A brainstorm: how reducing banner clutter (re: VA merger) links up with an article table generator

edit

Your ideas about reducing banner clutter in the Vital article Tfd merger proposal (which I only just now discovered) resonated with me, especially the part where you proposed the concise version, with your example of   VA-3, and I wanted to link this up with something I've been thinking about and get your feedback on it, as there may be some beneficial cross-pollination avenues here.

I have long been thinking about how to efficiently represent article page characteristics (such as article quality, length, protection level, etc.) so that WikiProjects and other similar pages can have lists or tables of articles and economically represent such metadata without heaps of repetitive text bloating the list or table rows. This led to creation of Template:Article attribute decoration which uses icon images or unicode characters to graphically encode such metadata.

Somewhere along the way, I discovered Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist working on a table summarizing which language Wikipedias have articles on Transgender history or trans rights, to be added at some point as a monitor or progress tracker perhaps at the WP:LGBT WikiProject or somewhere, and I proposed some ideas that might be useful to her table idea using the {{Aad}} template. Since then, there's been an on-and-off collaboration going on, and the single-table idea has morphed into more of a platform idea to assist editors who want to develop any kind of table or list of related articles as a tracker for their WikiProject. Having short symbols or icons, like your VA symbol, fits right in with this scheme.

And that's where you come in. I think you are ideally placed to be a third member of a small dev team geared to developing some tools or a platform or whatever it ends up being, to lower the bar of entry for others who might like to build tables or lists to track or monitor groups of articles, in the way that, say, Trans articles by region2 tracks and compares trans history and trans rights articles across Wikipedias. For a glimpse of the power of the (then current) version, see the (surprisingly brief) wikicode, and the config file at {{Trans articles for region/config}}.

I've been away for a bit and just got back, so YFNS may have updated it or taken it off in a different direction by now, but it's still very much a work in progress, afaik. Anyhow, if any of this intrigues you, I know I'd welcome your participation as you have a lot of strengths in envisioning what would be most useful for a project and coming up with just the right approach, and critiquing current ones or seeing the essential points in something of this nature, and I think YFNS would agree. Have a look around, and see what you think; would love to hear your thoughts about it. YFNS may have some newer/better links for you. Mathglot (talk) 00:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Mathglot! Great to hear from you, and that seems like interesting work!
My overall view of icons is that they present a tradeoff — on the one hand, they take up less space and are cleaner/easier to understand at a glance than text, but on the other, if you don't know what they represent, they're confusing, which can add to the barriers newcomers (or any of us, for newly introduced icons like the contentious topics one you included) face. Tooltips can partially mitigate that; I see you've used them for some of the icons already.
There's some existing infrastructure at {{Icon}} and related pages that it might be good to check to make sure there's no template duplication going on/integrate your new system into the existing documentation to make it discoverable.
Good luck with this work! Cheers, Sdkbtalk 17:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
The best-designed icons are self-evident or nearly so, but as with international road signage, they generally require a legend that describes them, and that is the approach I am following. If iconic enough, the description is easily associated with the icon and thenceforth they are no longer needed. Come to think of it, I should have the template generate a legend upon request as well. Mathglot (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Concern regarding Draft:Chester Whitmore

edit

  Hello, Sdkb. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Chester Whitmore, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Question from DandelionFluff (04:16, 12 June 2024)

edit

Hello! I just made some edits to the page of Lynn Conway. Sounds like there's a lot of that happening right now as she died over the weekend. Just wanted to make sure I did all right! (I've done some editing in the past, but I just established a username.) --DandelionFluff (talk) 04:16, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @DandelionFluff! Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for checking in! Your edit looks fine to me at a quick glance. Biographies of recently deceased persons often see a lot of editing activity; feel free to edit boldly, and if there are any issues another editor watching the page will be able to help out. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 04:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you! DandelionFluff (talk) 05:18, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Concern regarding Draft:Longform.org

edit

  Hello, Sdkb. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Longform.org, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Editnotice/doc#Namespace key Off-topic

edit

At 03:25, 17 June 2024 in [1], you undid my {{off topic}} tag, saying it was an "unexplained tag." However, I already explained it 2 hours ago at 1:39, 17 June 2024‎ in [2]. Since you do not feel the section is off-topic, could you explain, on the actual documentation page, the relevance of all those namespace IDs? 184.146.170.127 (talk) 04:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Generally, editors are expected to explain their edits in the edit summary (which can take the form of see [wikilink to talk page thread]). I did not see your talk page comment and did not understand the removal, thus the revert. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 19:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Men's colleges

