsTime: Sure, but I'm not sure what there is to explain. Newsweek has two rows on WP:RSP, one is marked (pre-2013) and is green (generally reliable), and the other is marked (2013–present) and is yellow (not generally reliable). Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 13:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Wow, I don't know how my eyes and brain missed that. Thank you. But still, the iconography that marks the 2013-present portion is labeled "Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#No_consensus". That's "no consensus", not "no longer reliable". - AppleBsTime (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@AppleBsTime: Are you Jkorsunsky? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 13:24, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

No, not at all. Why do you ask? I saw that Jkorsunsky is a paid editor. Does my work look like paid editing? I'm doing some personal learning about sources used by Wikipedia that are considered reliable or not, and I was searching Wikipedia discussions and found your comment perplexing, because I grew up with Newsweek as being very reliable, but now learn that there is some distinction around the 2013 change in ownership. Anyway, Wikipedia's RSP says to evaluate post-2013 Newsweek on a "case-by-case" basis. It looks like the Gregory Katz piece was this story. On a case basis, I see nothing unreliable at all about that article; do you? Maybe I am misunderstanding something, as I was above, not correctly reading the RSP table entries for Newsweek. - AppleBsTime (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@AppleBsTime: Newsweek literally copied that from Katz's LinkedIn page.[1] Welcome, by the way. You should know that many terms on Wikipedia are purposefully watered down, like "generally not reliable", just because there are no hard rules on Wikipedia, and this is one of our five pillars. However, Newsweek is rarely reliable. In fact, I'd personally never use any article by them post-2013, unless I had a very good reason, but that's just me. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 13:35, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Copying from another source for such a banal "article" doesn't seem problematic to me. I guess we will just agree to disagree, as I went to Newsweek today to take a look at a random news report, and (for example) this one presents no indication to me that it was presented with undue bias, hyperbole, or misinformation in order to drive an agenda or ulterior motive. Perhaps there are other articles that may seem more politically charged, but honestly, I just see them as reporting the facts, generally -- and it's a nice touch that they indicate when the subject of the story has been contacted for further comment. I think Wikipedia's "case by case basis" for evaluating Newsweek is fair, and it is the standard that I would use, should I ever need to provide a citation to it. Thank you for this discussion, Psiĥedelisto. - AppleBsTime (talk) 14:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@AppleBsTime: It is extremely problematic to cite something to Newsweek as a WP:RS that actually comes from the person's own mouth via their LinkedIn and should be treated as a WP:PRIMARY WP:SPS. It is not a "nice touch" to plagiarize from LinkedIn unattributed. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Disini v. Secretary of Justice

Hello! Your submission of Disini v. Secretary of Justice at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata CHAZ

I'm glad you're keeping an eye on the Wikidata item for Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone. Wikidata too often publishes unsupported claims, and then has the gall to cite a reference from Wikipedia that makes no such claim. I guess it would be harmless, except Wikidata shows up in Google search knowledge panels and misleads people into thinking it's WP work product. NedFausa (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Jueteng DYK

Hi, I noticed you just submitted Jueteng to DYK. As a heads up, it currently doesn't meet the 5x expansion criteria as you expanded it only from 2467 characters to 5615 characters. However, there's still five days to expand further. CMD (talk) 14:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Oh, I thought it went by bytes (4159 bytes on as of Special:PermaLink/917496688; currently over 22,000 bytes). What should I do? Withdraw? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