edit

Hi there - I see you cc'ed me. Is everything all good? It seems like you did some redirects but I don't quite work a ton on that part of Wikipedia. As you can see I've been trying to work cleaning up the page and also giving more nuance to the incorrect assumption that Catholic (and other religious) seminaries are always men's only colleges. The reality is some are, some aren't. Jjazz76 (talk) 17:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Jjazz76! Thanks for checking in and apologies I didn't explain further in my summary of the edit. I created List of men's colleges in the United States as a redirect to Men's colleges in the United States § List of men's colleges a while back. I recently noticed that a bot tagged the redirect as broken (no longer going to a valid target section name), and that the page no longer had that section as a result of your reorganization, so I removed the section link. Everything is good; the ping was just so you're aware. When doing major restructuring of a page, it can often be a good idea to check the incoming links (available under the tools menu) to make sure that nothing is being messed up. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 19:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Got it. Thanks! I will definitely do that in the future. And thanks for noticing/fixing it on the backend! Jjazz76 (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nomination for deletion of Template:Newspaper of record

edit

 Template:Newspaper of record has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 06:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Question from Kang Ticino X Fabi on User:Kang Ticino X Fabi (21:13, 23 June 2024)

edit

Hi --Kang Ticino X Fabi (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Floquengrump

edit

I don't actively object, but I still ... I guess "passively" object to people altering the way I chose to add myself. As far as I know, there is no policy, guideline, essay, or even good reason not to add the vote count. I certainly didn't boldly add it for others, without their OK, even though I think it's useful. Yet you and someone else (who I won't look up to avoid getting annoyed again) felt fine just overruling my choice. It's not like I accidentally did it and you're fixing it (for example, I love it when people fix my near-constant screwups). I know it wasn't the intent, but it sure felt disrespectful. I'm honestly not sure if it's a problem with your approach or mine. Probably mine; I'm increasingly annoyed at more and more stuff I see here. Anyway, the "Floq" part i don't actually care about, so feel free to change to "Floquenbeam" if you prefer. Floquenbeam (talk) 12:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

(Diff for reference) Thanks for the note, Floq; that's helpfully clarifying. Until pretty recently, the debriefs page had a mix of links to debriefs and transclusions of debriefs, which I found suboptimal as it gave unfair prominence to some over others and just made it harder to navigate the page. So myself and a few others discussed and arrived at the format now used. I'd say the reason for using only the percentage support rather than that and also the !vote counts is (a) that it's more concise (while still communicating the degree to which an RfA was contentious) and (b) that another editor didn't want it to replicate the format of WP:RFAY too closely. It's not the biggest decision (which is to say that we could easily have gone with something different), but once we have a format, the reason to use it consistently is just to make the page more easily scannable (combined with a tidying impulse, which, uh, is a rather common trait among Wikimedians  ). I think the other editor and I assumed you'd just miscopied the format rather than deliberately deviating from it.
Overall, the formatting stuff is minor compared to just ensuring that debriefs are listed — I enjoyed reading yours and am glad that others visiting the debriefs page will be able to discover it! Cheers, Sdkbtalk 16:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hi Sdkb, hope you're well. I've just cleaned up Musopen, which really took off after funding from a Kickstarter campaign. I'm trying to link to two Kickstart links from 10+ years ago, which include important information on the nature of the projects. Alas, it seems the links are on Wikipedia's blacklist. Is there anyway around this? Aza24 (talk) 02:56, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Aza! I think MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist may be what you're looking for? Beyond that, I'm not sure; good luck with your efforts! Sdkbtalk 04:25, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ah yes, I think so, thank you! Aza24 (talk) 20:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Backstory to Special:Diff/1231608002

edit

I don't have a strong opinion about the edit either way, but to provide the backstory to my edit that you reverted: I added the additional text because that page is transcluded in another page (WP:REFBEGIN) where another editor redundantly added a link to WP:RSP in the "See also" section (which I reverted) despite the link being in the transcluded text, which led me to wonder if the transcluded text needed to be clearer. Apparently not! Biogeographist (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thomas A. Moore moved to draftspace

edit

Thanks for your contributions to Thomas A. Moore. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and there is another person with the same name at ASUA who has a high h-factor (if there are no overlapping papers) so there is nothing to demonstrate his publication notability. His page shows no significant, peer recognition awards. Please establish these and go the AfC route rather than creating it directly.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ldm1954, as mentioned in the edit summary when I created the page, the relevant notability criterion is WP:NPROF #5, as he holds an endowed chair. I am reverting the move, and suggest you familiarize yourself with or check the applicable SNGs before draftifying in the future, as not all editors will know to revert and draftifying can bite them or deprive us of notable content. Sdkbtalk 13:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Please read the recent discussions on academic notability #5, just having an endowed chair does not qualify. As many have said, someone who is notable has many other achievements such as peer recognition APS fellowships, FRS, major awards, high h-factor etc. His page has nothing, and as I said above there is no other proof. I will hold off temporarily from an AfD to let you add the material requested. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks; I am on vacation until July 5, but I'll do a deeper dive for sources once I return. Sdkbtalk 20:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Happy First Edit Day!

edit

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

 

  Administrator changes

 
 

  Technical news

  Miscellaneous


Nomination of Thomas A. Moore for deletion

edit
 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thomas A. Moore is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas A. Moore until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Ldm1954 (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

check ur dms

edit

jp×g🗯️ 20:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your draft article, Draft:Motley Coffeehouse

edit
 

Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Motley Coffeehouse".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your draft article, Draft:Hunan Grand Theatre

edit
 

Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Hunan Grand Theatre".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your draft article, Draft:Donald Bentley

edit
 

Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Donald Bentley".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your draft article, Draft:White Pearl

edit
 

Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "White Pearl".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Incorrect Bot Changes

edit

Hey @Sdkb. One of your bots made a change to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Blackburn_Historical_Plaques to correct some dates to Wikipedia standard format. The affected text was taken from the plaques in question, so the changes made the text inaccurate.

I'm pretty new to editing Wikipedia, so asked in Teahouse if there was a way to protect some content from automated bot alteration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#c-Scooby359-20240714172200-How_to_protect_content_from_bots). They suggested raising it with yourself to let you know of the issue, and see if there's any way to resolve it.

I've now been made aware of the {{nobots}} tag. Is there any other way I could flag this content to protect it from bot alteration?

Thanks, Chris. Scooby359 (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Scooby359! Thanks for raising this. Those edits were part of the general fixes set, which is a collection of normally uncontroversial edits that my or many other bots will make in the course of other edits. Normally, GENFIX would recognize and ignore text in quotes, but in this case there are no quotation marks so it did not identify the quotes as such.
@Mathglot's advice to use {{as written}} on the quotes rather than {{nobots}} on the whole article is solid, as it's a much more precise way to target the issue.
Cheers, Sdkbtalk 14:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Sdkb That's great. I've changed the page to use {{as written}} so hopefully should be ok going forward. Thanks for explaining and teaching me something new!
Cheers, Chris Scooby359 (talk) 18:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Washington, D.C.

edit

Hello. I'm reaching out because of your (semi) recent discussion at the article Talk page concerning the photo collage on the article, and changes being made to it without consensus. There's been a strange rash of revisions to the thing over the past four days, unilateral and without Talk discussion notwithstanding the request in the article source code, and my efforts to steer matters toward conversation and consensus. TBH I don't really care much one way or the other about the collage, but do believe that an FA deserves better than thrice-weekly revisions by editors who have decided that they like, or don't like, the photos at the top of the article. If you have the inclination I could use a bit of support on the issue of process at least - helping get interested editors talking about what the article's photo collage should look like, in the hope that we can find something agreeable to everyone, and stable. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 17:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for reaching out! I've found collages to be a notoriously hard area to maintain — for whatever reason, there's a strong tendency for editors to want to make changes to well-composed collages that make them worse. It looks like the stable version of the D.C. collage has been restored, and I commented briefly on the talk page. Best, Sdkbtalk 04:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. I don't much care if it's updated or not (though I think the existing version is *fine*) - but it does matter that changes be made deliberately and thoughtfully, taken from among suitable photo candidates, and not just something that caught a random editor's eye. JohnInDC (talk) 12:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Culinary Institute of America photos

edit

Hi Sdkb, I was able to get some additional photos for the Culinary Institute of America article. I've linked to them in my response on the Talk page. Was curious if you had any additional thoughts. Cheers, BINK Robin (talk) 20:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for arranging to have the photos uploaded! I added the one of students in the kitchen to the history section of the article, where I think it's a nice addition. I'll leave the task of integrating the criticism section into the history section to someone else, as I unfortunately don't have the capacity at the moment to handle it myself. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 20:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hey, thanks for adding that! And no worries, I appreciate the feedback and work you've put in, and I saw Melchior responded about the criticism section. Cheers, BINK Robin (talk) 15:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

DYK mistake

edit

Hey Sdkb, there's a supposed image of Chopin floating around, which seems to be disproved as a fake ([3]); that is, an edited detail from a 20th-century painting.