It's based off prose character count. I don't know if there is a withdrawal procedure, but I would quite like Jueteng to make the main page and DYK is currently suffering from a lack of non-American hooks. Thus, my preferred action would be for another 6,720 characters to be added over the next 5 days, during which your recent edits will remain within DYK eligibility. CMD (talk) 15:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: The problem is, there's not much left to say. I can open a GA nom, and you can review it, and we can do it that way, if that's okay with you. You haven't contributed to the article, so I doubt that should be a problem. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I strongly feel it could be expanded further. There's scope to get into real detail given the specificity of this topic. For example, there isn't really a reason that the History section needs to be so concise. More could be said about Duterte's opinions (and other opinions). I wouldn't pass it as a GA in its current state (although the theory is correct), however, I'm willing to help add to the article myself over the next few days if that's not a problem for you. CMD (talk) 15:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Not a problem at all, have at it. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Do you know much about the picture you found on flickr? I see it is listed as CCBYSA, but at the same time the uploader wrote all rights reserved. I'm not sure how Wikicommons interprets that. CMD (talk) 15:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: I had the same concern. I asked on IRC (#wikimedia-commons @ Freenode), and Josve05a, an admin on Commons, cleared it. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: To be clearer, the Flickr user has to manually change the license on Flickr if they want anything other than "Copyright - All Rights Reserved". The user could (previously at least) have set it so that all their uploads where posted under a specific license, but looking at the other photos by this Flickr user it seems like this file being freely licensed is a rarity and not done by default. Given that they had to intentionally and manually select the CC license (and CC licenses being non-revocable), I'd say that the file is a-ok on Commons in my opinion, but I don't speak for the entire project. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Jonatan Svensson Glad, that makes sense to me too given many other images by the same photographer are actually all rights reserved. CMD (talk) 00:20, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy to help! Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Have you encountered any good sources on the Chinese name? The current sources both give different transliterations and just call it Chinese, and the article itself has the Mandarin transliteration which is quite different to how jueteng is pronounced. My very strong guess is that it originated from Fookien, as it sounds Fookien and there is a significant historical Fookien-speaking population in the Philippines, but it would be nice if a source could come out and say that. CMD (talk) 17:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Every source I was able to find, I put in the article. The idea that it might be Southern Min/Hokkien and not Mandarin is of course possible, but I can't find any Chinese character that means "bet" which sounds like teng, tang, deng, dang, or another similar sound, in the Dictionary of Frequently-Used Taiwan Minnan. Reliable Filipino Chinese World News (newspaper) came up with a word that means flower shop in normal Chinese. I think that the reason some sources, such as the Philippine Law Dictionary, call it "Chinese" is because, as you correctly note, Chinese immigrants had a hand in the game during the 20th century, and there is a very common folk etymology among non-Chinese Filipinos that the name somehow comes from Chinese. I'm happy to be proven wrong if anyone can produce the actual Chinese characters, though. See also my latest edit. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 06:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I am extremely doubtful it is Mandarin, given all the context (which is not to say of course I know what it might be precisely). It's tricky given how much sounds can change. List of Chinese loanwords in Indonesian says 莊家 became cengkeh, with the Malay ceng not far at all in pronunciation from the Tagalog teng (and who knows what Filipino language speakers it actually came through). There's also a reasonable possibility it was slang from a particular overseas Chinese community. The World News Source treats it as a current proper name rather than as an etymological origin. In the meantime, I suggest we remove the specific characters from the article since we don't know what they were/are. CMD (talk) 08:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: How about [2]? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 08:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

That's actually much clearer. I just pulled out the two English-language sources as they didn't fit where they got moved to during your rewrite, and put in a quick sentence with their context. CMD (talk) 08:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

[3]: "Jue" from the Spanish "juego". Idle speculation from the author so I don't think it should be put into the article, but it shows how little is known about the name. CMD (talk) 17:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Yup, I'm aware of the article. Agree completely, definitely shouldn't be included, as it's meant to be humorous. I had the same conclusion as you. This is just my opinion, but I think a real possibility is that the Spanish introduced it with that name to sound "exotic", a form of yellowface. And then, when Chinese immigrants started running many of the games, the name really stuck. I really doubt it has any legitimate Chinese meaning. I asked a Chinese friend (from Beijing, mind) and they couldn't think of a possible combination of characters, even esoteric (classical). Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 17:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

The article is now at a point where it qualifies for DYK, if resubmitted soon. Please look through it as I edited piece by piece and haven't been able to step back and see how it all flows together. I'd especially appreciate your insight into the politicians section, as I have trouble balancing the need to avoid copyvios with the need to avoid misrepresenting the specifics of the law. You're probably more versed in that area. CMD (talk) 15:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Decided to do it myself due to time pressure. CMD (talk) 16:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis, Thanks for restoring it. I'll review your work soon. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 16:36, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that you recently removed content from TV Patrol 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) 14:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: I did explain why. I did not remove content, I removed a tag. You should read Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help.

I'm pretty new to this, as you can see, so I was unsure if how I'm going about patrolling RC with RedWarn was alright. Much obliged. Xtat1c (talk) 18:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Xtat1c: No problem. In future, you want to keep posting warnings, even if he's ignoring them. And also, you want to take him to WP:AIV if he keeps vandalizing despite a last warning. Check out this edit I just made, I'm sure he'll love it. I found the actual book, he's totally lying, exactly what they said is in there is in there. It calls Jewish kids killing machines and says the Holocaust is a myth. WP:NONAZIS is the relevant policy here, and I don't like seeing them around. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 18:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Xtat1c, you can do this in RedWarn by clicking the final warning indicator when submitting a new notice, clicking the gavel at the top of a user page, or right-clicking a user link and selecting "report to admin". (sorry to come out of nowhere, I check on RW topics sometimes) Ed6767 talk! 19:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #3

On 16 March 2020, the 50 millionth edit was made using the visual editor on desktop.

Seven years ago this week, the Editing team made the visual editor available by default to all logged-in editors using the desktop site at the English Wikipedia. Here's what happened since its introduction:

• The 50 millionth edit using the visual editor on desktop was made this year. More than 10 million edits have been made here at the English Wikipedia.
• More than 2 million new articles have been created in the visual editor. More than 600,000 of these new articles were created during 2019.
• Almost 5 million edits on the mobile site have been made with the visual editor. Most of these edits have been made since the Editing team started improving the mobile visual editor in 2018.
• The proportion of all edits made using the visual editor has been increasing every year.
• Editors have made more than 7 million edits in the 2017 wikitext editor, including starting 600,000 new articles in it. The 2017 wikitext editor is VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode. You can enable it in your preferences.
• On 17 November 2019, the first edit from outer space was made in the mobile visual editor.
• In 2019, 35% of the edits by newcomers, and half of their first edits, were made using the visual editor. This percentage has been increasing every year since the tool became available.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:06, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jueteng

Hello! Your submission of Jueteng at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

On TV Patrol article

Its on March 2 was premiered on Monday replacing Balita ngayon. Not March 3 on tuesday. As I see on ABS-CBN News on 25th anniversary of TV Patrol on youtube. Watch StevenNBA89 (talk) 14:16, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@StevenNBA89: Do you have a source for this information? Only statements backed up by reliable sources can remain on Wikipedia unchallenged. You've been warned about this in the past. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Disini v. Secretary of Justice

On 8 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Disini v. Secretary of Justice, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after a 2014 Philippine Supreme Court decision, liking or retweeting cyberlibel is no longer a crime? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Disini v. Secretary of Justice. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Disini v. Secretary of Justice), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

:(

So some extremely thoughtless people (to put a charitable interpretation on it) have had the point driven home to them via blocks, and that's as it should be. But I'm guessing that doesn't do much to make the whole situation feel less shitty. So listen: you're not needed at the ANI thread, so log out and get some rest. You call me any time if I can help. EEng 02:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC) P.S. Some day (not now) I'll want an explanation of why the h in your name is wearing a little party hat.

@EEng: This is not serious, right? I don't know if I can handle having another Wikipedian mad at me right now. I appreciate you and your advice a lot. Best, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 13:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

When in doubt, it's always safe to assume I'm not serious. And don't call me Shirley. EEng 14:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

It's rare enough to see EEng speak outside of small font. CMD (talk) 14:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Psiĥedelisto, I learned about you by reading the recent ANI thread. This Wikipedian admires you for your intelligence, courage and fortitude. I wish I could send "waves of support and compassion" through some sort of mystical ether.

In the background of the photo in the FB article is a really cute dog...what breed? My very best wishes to you, Sincerely,(WP:GNOME) Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 00:18, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger: Thank you for the kind words. My dog Hitomi (智美) was sold as a Pomeranian, but there's some doubts about her provenance. I think she's a pomchi. Love her all the same...actually I think sometimes the universe knows what you want better than you do, as I've seen purebred Pomeranians at dog shows and prefer her to them due to her smaller chihuahua-like size. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 16:35, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Pomchi! Even her breed name is adorable! Sending Hitomi a pat....Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 20:59, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Forking the citation modules

It's really not appropriate to fork the citation modules and then use them in mainspace. If you believe changes should be made to how the citation modules work, you should work to build consensus for that on Help talk:CS1. From what I can see, you should not have made this change here. --Izno (talk) 14:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm about to log off for the next few hours, but I had a similar doubt...see Talk:List of Hokkien dictionaries § Category:CS1 maint: unrecognized language:

“ I don't know if it's actually allowed to use sandboxes in the article space instead of the main templates? I imagine that if it's only being done temporarily, and as a proof of concept, on one not very popular page, it should be okay. ”

In that discussion, you will also see that I've been told to wait a few days for CS1 to begin accepting new features / proposals again.

@Izno: If you'd like, I can simply give up on that and (you or I can) subst all the reference templates in that article to avoid sandboxes in article space. Because the MOS does not even require templates be used, but rather a consistent style per-article, this should not be a problem per policy. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

No worries. I saw the discussion on the talk page after leaving the note here but only skimmed it.

Generally (not just with the citation modules), you should not use sandboxes in the mainspace. It makes it hard to track the accepted version of the template, among other reasons (unrelated to page popularity).

You can begin the discussion today at Help talk:CS1 and some test cases on a personal sandbox. It is only the module sandboxes you should avoid editing (and anyway, the citation sandboxes are more like "consensus sandboxes" or 1RR versions than they are arbitrary sandboxes; this is unlike most other sandboxes).

Recommend strongly against substing them for practical reasons. The modules will not substitute cleanly in any way, shape, or form. I would recommend reverting that edit but it looks like you made some changes there that conflict with a trivial revert, which I didn't want to lose and didn't really want to pick out myself, which is how I ended up on your talk page instead. It's not something that can't be done when you're back online. --Izno (talk) 14:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

More applications of format linkr

Re this TPER, assuming it goes through, there may be other templates that could benefit from {{format linkr}}. For instance, {{Moved}}. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I sure hope it goes through, since I have some follow-ups already ready... :-)

1. Using {{italic title}}'s module instead for the italicization. This would fixes two problems with the case Talk:Rappler § Rappler is an unreliable source:
   1. The name of page should appear as Talk:Rappler.
   2. If using that parent template, can give a substring, so section could be {{format linkr|Talk:Rappler#Rappler is an unreliable source|Rappler}}, giving Talk:Rappler § Rappler is an unreliable source, as can be done e.g. in article space.
   3. Also, as in article space, WP:DAB respect will happen with that module. So, World News (newspaper) and not World News (newspaper) or World News (newspaper) as now, both of which are wrong in different ways.
2. I regret giving |italicizepage= such long name. I will propose |ip= and |is= as shortcuts.

Feel free to approach me any time, fellow editors!

-EEng

@EEng: The irony that you're one of the most approachable editors on this site is not at all lost on me. 😂 Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 00:32, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

But, hard to be motivated when sits for so long. Maybe you can poke an admin/template editor friend of yours, skdb. I'm sure you have one.... Only template editor I have had little friendly discussions with is The Rambling Man, but I don't think he likes me very much, I always end up saying the wrong thing. An editor of TRM's caliber leaves me starstruck sometimes... EEng is much more approachable, and seems to like me a little more, but I don't think he's a template editor. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 00:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Psiĥedelisto sorry you feel that way. I have no feelings about you, I think we've interacted perhaps once? Sorry if that has come across as being "unapproachable". But yes, if you're after the LOLZ, EEng is the one for you. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I'm not the best at reading social cues, so it's probably me and not you. Thanks for clarifying! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 05:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh, btw, @Sdkb:, see Wikipedia talk:Third opinion § {{format linkr}} (esp. § Attempt №2). I'm irrationally very proud of that one. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 00:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Ws

Module:Ws has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:47, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I forgot about it, I tagged G7. The rejection at Template talk:Ws was justified. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 22:37, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Rafał A. Ziemkiewicz

You are welcome to join the discussion: [4] AvertSec (talk) 22:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Precious

Philippines

Thank you for quality articles around the Philippines such as People of the Philippines v. Santos, Ressa and Rappler (mentioned in the news), Disini v. Secretary of Justice and Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center, for language topics such as Deseret alphabet, - Fredrick, translator of music lyrics, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2425 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Jueteng

On 31 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jueteng, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite being illegal, jueteng is played by one out of every seven Filipinos? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jueteng. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jueteng), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

See? Yoninah (talk) 15:14, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

One of the most viewed DYKs I've been involved with. What's your secret? Let me know if there's other articles I can help out on. CMD (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Hi! I just put this one up on DYK: Template:Did you know nominations/2channel. So, I'm ready to take on a new project. Here's an idea—improving baybayin to GA status. Think we can do it? I'm something of an expert… Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 06:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Nice work on the GA, although perhaps a hook that does not require BLP checks would be preferred.

On Baybayin, I've read your unicode pdf before, and for what it's worth I support that initiative. I'm interested in baybayin, and think it would be a great to bring it to GA. Definitely worth a look in. However, I will not be pleased with baybayin until I overcome my past inability to get a baybayin keyboard working on my windows 10. (Elder Futhark, no problem, Baybayin, problem.) CMD (talk) 09:48, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: I'm surprised you're aware of my Unicode work. Yes, today I wrote a follow up, and just sent it off to be reviewed. Fingers crossed! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 23:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm only aware of that one paper, which I found somehow when we were working on Jueteng. I presume through a link somewhere on Wikipedia. For the record the pamudpod displays as a separate character with the dotted circle for me on Baybayin. CMD (talk) 00:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2channel

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2channel you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of NamelessRumia -- NamelessRumia (talk) 05:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2channel

The article 2channel you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2channel for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of NamelessRumia -- NamelessRumia (talk) 05:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 05:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center

The article Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 05:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK

I just wanted it discussed because I know how certain Wikipedia editors can be when something they feel is wrong gets added to a high traffic place such as the main page. If consensus is against unpromotion, which it might be, that’s fine with me. I don’t want to be the brunt of that abuse again because I have had enough of that. I just think it’s better to be safe than sorry...especially after two Wikipedia members basically said I was belittling women because of where I initially put a marriages section (another editor flat out said it in an edit summary). I like Wikipedia, but I do feel like many editors need to get a life. SL93 (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@SL93: Are you saying I need to get a life? Not sure where you're going with this, maybe I'm just not understanding you because I'm tired. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 07:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I’m not. When I insult people, I make sure that everyone would know it. I’m saying that I don’t want to be the brunt of abuse from other editors for being the one to approve a hook that they are against. SL93 (talk) 07:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@SL93: Oh, I understand what you mean. Yes, I once had a bad experience with the Main Page/Errors as well, so I know what you mean. People can be really vicious on there. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 07:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #4

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

Reply tool

The number of comments posted with the Reply Tool from March through June 2020. People used the Reply Tool to post over 7,400 comments with the tool.

The Reply tool has been available as a Beta Feature at the Arabic, Dutch, French and Hungarian Wikipedias since 31 March 2020. The first analysis showed positive results.

• More than 300 editors used the Reply tool at these four Wikipedias. They posted more than 7,400 replies during the study period.
• Of the people who posted a comment with the Reply tool, about 70% of them used the tool multiple times. About 60% of them used it on multiple days.
• Comments from Wikipedia editors are positive. One said, أعتقد أن الأداة تقدم فائدة ملحوظة؛ فهي تختصر الوقت لتقديم رد بدلًا من التنقل بالفأرة إلى وصلة تعديل القسم أو الصفحة، التي تكون بعيدة عن التعليق الأخير في الغالب، ويصل المساهم لصندوق التعديل بسرعة باستخدام الأداة. ("I think the tool has a significant impact; it saves time to reply while the classic way is to move with a mouse to the Edit link to edit the section or the page which is generally far away from the comment. And the user reaches to the edit box so quickly to use the Reply tool.")[5]

The Editing team released the Reply tool as a Beta Feature at eight other Wikipedias in early August. Those Wikipedias are in the Chinese, Czech, Georgian, Serbian, Sorani Kurdish, Swedish, Catalan, and Korean languages. If you would like to use the Reply tool at your wiki, please tell User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF).

The Reply tool is still in active development. Per request from the Dutch Wikipedia and other editors, you will be able to customize the edit summary. (The default edit summary is "Reply".) A "ping" feature is available in the Reply tool's visual editing mode. This feature searches for usernames. Per request from the Arabic Wikipedia, each wiki will be able to set its own preferred symbol for pinging editors. Per request from editors at the Japanese and Hungarian Wikipedias, each wiki can define a preferred signature prefix in the page MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix. For example, some languages omit spaces before signatures. Other communities want to add a dash or a non-breaking space.

New requirements for user signatures

• The new requirements for custom user signatures began on 6 July 2020. If you try to create a custom signature that does not meet the requirements, you will get an error message.
• Existing custom signatures that do not meet the new requirements will be unaffected temporarily. Eventually, all custom signatures will need to meet the new requirements. You can check your signature and see lists of active editors whose custom signatures need to be corrected. Volunteers have been contacting editors who need to change their custom signatures. If you need to change your custom signature, then please read the help page.

Next: New discussion tool

Next, the team will be working on a tool for quickly and easily starting a new discussion section to a talk page. To follow the development of this new tool, please put the New Discussion Tool project page on your watchlist.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:48, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 2channel

On 7 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2channel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 4chan owner Hiroyuki Nishimura claims that 2channel, once "Japan's most popular online community", was stolen from him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2channel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2channel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

CS1 sandboxes

You created Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandboxPsi, Module:Citation/CS1/sandboxPsi, and Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist/sandboxPsi in July and haven't edited them since. Are you still using them, or should they be deleted? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:05, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: They're still transcluded in mainspace. Not sure where to go after Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_69 § Request:_Please_make_it_so_%7Clang=zh-tw_displays_"Taiwanese_Mandarin"_and_not_"Chinese". There was consensus for a change, but one was not made. If you have an idea, let me know. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:32, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

The proposal has effectively failed because no one was willing to actually go about implementing it, and it was never a good idea to use sandboxes in the main namespace in the first place. At this point, the traces should still, in my opinion, be cleaned up. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:19, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Popery: As acknowledged above, I now know that using sandboxes in mainspace is not allowed and won't do it again. This particular situation is complex to fix and I don't have time to. Feel free to remove it from mainspace yourself, though. If you delete the sandboxes it's possible I'll recreate them in future to test something else, as using the main sandbox was specifically requested against by User:Trappist the monk. Regards, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 12:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Also {{cite book/sandboxHokkien}} and {{cite web/sandboxHokkien}}. Delete them all or, at the least, userfy them all. We should not fork and we must not transclude sandboxes into mainspace.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Correct, the templates too. Modules must be in module space to execute which is why they exist and could be legitimately recreated to test something else. But if recreated should only be transcluded in user space. The system of getting changes to these templates is too opaque so in future, when faced with a situation where the Citation templates are not working as expected, I'll just write out the citation in plain wikitext, which is allowed by the relevant guidelines and save us all the trouble. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixed

@Trappist the monk and Pppery: Thanks for your patience friends; I have finally figured out a way to recursively substitute the templates in a sane way so it doesn't look terrible in Wikitext. See this edit to List of Hokkien dictionaries and this quick hack to get the code out. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 21:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk and Pppery: Both the templates were just deleted at my request under WP:CSD#G7. The module-space sandbox, I'd prefer to keep, but leave it up to you. Modules can't run in userspace. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 02:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

A de-facto userspace for modules exists as Module:Sandbox/<username>/* and Module:User:<username>/*. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:03, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: Sure, they can be moved. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 02:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: Thanks, sorry for any trouble caused. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 04:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

"Rodolfo B. Albano, Jr." listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Rodolfo B. Albano, Jr.. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 13#Rodolfo B. Albano, Jr. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Bit late to the news, but ...

I stumbled across your userpage randomly and was surprised to find Fredrick Brennan as the owner of a highly productive account that seems to stay away from controversy. I have to say that I have followed 8chan, Gamergate and other sources of internet violence against marginalised groups for years with a grim fascination. I remember being particularly upset by an article you wrote that was published in the Daily Stormer, around the time that I made this typographical change. I say this not to offend you, but to give a bit more weight to my honest and heartfelt thanks for many of your actions over the past few years, including public actions like the disavowing of 8chan and private actions such as the contributions you made on Wikipedia when anonymous. If you'll accept it, here's a barnstar:

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your excellent work in creating Bureau of Immigration Bicutan Detention Center and taking it through two of our quality review processes. — Bilorv (talk) 08:50, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

— Bilorv (talk) 08:50, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:17, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Unsigned IP comment in re 8chan article

Frederick- I went to wikipedia 8chan page to research qanon (because a mentally I'll neighbor was shouting about it) I was pleased to find a link to 8chan on Wikipedia for about two seconds. I followed the link and encountered Child Pornography.

I removed the link on Wikipedia to protect everyone who might fall into it. Wikipedia was blocked this edit via its process. I wrote a note to the DOJ re 8chan via Wikipedia.US and international law is clear on the issue.

The connection of qanon to pornography and child pornography or even pedophilia is clear. I cannot believe how obvious and transparent this connection is.

I was not aware of you personally or the Mother Jones article linking Qanon (spreading rumors on pedophilia) to Child Pornography via 8chan. That link is clear.

So it looks like Q is in plain sight waiting to get arrested here in the US by Federal Authorities. Who would think that a bible toting aircraft maintenance mechanic turned janky pornographer could cause as much damage to a society as he has. Perhaps our society was ripe for the taking.

Thanks for fighting the good fight! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:05, 14 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) 02:48, 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) 09:56, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Debresser: Why? That's not my template. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 10:25, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

I noticed that you edited this template a few times, so I decided to notify you. I'd appreciate your opinion, but if you are not interested, that is fine with me. Debresser (talk) 16:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Greetings...

I saw this "article", and thought of you: [6]. Here is an intelligent child....who possesses the ability to change the future...as do all children! I hope you are well, and safe. My very best wishes, as always, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 00:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Cheers and happy wishes to you!

I saw a COI disclosure on Talk:8chan and thought, "Who the hell?? I can only think of one person who could possibly have a COI with that organization". Imagine my shock! Anyway, condolences on that whole chapter of life -- the 2010s have been an unpleasant time in many ways. I hope you are doing well. jp×g 15:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@JPxG: I've been better, but not doing terribly…and don't worry too much, your reaction is common Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 02:23, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for attending to the details

	Cathedral Builder
	Thanks for the fix ups I've seen you making. The Little Platoon (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey there

To continue on what Bilorv said, I really wanted to thank you for your work on Wikipedia and IRL standing up to hate. Ethan Ralph is a great article! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

@MJL: Funny you thought it was a great article, considering you were looking at a vandalized (or at least WP:BLP-violating) version! Appreciate the compliment though! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 04:13, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

[Thank you for the ping] Woops!! I guess I didn't notice some of that (or just passed it off as accurate when it wasn't). Gotta be careful there lol –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:39, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

@MJL: No problem, you made me look at the article after a few days of not doing so, so it got caught in the end! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 04:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Editing news 2021 #1

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

Reply tool

Completion rates for comments made with the Reply tool and full-page wikitext editing. Details and limitations are in this report.

The Reply tool is available at most other Wikipedias.

• The Reply tool has been deployed as an opt-out preference to all editors at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
• It is also available as a Beta Feature at almost all Wikipedias except for the English, Russian, and German-language Wikipedias. If it is not available at your wiki, you can request it by following these simple instructions.

Research notes:

• As of January 2021, more than 3,500 editors have used the Reply tool to post about 70,000 comments.
• There is preliminary data from the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedia on the Reply tool. Junior Contributors who use the Reply tool are more likely to publish the comments that they start writing than those who use full-page wikitext editing.[7]
• The Editing and Parsing teams have significantly reduced the number of edits that affect other parts of the page. About 0.3% of edits did this during the last month.[8] Some of the remaining changes are automatic corrections for Special:LintErrors.
• A large A/B test will start soon.[9] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.

New discussion tool

Screenshot of version 1.0 of the New Discussion Tool prototype.

The new tool for starting new discussions (new sections) will join the Discussion tools in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures at the end of January. You can try the tool for yourself.[10] You can leave feedback in this thread or on the talk page.

Next: Notifications

During Talk pages consultation 2019, editors said that it should be easier to know about new activity in conversations they are interested in. The Notifications project is just beginning. What would help you become aware of new comments? What's working with the current system? Which pages at your wiki should the team look at? Please post your advice at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Re: Welcome!

You said that I was advertising but didn't even mention what made you come to the conclusion, and if you honestly think my edit was advertising then 28chan is definitely advertising in your opinion as well since its not even a year old and has less activity than most imageboards and PTchan probably is as well because with a little bit of reasearch I found a more popular Brazilian imageboard. (Yufixit (talk) 10:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC))

@Yufixit: Good point—I've removed the other non-notable imageboards from the list on Imageboard. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 10:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Atlantic City Police Department logo.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Atlantic City Police Department logo.gif. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@JJMC89: Is there still a problem? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 23:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

No, someone else took care of it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:13, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	You are the man! Keep up the good work. Snapdeus (talk) 02:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdeus: Thank you! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 02:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Ballot letters

Thanks for adding the Arabic ballot letters to the party articles. I wondered whether adding them like this might be slightly better and helpful to readers? (I meant to add a question mark at the end of my edit summary rather than it being a statement of fact!). I also removed the ref as I don't think it's info likely to be challenged (WP:INFOBOXREF). Cheers, Number 57

@Number 57: I actually added the cites because the information I think likely to be challenged is that the Arabic and Hebrew appear in roughly the same size on the voting cards. (This wasn't always the case; compare [11] and [12].)) That is to say, I think people will find them non-official / secondary even though they're official / primary / of equal weight. Regarding the format, I made a slight change that I think is better in two ways: one, it puts one over the other as they appear on the cards, and two it uses the {{lang-he}}/{{lang-ar}} templates so that the language links look like they do in articles and other infoboxes. I think the cite should be re-added for reason I stated. Official voting cards have changed a few times, at one point Arabic was only put on parties Arabs were seen as likely to support as well: [13]. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 18:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

References

By all means re-add the cite, although it might be better to put the language after the symbols in brackets so you can put the cite against that rather than another line. Cheers, Number 57 18:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57: Really I would like the cite to come after Election symbol. Some templates have the ability to add cites to certain of their labels, but this infobox doesn't. What about if we split the template? ({{Infobox political party}} ⇒ {{Infobox Israeli political party}}) I considered doing that but thought it'd be too radical a change, but if another editor agrees……I've had to split templates before when a country's situation becomes more complicated than the template allows. An example is {{Infobox court case}} and {{Infobox Philippines court case}}. Such splits are quite common, {{Infobox SCOTUS case}} pre-existed my Philippine one. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 19:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Rather than creating a wrapper, could you use a blank data row? Then you could also amend it to 'Ballot letters' instead of 'Election symbol'? I've done the Shas article as an example. Cheers, Number 57 19:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57: Very interesting, we should standardize on that, it looks great. Being an admin of course you know all the tricks! 😁 I don't have time to update all the articles right now, so feel free. My recent contribs should help you find them all. If you're too busy as well I'll try to do it some time this week. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 19:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Editing news 2021 #2

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

When newcomers had the Reply tool and tried to post on a talk page, they were more successful at posting a comment. (Source)

Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:

• Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
• The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello. Just to let you know that User talk:Psihedelisto redirects to your user page: did you mean to target this page instead? Certes (talk) 18:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Certes: Sure, I'm not sure it matters much, but I fixed it. Thanks for noticing! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 06:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Wow, one year already. Thank you! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:16, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Help me to encode Okinawan Kana

Haitai, Psiĥedelisto-san!

I have read the proposal regarding the coding of the Taiwanese Kana which you attached here. Also, I was very happy to know that your proposal has been accepted by UCS and will be published in Unicode version 14.0! That's crazy since some proposals take years just to be reviewed by the committee!

May I ask your help to help me make a proposal to encode Okinawan Kana?

Nifēdēbiru! れいはりん (talk) 14:41, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@れいはりん: Hello! I'd be honored to help with this. I'm aware of the Okinawan kana. You'll need to collect sources. I'm not sure that this is really Wikipedia related, you should probably email me what you have, so we can come up with a repetoire for encoding in a future version of the Unicode standard. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 05:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Your control over Ethan Ralph's article

Hello, do you think you should be editing Ethan Ralph's page considering your ties to him and Josh? As you can see here Null & Hotwheels on the Killstream Regarding 8ch 2001:569:7E8F:5300:80AA:69A8:C092:882D (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I do not feel I have a COI as regards Ralph, and if you feel otherwise you may raise it at the appropriate forum (not here). Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 22:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Being accused of uncivil behaviour

I've tried to talk to the IP user and engage them to end the dispute, by starting out that we may both have behaved badly in letting our dispute go straight to ANI, rather than talk it out. I sent a message to them last night, but found this morning they had deleted it and left an edit summary of "your behavior uncivil not mine". I seriously wanted to engage with them, but feel disheartened they wouldn't do anything of the sort with me. What should I do? GUtt01 (talk) 08:43, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I've decided that I feel the dispute will rage on if I stay. So, with a heavy heart, I am gonna discontinue involvement with Wikipedia altogether. Whatever happens now, I've enjoyed my time. GUtt01 (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Per your request

As i mentioned on Nightbirde's talk page discussion, some other articles that may not meet notability are: Victory Brinker, Dustin Tavella and Léa Kyle (i removed content that wasn't about Kyle and it was quickly reverted regardless: [14]) from AGT Season 16. A search of them may result in past activity that can be added to articles with sources. Thanks! 137.27.65.235 (talk) 05:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, proposed two out of three for deletion. (WP:PROD)

If needed I'll start AfD's… Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 18:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. I think it's fair to say Nightbirde can remain. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 02:12, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nightbirde

You withdrew your nomination [15] and articles for the less notable AGT participants above were kept with AfD templates quickly removed. Therefore, will you remove the one on Nightbirde's? More voted to keep it. Thank you, kindly! 137.27.65.235 (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@137.27.65.235: I'm sorry, that isn't quite how it works. Some processes, such as WP:AfD, have closing procedures that are defined by our policies and guidelines. Also, Wikipedia is not a democracy, so the absolute numbers do not matter. While the principle of a non-admin closure exists (only applies to registered users), as does the principle of WP:SNOW, I don't believe either are applicable to this AfD. I believe that the closing admin (or, less likely, non-admin) will most likely determine that consensus is against the deletion and close it as keep, but if I do that personally I'd be speaking for the users who weren't me who !voted delete, which isn't right. Please wait for a closure via the normal AfD process. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 07:06, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Vit B6

Thank you for pass on GA. I've caught a bit of Wifi access at ariport (Iceland), but will be better able to address the remaining criticisms once back at my desk in US. FYI - my intent is to raise all vitamins to GA. Dreading the remaining fat solubles, especially vit D. 157.157.52.49 (talk) 10:48, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: No problem! I was sure you'd appreciate a review while on vacation if it was going to lead to a pass; otherwise I would've waited for you to get back. I ended up reading some of vitamin D as it is related to osteogenesis imperfecta, which I rewrote recently and nominated for GA. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 11:36, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Also dreading vitamin A. My thesis topic was vitamin A and immune function, but that was 40 years ago, so I am sure there have been some research advances since then. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

経団連（Keidanren）

As you can see in Citation, there are fixed abbreviations for Chinese characters. If you can afford it, see the German Wikipedia article.

It looks like you're cutting and pasting Chinese characters, which is shabby and spoils the aesthetics, so don't do it. 2021-10-02 0:31(JST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 東京オリンピック１９６４ (talk • contribs)

@東京オリンピック１９６４: What? This comment makes no sense. What German Wikipedia article, and why wouldn't I be able to afford it? 僕が日本語を話さず単に漢字をコピペしていないと考えるのは間違い。Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey!

Do you wanna join a discord server? ~TheresNoTime ^{(to explain!)} 00:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@TheresNoTime: Which and why? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 01:16, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto I'll send you an email ^^' ~TheresNoTime ^{(to explain!)} 01:17, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Emailed ~TheresNoTime ^{(to explain!)} 16:33, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Osteogenesis imperfecta

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Osteogenesis imperfecta you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 11:20, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Vaticidalprophet: Thanks! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 01:16, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Mrs. Gravata

Mrs. Gravata case of 62 children is a legitimate story as any of the top of the list due to lack of information for most women and couples. There are cited references, so why have you reverted the entry ?? Cltjames (talk) 02:24, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cltjames: Hello. As I wrote on 9 September when reviewing Gravata case:

Added {{Hoax}} tag: I don't use this tag lightly, but I find this story very farfetched. Over on List of people with the most children, all cases with this many children are marked as being highly unlikely. It's likely Ms. Gravata had a lot of kids, but the number is likely exaggerated. I believe this is partially a hoax and it needs someone to do research on modern sources…

Does this answer your question? Citing sources from 100 years ago is not enough, modern scholarship is required. See WP:AGE MATTERS. We must be very careful on Wikipedia not to propagate WP:HOAXes, especially ones surrounding people at the top of that list. Wikipedia:Verifiability § Exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 10:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

The problem with the cases of women having multiple births for life, is there is very little evidence for all the cases at the top of the list; being, 69, 57, 52, all 3 stories ranging from 1700's-1900's, but even less references than Gravata due to being older cases. There was the case of the Chilean woman with 55 children, and that turned out to be a woman collecting cousins and orphans and was a hoax... But I do not understand why you have singled out 1 case as a hoax and the rest as not a hoax; what is your method of determining ? (talk) 08:34, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia

Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Thanks for the interesting survey, I filled it out. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 22:43, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, that's very much appreciated! _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Osteogenesis imperfecta

The article Osteogenesis imperfecta you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Osteogenesis imperfecta for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 12:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK

Just noting that as Osteogenesis imperfecta just passed GAN and hasn't run DYK before, you could nominate it for that process if you wanted to. Medical articles don't run DYK too often but are very popular when they do (I got nearly 20k views for an incredibly obscure chromosome disorder), so it might be an interesting thing to do. Vaticidalprophet 14:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Vaticidalprophet: I was planning on it but might be too close to the subject to know what's an interesting hook, that's what I'm struggling with (I even already did a QPQ: Template:Did you know nominations/Wizard Pharmacy.) Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 14:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

A lot of the best medical article hooks, especially for things people are fairly likely to have heard of, come out of history sections -- all kinds of interesting historical misconceptions out there. Malebranche thinking OI was caused by a pregnant woman watching a breaking-wheel execution, maybe? Vaticidalprophet 14:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Vaticidalprophet: What about … that the genetic condition osteogenesis imperfecta causes blue eyes? Not technically a lie! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 00:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)