It's been removed from the associated Wikipedia articles, but apparently it was featured on the main page as a part of DYK. See Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/January#9 January 2024. Do you think its worth starting a discussion on DYK about checking the chosen images more thoroughly? I don't know if this really relates to a larger issue or not. I suppose at the end of the day, its still an intended depiction of him, but I doubt DYK would have used it if they knew it was a forgery. Aza24 (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Aza24, I would absolutely bring it up. There is a prior instance in which a photo of the wrong person was used, so this isn't totally a one-off, and brainstorming about how to prevent it from recurring might be helpful. Sdkbtalk 04:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, just got a conversation going hereAza24 (talk) 03:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Growth News, July 2024

edit

15:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Possible issue with rmCloser?

edit

Hey Sdkb, I noticed that on Special:Diff/1238025322, the rmCloser reverted the archive wrapper and re-added the RM dated template. I'm just curious if you noticed anything peculiar with that edit and are not surprised to see this message, or if you didn't and there might be something wrong with the script. Courtesy ping TheTVExpert. Best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I didn't notice anything unusual when I made that edit, so yeah, there may be some sort of script issue. Thanks for noticing/fixing! Sdkbtalk 19:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

  Administrator changes

  Isabelle Belato
 

  Interface administrator changes

  Izno
 

  CheckUser changes

  Barkeep49

  Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

  Arbitration


Question from Abdulrahman nura (16:19, 12 August 2024)

edit

Hi mento how i create my wekipedia page indeed --Abdulrahman nura (talk) 16:19, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Abdulrahman nura — see Help:Your first article. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 19:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Question from Abdulrahman nura (17:08, 12 August 2024)

edit

How do i create citation --Abdulrahman nura (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Abdulrahman nura — see Help:Referencing for beginners. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 19:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

edit
New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
 
  • On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Question from RICHAOBO1 (10:17, 27 August 2024)

edit

Hi Sdkb, what's your best advice for someone who's new here and wants to learn how to edit and publish new articles? --RICHAOBO1 (talk) 10:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

My advice is not to start with creating new articles; go build up some experience with other tasks first. Then, when you're ready, read Help:Your first article and follow its advice, particularly about sourcing. Cheers, Sdkbtalk 13:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

  Administrator changes

  Pppery

  Interface administrator changes

  Pppery
 

  Oversighter changes

  Wugapodes

  CheckUser changes

 

  Guideline and policy news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Infobox musical artist

edit

Heya, I saw you added pluralisation control to the instrument parameter of Template:Infobox musical artist. Would you be able to do the same for occupation, spouse and partner? Miklogfeather (talk) 12:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Miklogfeather,   Done here; please let me know if there are any issues! Cheers, Sdkbtalk 19:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Boston meetups?

edit

Hi Sdkb! I remember coming across your RfA previously and wanted to offer a belated congrats for successfully passing :)

I'm writing because I was browsing Wikipedia:Meetup/Boston and have noticed your name come up fairly often in recent meetups. Do you happen to still be in the area? I was interested in potentially attending/organizing one as there hasn't been a single in-person meetup in the region this year to my knowledge. I managed to catch the tail end of one nearly a decade ago but the opportunity has eluded me since. I'm close by and my schedule is relatively flexible for the coming months, and I'd love to meet some other contributors in the area. Would you happen to have any insight into what goes into organizing one of these (room reservation process, etc)? Appreciate it! ~Liancetalk 19:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Liance; thank you! I'm not in the Boston area most of the year (although I will be at WikiConference North America in Indianapolis in a few weeks), but best wishes with arranging a meetup! Sdkbtalk 19:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the quick reply! I'll reach out to some other editors who might be in the area. Perhaps our paths will cross sometime in the future. Best, ~Liancetalk 23:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Template spam reform idea

edit

Hi there Sdkb, I'm toying with a proposal to reduce template spam, which perhaps you could comment on. My idea is that any template includes "discuss the issue" or "Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page" can be removed by any editor, if there was never a discussion begun on the talk page about such issues. In my mind, other editors can't be expected to read the mind of drive-by templaters, and it's not their responsibility to do so. Additionally, if the templater can't be bothered to even give one sentence on the talk page, that's on them.

I've found myself frequently removing templates undersuch rationales, see here most recently.

Examples of such templates include {{Original research}} & {{Too few opinions}}, among many others. How does it sound? Aza24 (talk) 16:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also, I just saw a comment from you a few years back at Template talk:GANotice#Linking to the assessment subpage. I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but given that we have a new bot & operator, perhaps this could be easily implemented now. Aza24 (talk) 18:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply