User talk:SoWhy/Archive 31

Archive 25

←

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

FA!

Congrats to Adele Spitzeder promoted! When should she appear? Soon, or a specific date? - I am proud today of a great woman on the Main page, Márta Kurtág, finally! - Here's my ideal candidate for arbcom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:40, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Heh, thank you very much. It took a long time but mainly thanks to your help, it succeeded. I would probably suggest it for TFA on 9 February, her 188th birthday. Congratulations on Marta at DYK as well. And shame that SHB is no longer active to run for ArbCom ;-) Regards SoWhy 19:48, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

By then, we should turn the red links blue ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Adele Spitzeder. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:10, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faiths and Pantheons

No problem with your close as nobody else voted to delete, but I'm curious as to why you wrote even if there was no sufficient coverage to support a full article, nominator failed to explain why a merge to List of Dungeons & Dragons rulebooks (to be discussed at WP:Proposed mergers if necessary) is not a valid option (WP:ATD). I'm just curious as to why you say it should be on the nominator to suggest a merge, especially when I believe the article needs to be deleted? SportingFlyer T·C 10:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@SportingFlyer: WP:ATD (as a policy) requires us all, but especially those in favor of outright deletion, to consider alternatives to deletion if the article contains material that in some shape or form belongs in an encyclopedia. Only if no alternative presents itself, should such material be deleted (cf. also WP:PRESERVE, WP:BEFORE Section C#4). In this case, while you argued for deletion, neither in the nomination nor after it was brought up by BOZ did you explain why it should not at least be included in a larger overview of the topic. And while it's not upon you to suggest a merge (if you did, it would be a case for WP:SK#1), the argument for deletion becomes incredibly weak if you are unable explain (when so challenged) why you believe a suggested alternative is not the appropriate action (considering the policies I mentioned above). Regards SoWhy 10:27, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

BOZ votes keep or merge on every AfD they participate in. While I generally agree with you, I still have no idea why merging an article which had no reliable sources (and, arguably, now has one) would be beneficial to the encyclopaedia, or why I would be called out on it in this instance. I'm only asking because I feel as if I'm being scolded for what I feel was a very valid nomination, though not one that I ultimately gained consensus on. SportingFlyer T·C 10:40, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Since lack of sources is not a valid reason for deletion (per WP:NEXIST), the question is only whether the subject is notable which there was consensus for that it is. I did not imply any "scolding" with my summary and I'm sorry if it was perceived as such. I merely wanted to explain what I said above, i.e. that there was no reason to assume that the suggested alternative for deletion was wrong. And if an alternative exists, policy dictates we should not delete. Regards SoWhy 10:53, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate your further explanation and I think we're in general agreement on WP:ATD as a policy. :) SportingFlyer T·C 11:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

ACE2019

It seems that I either totally disagree or totally concur with you on Wikipedia. On the balance, I think that's probably a positive. I believe you would make an excellent Arbcom member. Why don't you nominate yourself while there are still a few hours left? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:44, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@Kudpung: You are the third person whose judgment I trust to suggest that. So you know what? I'll try it. At the very least, it gives the community more people to choose from and there is a snowball's chance in hell that I could realistically spoil the chances of any of the better qualified candidates (like NYB) Regards SoWhy 11:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Also schwing Dich in den Hoofen! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

You waited for me to run before adding your candidacy so I wouldn't back out, didn't you? Regards SoWhy 14:59, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Not really, no, that wasn't in my thoughts. I just thought that when I saw you had really gone for it, I might as well throw my own hat in the ring to make up the numbers. There just aren't realistically enough candidates to choose from for so many vacant seats. In the unlikely event that I get elected, I would put body and soul into it though, but you have a far better chance than I do. Would be interesting though if we were both on the committee 😎 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, right I seriously hope you are not correct because I cannot imagine that you are less popular than me. Regards SoWhy 15:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Adoptee looking for adoption)

Hello! I found you on Adopt a User Project as I am currently looking for someone who could help me gain a better understanding of Wikipedia to enhance my contributions. I've been editing for a month now and used to address my questions on Teahouse page, but for me personal contact is always the fastest way to learn. I've read your profile and you are very experienced, i believe i can learn a lot from you. Hope you can adopt me. I won't bother you too often, promise) Hopeful --Less Unless (talk) 14:12, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@Less Unless: I'd be happy to and I'll try to answer any questions you have. Regards SoWhy 20:47, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much, SoWhy! And here I come ;) I've been editing articles so far and wrote a few but I feel i'm missing out on something, swimming on the surface. I have a lot of free time now that i would like to dedicate to Wiki, and I would like to use this time wisely. I feel I lack some knowledge, i feel lost at the moment. I've read there are vandalism and speedy deletion that require attention, and some other spheres but i don't know where to start there. I would like to get to know all the types of work here to find my perfect spot where i could be the most productive. So can you guide the blind here? Maybe you could recommend where to start. Sorry if i'm a bit messy - that's how I feel) --Less Unless (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Just call me So! Wikipedia has a great many tasks to do but it depends on what you like to do. If you like writing and editing articles, adding references to biographies of living people (see Category:Unreferenced BLPs) is a worthy cause. If you want to patrol pages for vandalism and stuff like that, head to the Wikipedia:New pages patrol/School for orientation. Speedy deletion is a pretty complicated field, so I wouldn't start with it but you will probably learn about it at NPP. Those are just two ideas off the top of my head. If you need more ideas, the Wikipedia:Task Center has an extensive overview of a lot of possible tasks with helpful links. Regards SoWhy 21:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the tips! I haven't noticed your reply earlier. Actually I like researching and looking for references, I've been doing it a bit along with wikilinking where needed. I will definitely look at the NPP School. Even if it turns out not up my alley I will gain a better vision of what's going on. Thank you again! --Less Unless (talk) 23:31, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Auditor of Reality.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:23, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 36

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019

• #1Lib1Ref January 2020
• #1Lib1Ref 2019 stories and learnings

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

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

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

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

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

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

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

Administrator changes

EvergreenFir • ToBeFree

Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox

Deskana

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
• Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news

• Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

welcome to the Arbitration Committee

Congratulations on your success in the elections and welcome to the 2020 Arbitration Committee. This is the first part of your induction onto the Arbitration Committee.

Please use the EmailUser function to indicate:

• the email address you'd like to use for ArbCom and functionary business, and
• if you wish to assigned checkuser and/or oversight for your term.

Before you can be subscribed to any mailing lists or assigned checkuser or oversight permissions you must sign the Wikimedia Foundation's confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information. Please confirm that your username is listed on the Access to nonpublic personal data policy/Noticeboard. If it isn't, and you haven't signed the agreement, please do this promptly and let me know when you have signed it. If you have signed the agreement, but your username is not listed on the noticeboard, please let me know.

Over the coming days, you will receive a small number of emails as part of the induction process. Please carefully read them. If they are registration emails, please follow any instructions in them to finalise registration. You can contact me or any other arbitrator directly if you have difficulty with the induction process.

Thank you for volunteering to serve on the committee. We very much look forward to introducing ourselves to you on the mailing list and to working with you this term.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Katie^talk 17:43, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

It’s that time of year!!

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic) Atsme Talk 📧 19:10, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
	Time To Spread A Little Happy Holiday Cheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: *it doesn't need water *won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas - Happy Hanukkah‼️ and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

@Atsme: Thank you! And a happy Festivus, Newtonmas, Saturnalia or anything else you want to celebrate to you too!!! Regards SoWhy 15:02, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

And thank you right back - and CONGRATULATIONS!! I hope you're a mover & shaker who can help make things happen on ArbCom. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 23:49, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Obligatory congratulations

Hope that you will bring newer perspectives to the committee :-) ∯WBG^converse 12:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Not sure that it's obligatory but thanks nonetheless. I'm quite surprised myself actually. Hopefully, I can do that Regards SoWhy 15:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Super Cool! Congratulations Calmer Waters 16:26, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Calmer Waters, long time no see! How you've been? Does this mean you are coming back to the project? Anyway, thank you! Let's hope it will be "super cool" Regards SoWhy 16:40, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy to see this, my friend :) If you want to learn to to use the CU tool, I'm always happy to help. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:42, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm very pleased to see this result. Not sure if it was me who finally helped you decide to run, but it's been worthwhile and the Committee certainly needs someone like you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Congrats. I really think you're the right kind of person to work well in that kind of role, so I'm really glad you ran and succeeded! ~ mazca ^talk 01:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Again, thanks for all the nice messages and I hope I can prove myself worthy of the trust you and the community placed in me. Regards SoWhy 09:00, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Brian, we miss you

Unobligatory congratulations, and yes, I voted for you, like for most who clearly went for in dubio pro reo (- 2, one who disappointed me by a thoughtless edit summary mentioning therapy, the other because I knew he'd be elected anyway, - I wanted to vote only for 11). Would you have time for a look at a FAC in need? A quick look for the question if a FAC should have a Background section even if that appears the same way in other articles, or a long look for more comments? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:06, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks for both, although I'm not sure whether you did me a favor or not. I'm always happy to help but I have no knowledge of the subject at all, so I probably need some more details on how I can help with that. Regards SoWhy 08:37, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Which subject? ... that parts of an article are moved to a diffeent one? ... that the article was moved without discussion? ... that the bolding of a redirect (MOS:BOLD) was replaced by a link to the familar term BWV (overlink in my humble opinion? - Repeating: there's a question if the article should/could have background even if the same text appears in similar articles as well. A simple yes or no would help me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Without knowing anything about a subject, I would expect any FA to be as complete as possible which usually should include some background information for people like me who know nothing about it. I will try to read the review and see if I can add something more of substance though (although it might take a day or two since I will be busy tomorrow evening. Regards SoWhy 21:28, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello!

	Hello!
	Hello SoWhy if its not a problem with you, would you like to adopt me? Neomorph Xenomorph 07:45, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

@Neomorph Xenomorph: Depending on what you expect, I'd be happy to but I only offer a place to ask questions and get some hopefully informative answers. I don't do courses or classes for adoptees like others do. Please indicate whether that's okay with you. On a side note, you apparently need to fix your signature. The guideline requires that you have at least a link to your user page or user talk page in your signature. So you either need to deactivate "Treat the above as wiki markup" in your preferences so that the software adds the links automatically or you need to manually change the code to include a link using wiki markup. Regards SoWhy 11:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

2020 Arbitration Committee

The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning arbitrators following their election by the community. The two-year terms of these arbitrators formally begin on 01 January 2020:

• Beeblebrox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Casliber (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• David Fuchs (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• KrakatoaKatie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Newyorkbrad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• SoWhy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Worm That Turned (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Xeno (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The one-year terms of these arbitrators also begin on 1 January 2020:

• Bradv (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• DGG (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Maxim (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

All incoming arbitrators have elected to receive (or retain, where applicable) the checkuser and oversight permissions. Xeno has elected not to receive administrator permissions.

We also thank our outgoing colleagues whose terms end on 31 December 2019:

• Opabinia regalis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) will retain Oversight
• Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) will retain Oversight

Outgoing arbitrators are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the functionaries' and arbitration clerks' mailing lists following their term on the committee. To that effect:

• Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing arbitrators after 31 December 2019 at their own request:

  CheckUser: Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos

• Outgoing arbitrators are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. Whether or not outgoing arbitrators will remain active on any ongoing case(s) will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
• Both outgoing arbitrators will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list
• Both outgoing arbitrators will be unsubscribed from the arbitration clerks' mailing list at their request.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Katie^talk 21:02, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#2020 Arbitration Committee

Deletion review for Nimrod de Rosario

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nimrod de Rosario. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Dereck Camacho (talk) 07:30, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!
	Hope you enjoy the Christmas eve with the ones you love and step into the new year with lots of happiness and good health. Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year!CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:48, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey CAPTAIN RAJU, sorry for the late reply and thanks for the nice message. I hope whatever you celebrate will be great and I wish you a happy new year! Regards SoWhy 11:07, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 03:24, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

@Lightburst: Same to you too. I hope you have a nice few days and a happy new year! Regards SoWhy 11:58, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Happy Holidays! May your winter holidays be filled with joy, laughter and good health. Wishing you all the best in 2020 and beyond.

--Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 21:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

@Cameron11598: Thanks although I'd already be happy if they are filled with relaxing and not having to work. Have a good holiday season and a happy new year! Regards SoWhy 13:28, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Cold where you are?

Hi SoWhy! Die wärmsten Wünsche für Weihnachten, während ich bei 27 ℃ schwitze, und ich wünsche Dir einen guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr! Stoss mit mir ein Bier zusammen in Bangkok, wenn es noch wärmer wird! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:20, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey Kudpung, noch ist es nicht so kalt hier, aber 27°C erreichen wir nicht. Ich wünsche etwas Abkühlung und schöne Feiertage und einen guten Rutsch! SoWhy 13:37, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hello SoWhy: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 17:56, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Good luck

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはSoWhyたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 03:03, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

old german

Hey, SoWhy! I have some 13th century German I'm trying to get translated for Kifli:

dô brâchten im die pecken

chipfen und weiʒe flecken,

weiʒer dann ein hermelein.

Any chance you'd be able to help, or point me at someone else? (You probably got a ping to Kudpung's page, but I thought I'd ask here instead of cluttering up there! --valereee (talk) 04:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

@Valereee: Sorry, I'm also not really versed in Old German and I can't think of someone who is. I can guess some meanings ("brachten" is probably a past form of "brachenen", now "brechen" = to break and "weiʒe" is probably "Weizen", i.e. wheat) but I doubt that it will be helpful. According to Babel, only one user, Leornendeealdenglisc, has indicated some knowledge in Old High German. Maybe they can help? Regards SoWhy 09:50, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm starting to get an idea of why none of the sources have translated this lol --valereee (talk) 13:49, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

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

Administrator changes

Dreamy Jazz • Newslinger • Rosguill

Deor • Spartaz • Xeno

Angusmclellan • clpo13 • Edgar181 • Matthewedwards • NCurse

CheckUser changes

Bradv • Casliber • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno

Oversight changes

Bradv • Casliber • DGG • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno

Someguy1221

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
• A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
• Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.

Arbitration

• The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
• Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

• This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

RHaworth

First congratulations / commiserations on your election to the committee. I am looking forward to your careful analysis and wise judgements as always. Secondly can I ask about your recusal from the RHaworth case, because this would seem to be an area within your expertise? Best regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

@MSGJ: Thanks / thanks. I hope I can provide at least some of what you hope for. As for RHaworth's Case, generally, yes. However, I have in the past more than once explicitly expressed my dissatisfaction with this editor's approach to adminship, especially (speedy) deletion. As such, I believed that there was no way anyone (including myself) could reasonably believe me to be an impartial arbitrator in this case. Regards SoWhy 21:06, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

re: ASint Technology

Thank you for your ping re Speedy decline for ASint Technology, but WP:NOTINHERITED. Effectively you are suggesting that if a page has a blue link to anything (notable owner... why not product, or employee, or such) this is a claim of significance. I can see why I was a bit too hasty for Maxdata, that's fair, but in this case I am really not convinced. I'll ping User:Ritchie333 for his 30. If both of you think this was not a valid A7, I'll revise my criteria for tagging A7, but I'd appreciate further explanation why 'two notable owners' are sufficient. (Would one be sufficient too? Would a notable product or employee be sufficient too? What about being WP:LISTED when BEFORE failed to find anything? A7 or safer to PROD?). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus: WP:NOTINHERITED is a for notability, not for A7. For A7, a strong connection is generally sufficient per this RFC. Since A7 is for the most obvious cases, anything that is not that should not be tagged for speedy deletion. Otherwise, situations like Maxdata occur. Also, generally speaking, in most cases a notable connection means that WP:ATD can be applied (such as merging or redirecting to the notable subject's article). But if ATD can be applied, deletion cannot: A non-notable company with a notable product should be merged to the product's article. A non-notable founder of a notable company redirected or merged to the company's article. An otherwise non-notable singer should be redirected to the article of their notable band etc. pp. Regards SoWhy 10:32, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I see. Would you say that in such cases being bold and redirecting such articles is preferable to either A7 or PROD/AfD? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:52, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Basically, yes. SoWhy 11:10, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus: (talk page stalker) It's a common misconception, but NOTINHERITED was never meant to mean that such a claim automatically fails part b of the credible claim of significance test. It simply means that the connexion doesn't override our notability requirements; in other words, that the connexion itself doesn't automatically make the subject notable. Contrary to popular belief, that is not to say that the subject cannot become notable due to the connexion (that is, gain coverage in reliable sources. In fact, I can think of a whole host of things that gained coverage in such sources mainly because of such a connexion).

@SoWhy: if ATD can be applied, deletion cannot That's actually not true; someone (I believe it was TonyBallioni) once told me that it's a content decision. Also, policy does not say that such articles must be ATDed, just that they can be. Policy does not prohibit deletion; it just says that it might not be the ideal solution. I've also seen many articles that could have been ATDed deleted at AfD or even via CSD (after all, just because it can be ATDed doesn't mean it should be). However, I do agree that if it plausible can be ATDed, that's generally enough to at least make deletion controversial. Adam9007 (talk) 16:10, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Imho, if there is an alternative to deletion, then deletion is by definition not desirable because preserving appropriate content is a core policy. Sure, there can always be exceptions to the rule (IAR etc.) but generally speaking (as I was, sorry if that was not clear), in the majority of cases ATD is clearly preferable with our goal to create an encyclopedia in mind. And especially for purposes of A7, any case in which ATD is plausible is - as you say - not uncontroversial enough to warrant speedy deletion. Regards SoWhy 16:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Johann Baptist Sigl

I did the DYK review but then noticed QPQ was missing. So, it's on hold for now, but please ping me when QPQ is done and I'll approve it (again). Indignant Flamingo (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

@Indignant Flamingo: Wow, that was quick. Usually DYK reviews take a while so I thought I could take my time as well. I'll try to do it tomorrow or the day after and I'll ping you when it's done. Regards SoWhy 21:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello SoWhy, are you okay with Inspector General report on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation as the article stands? You green-ticked the hook ALT3, and since then the DYK review was marked as promoted. I'm just double-checking since you didn't explicitly comment whether the Other problems were resolved. Thanks :) starship.paint (talk) 13:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: The "Other problems" referred to the hook, not the article, specifically the lack of context in ALT0. ALT3 solved that. There were no other problems which is why I greenticked it. Regards SoWhy 14:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

SoWhy, that is a hilarious mistake on my part. Well, at least the article got improved in the process :) I am sorry to have caused a bit of inconvenience! starship.paint (talk) 15:01, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Question on speedy deletion from the adoptee

Hello SoWhy! I don't know if you remember me, but about 5 weeks ago you agreed to adopt me and recommended to take courses at New Page Patrol Academy, which I am currently doing. I am on Module 4 , which covers Speedy deletion and one of the assignments is to successfully nominate 5 articles under G11. As you specify in speedy deletion I would like to ask you how to define which article is clearly G11 candidate and which just tells about (lets say company or product) , buy has some violations of NPOV. I find it hard to see the difference. Thank you. --Less Unless (talk) 18:12, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Less Unless: The question is a difficult one but there are some helpful reminders and tips. I'm not sure if you have ever heard about the blue pencil doctrine but the method is the same. With the blue pencil doctrine, a court will "strike" away all parts of a contract that are invalid and only decide based on the parts that were not struck. The same applies to G11 basically: If you can remove the offending (promotional) parts, will there be a valid stub left upon which someone else can create a NPOV article? If so, it's not a G11 because WP:PRESERVE tells us to just do those removals instead. If after removing all promotional language, you would be left with nothing, then it's a G11. Back in 2009, I used this example: "Buy software XXX now!!!" is blatant advertising. "Software XXX is the best software for apply the infinite monkey theorem to cats!" is not. That still applies more or less. If you are interested in more details behind the scenes, there is currently a discussion at WT:CSD about G11. Regards SoWhy 18:27, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

SoWhy, thank you! Will study and read the material you mentioned! Less Unless (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Piotrus and A7. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:36, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 37

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 37, November – December 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Administrator changes

Ergo Sum • Nick Moyes • QEDK • Wugapodes

Dennis Brown

Aude • BrownHairedGirl • CALR • Jengod • John Reaves • J.smith • Kim Dent-Brown • K1Bond007 • MECU • Refdoc • RHaworth

CheckUser changes

Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
• The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

• Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
• When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]

Arbitration

• Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Michael John Treanor. How to create a visible Wikipedia page on Google?

Thank you for your feedback I really appreciate you giving up your time. Best Wishes

Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Treanor (talk • contribs) 13:33, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Johann Baptist Sigl

On 6 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Johann Baptist Sigl, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Johann Baptist Sigl (pictured) was imprisoned multiple times for publishing insulting articles about the German chancellor Otto von Bismarck and the German emperor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Johann Baptist Sigl. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Johann Baptist Sigl), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Adele Spitzeder scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that Adele Spitzeder has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 9 February 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 9, 2020

Thank you today for the article about "one of the most prolific German swindlers who pioneered the Ponzi scheme before Charles Ponzi was even born"! - Thank you for arb work also, and I hope that next time I will have to thank you for a vote, not only five others for whom I voted ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. I try to live up to the trust placed in me by those who supported me. Regards SoWhy 09:21, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Bright Sky Group of Services page speedy deletion

I fully understand why the page I created was marked for speedy deletion. My intention was not to waste anyone's time but I had to show the head of Bright Sky Group of Services that it wasn't going to remain published without sources and noteworthy information that is beneficial to Wikipedia users (like how the company was started by a Greek immigrant back in 1970 and expanded over the years to meet market demands). I begged for sources and historical information to tell a story and edited it what I had published last night to sound as least advertorial as I could. Is it possible at all to get what I wrote and formatted so far so that I can continue on? And if it turns out that I still don't get source or notable historical company info from the head of Bright Sky, I won't bother publishing at all again.

I appreciate your guidance, Megan Ford — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mford19 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Mford19: Judging from your message, I assume you are paid to write about them? If so, please note that per WP:PAID, you have to declare this on your user page. Undeclared paid editing is a violation of Wikipedia's Terms of Use and will result in the loss of your editing privileges. Once you have made the declaration or explained why you would edit in tandem with a company without being paid, I will consider restoring your article as a userspace draft. Regards SoWhy 19:27, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dungeons

Template:Dungeons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Possible adoption

hi. i was wondering if it is possible for you to adopt me, under the Wikipedia program to do? I could really use your help and input. I appreciate it. thanks!!! --Sm8900 (talk) 14:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sm8900: Adoption was designed for new users with little experience, which you definitely do not fall under. Nevertheless, even without any "formal" adoption, you are welcome to come to me and ask me any questions you need answering and I will try my best to help you. Regards SoWhy 17:43, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!!! you have no idea how much I need that. believe me, I can truly use your input. there's lots going on now. gotta keep things moving forward, as you know. I appreciate your help. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Possible adoption 2

I've found myself interested in becoming an admin, but realized that I likely wouldn't be that good of an admin (or at least wouldn't be able to pass an RfA), due to my poor understanding of the notability policy. I think adoption is (probably) the best option for me. Even though I likely wouldn't really do much around AfD or any other areas involving notability, I think that a good understanding of the notability policy is something that any admin should have. Invalid^OS (talk) 14:50, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

@InvalidOS: You are of course correct about notability being an important guideline (not policy) to know as an admin but I don't think you need to be adopted to learn about that. That said, as with Sm8900 above, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. If you want to become more familiar with notability, AFD is not the only area. There is also a a lot of drafts that need judging for notability and you can probably pick up a lot by reviewing how other experienced reviewers have reviewed drafts. Regards SoWhy 17:50, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Travis Patron

Can you restore the redirect of Travis Patron you deleted, now that the redirection target is notable.

(I'm surprised there's no article for him, given his media prominence 1, 2, 3 - but I'm not interested in creating one). Nfitz (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nfitz:  Done. Regards SoWhy 08:57, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I just realised that the original version on Canadian Nationalist Party is still deleted. Can you restore (I assume the question of notability is moot given the state of the article these days - though it's not gone through AFD or anything). Nfitz (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nfitz: Sure, no problem. Regards SoWhy 18:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

German WP equivalent to RSPS 19-FEB-2020

Hello! I was wondering if there was, to your knowledge, a German Wikipedia page equivalent to our WP:RSPS? Thank you in advance for your answer, and belated congratulations to you on both Adele Spitzeder's achieving FA status and your selection for ARBCOM. Warm regards,  Spintendo  13:22, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Not to my knowledge. In my experience, de-wiki has always been much less strict with sourcing than en-wiki has. There is de:Wikipedia:Belege/Fließband which is the equivalent of WP:RSN though which can be used to search for previous discussions but I don't think they keep a list of "good and bad" sources. Thanks for the congratulations. With regards to ArbCom, I'll interpret them as condolences. Regards SoWhy 14:07, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Filter log

Thanks for answering my question at the HD. BTW, what triggered that question was that we have a more specialized feature on wiki: Even for my own contributions, I'm offered a link for “filter log”. So I tried to use that first, and it didn't occur to me that for the more basic feature, I needed to look outside of WP. ◄ Sebastian 09:51, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that function is probably misnamed since it's the log for the edit filter, not an option to filter the log. Regards SoWhy 09:58, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Plus, it appears to be available to everyone on their own contributions page. Do we really want to make life easier for people who trigger filters so often that they need to filter them? There may be a few who do so for legit reasons, but they would know how to access their own filter log; no need to stick the link in everyone's face. ◄ Sebastian 14:10, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi there!

I want to get more involved with editing, and I was wondering if you'd be willing to adopt me (re)? Thanks, Balag12 (talk) 12:30, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

@Balag12: Usually, I'm happy to help but I don't think I have the sufficient resources to devote to it at the moment. I thought I had disabled this on the adoption page... You are probably better off with someone who has more time to help. Regards SoWhy 08:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@SoWhy: No worries - thank you for letting me know Balag12 (talk) 09:09, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Kudpung PD1 v PD1.1

Re your comment on the case page - PD1.1 cannot actually pass now, as both AGK and David Fuchs indicated that they would only support it in the event of PD1 not passing. Black Kite (talk) 09:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@Black Kite: You are correct, my comment was phrased misleadingly. I clarified it now (hopefully). Thanks for the note! Regards SoWhy 10:10, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Need advice on CSD case

Hello! I wanted to ask you what to do if a speedy deletion is contested by the creator of the article, but the article clearly needs to be deleted per Wikipedia policies. For instance, this article - Miss Charm. I nominated it per G4 as the article was recently deleted (logs [[2]]. The creator however contested the deletion saying that the subject is notable (but it was deleted because of the notability issues). I don't want to be edit-warring, but I don't know what is the proper way of conduct here. Can you please help me on this? Thank you in advance. --Less Unless (talk) 19:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Less Unless: Generally, creators are of course not allowed to removed tags themselves and can be warned when they do. And you can always ask any admin to review an article you tagged even when the creator keeps removing those tags. There is no rule that a tag has to be in place for speedy deletion to occur. As for the article in question, the deleted version claimed it was a pageant that will be held for the first time this year. The current article claims it was (also) a pageant in 1989 and 1990, so it's actually not eligible for G4 but you are free to AFD it again if the new version also fails notability despite the new claims. Regards SoWhy 21:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! --Less Unless (talk) 21:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Administrator changes

Money emoji

Athaenara • DeltaQuad

Fishhead64 • Kudpung • Mikaey

Bureaucrat changes

DeltaQuad

CheckUser changes

DeltaQuad

Oversight changes

DeltaQuad

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
• A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

• Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
• The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

CableOne/Sparklight

I have actually read the WP:LISTED section you reference, and it says that being listed is not on its own a criteria of notability in absence of other independent sources. I have found nothing noteworthy about this ISP in about an hour (actually, I have stumbled onto the wiki page when I was trying to find ANYTHING about them), and the article itself is only references to their own web page (and one rather narrow google search, not even any resulting page). Which I noted in my comment on talk page. Additionally, looking at the page history, all four contributors to that page are tagged as affiliated with the company itself. I think the above makes it definitely not "clearly significant", and warrants if not a deletion, then a major rehaul of the page. At the very least, sections listing their current and historic offers definitely don't belong.MreeBiPolar (talk) 16:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@MreeBiPolar: Please note that "significance" as used in speedy deletion criterion A7 is explicitly not the same as notability (as used in WP:NCORP) but a lower standard. A company that is listed in the NYSE will almost always be significant enough to warrant further research but if that's the case, it also warrants further discussion. I'm not sure where you checked but I can find scores of sources mentioning the company, e.g. [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. Is that enough to establish notability? I don't know. But it's sufficient to pass the low bar of A7. If you still believe notability is lacking, feel free to take it to WP:AFD. Please note however, that per WP:IMPERFECT, neither the fact that people with a conflict of interest worked on the article nor a current lack of sources is sufficient to delete an article if the problems can be fixed by editing. Last but not least, listing products is normal for company articles, e.g. Coca-Cola#Brand portfolio or Google#Products and services. Regards SoWhy 16:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Adopt Request

Hi, Hope you doing well. This is Abha Butt from Pakistan. I want to learn How to edit Wikipedia, as a few numbers of Pakistani are editing Wikipedia and improving articles related to Wikipedia. I am a traveler and I visit different places across Pakistan, most of the time I unable to find Wikipedia pages for Villages, Towns, and cities that exist in Pakistan. I read Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines but I am still confused with reference for places. So, I want to request you adopt me and teache me how can I contribute to Wikipedia by creating new articles and improving existing. Waiting for your response. Thanks in advance. --Abha Butt (talk) 15:57, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

@Abhabutt: Thanks for your interest. I'm always happy to help but unfortunately, I don't think I can devote sufficient time to adopting you at this moment, which wouldn't be in your best interest (I assume). I apologize if a technical problem on the adoption list made you think otherwise. Please check Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters for more experienced editors who have more capacities to devote. Regards SoWhy 19:19, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Women footballers / soccer players

There seems to be a sudden uptick in proposed deletion of articles focused on top-division women's footballers by one user in particular. Would you mind taking a look if you have time? Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 21:17, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Hmlarson: I can do so but I am not sure what you expect me to do. Nominating a couple of articles for PROD is not per se problematic since you can easily challenge them by removing the PROD. It does not appear to be disruptive (at this point) though. Regards SoWhy 07:26, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. I'm confused though: I understand a couple to mean two; not over 25 + growing. Oh well. Hmlarson (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

I wish to apply for Wikipedia Library Cards for Newspapers, NewspaperARCHIVE

• Newspapers.com

• NewspaperARCHIVE.com

• I do not know how to link to accounts at commons or wmflabs.org et cetera, so I am asking here.

• I want to add accounts for commons et cetera can you help.

• I am doing biographies 1810-2020, the plaintext embedded often has jumbled columns and I need to see the photos of the news page.

• User:Cameron11598 is ill and cannot do Newspapers.com

T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 02:36, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@T3g5JZ50GLq: I'm not really sure what you are asking for. If you go to one of the links you posted, there should be a "Log In" button below the header. Since you have a unified login, you can use this to login to your account to authenticate yourself for the Library Platform. Once you are logged in, use the "Apply" button to request access and I can process your NewspaperArchive request. For Newspapers.com, if the coordinator is not available, requests are usually processed by the rest of the team (such as Nikkimaria). I don't have access to it though. Regards SoWhy 07:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I was looking for Special:MergeAccount...T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 08:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Administrator changes

Cabayi • Lee Vilenski

Boing! said Zebedee

Jonny-mt • MarkGallagher • PeaceNT

Money emoji → Moneytrees

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork • WereSpielChequers

CheckUser changes

NativeForeigner

Oversight changes

Someguy1221

Daniel Case

Guideline and policy news

• There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

• There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

• The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Crat?

You seem like a good nominee for Bureocrat. Third times the charm! You seem very experienced. Jcoolbro (talk) 13:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Jcoolbro: Thanks but I am sufficiently swamped with being on ArbCom already. We have a lot of skilled and experienced crats (now more than the last time I ran with SilkTork and WSC joining their ranks) that there really is no need for me to offer my services again. Also, I have expressed in the past that I won't run again unless those crats who previously opposed me have changed their mind and I plan to stick by that rule. Regards SoWhy 14:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I was intrigued to stolper onto your excellent recent definition of mendacity. It's a shame not all your colleagues on the Committee practice what they preach and that they don't examine fake claims with a more critical eye when adjudicating their cases. People on that team are not all skilled and experienced for what they are supposed to be doing, and it is not inconceivable that some might use their position to their own ends and vengeance - even the Arbitration Committee itself has a history of members being expelled. I'm glad I teased you to running in the election, and while I wouldn't suggest you try to change anything there, it might be an idea to help the community understand that the Committee does not have a Chairperson (or does it?) and that Committee self-appointed 'spokespersons' are often evincing their own personal views and dislikes of the people in the dock.. Take care my friend, and Jcoolbro's suggestion is not unreasonable. Plenty of people are with both hats bekleidet and I would support it in a heartbeat. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't like to (and thus won't) comment on my fellow arbs whom I have the highest respect for, even if we sometimes differ in opinion. As for cratship, I know that some arbs are twice-behatted but on the other hand, these include at least one person who previously opposed my RfB and while I truly do not hold a grudge against anyone who did so, I have no intention to break the rule I mentioned above. Regards SoWhy 14:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully those crats come around eventually...because I also think that you would make a great one. Anyhoo, that's my annual "SoWhy should be a crat!" message fulfilled. See you next year with the next installment --All the best, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 19:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

To be sure that I know I'm not wrong, I have taken a whole morning to review both runs for 'cratship again and in particular the comments on the 2nd one by Iridescent and myself (and getting very sidelined by various links on the way). The traditional teutonic thoroughness and pragmatic approach (perhaps even Kaltschnäuzigkeit) of a German jurist, is precisely what is needed on Arbcom, especially to maintain checks and balances within a Committee which itself has been historically riddled with corruption and gross mis-dispensation of justice; I spent nearly 20 of my most formative years through the 70s and 80s as a young adult in Lower Saxony and Berlin, and that's why I teased you into running. It's therefore also exactly why you should now be sufficiently respected and accepted by the community for 'Cratship and for the very reasons most of them opposed! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

NCIS: Los Angeles

I saw you reverted my edit, when in fact I am correct as the main headquarters for this district is here in San Diego where I live and they oversee the Los Angeles office is stated in this article: https://www.ncis.navy.mil/About-NCIS/Locations/ where it says in part "SOUTHWEST FIELD OFFICE 3405 WELLES STREET BLDG 57 SUITE 1 SAN DIEGO CA 92136

PHONE: 619-556-1364 DSN: 526-1364

The Southwest Field Office (SWFO), located aboard Naval Station San Diego, California, currently empl­­oys approximately 130 personnel spread across the main field office as well as six resident agencies and resident units in California.

Subordinate Offices: NCISRA China Lake, California; NCISRA Lemoore, California; NCISRA Los Angeles; NCISRA San Diego; NCISRA Ventura, California; and NCISRU Monterey, California."

It also reference on the NCIS Office Preference List as "Southwest: The Southwest Field Office is located in San Diego, CA. Subordinate offices I may be assigned to include: NCISRA Los Angeles, CA; NCISRA Ventura, CA; NCISRA China Lake, CA; and NCISRA Lemoore, CA." - Link https://www.secnav.navy.mil/donhr/Documents/CivilianJobs/NCIS_Office_Preference_Sheet.pdf

I will be removing that statement again as the office does indeed exist. Please do not revert it but post on here and it can be discussed. Thanks! --Galendalia (talk) 08:57, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I wanted to add I did not remove "a fictitious branch of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service" as that is true. I removed the statement about there being no NCIS office in Los Angeles.--Galendalia (talk) 09:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia: I merely removed your addition of the external link (and did so again). The reason is our guideline at Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided (especially #1 and #13). The article is about a television show. As such, the only appropriate external links are those about this show, not about real life entities that might appear fictionalized on this show. Information about the real NCIS Los Angeles office could conceivably added to Naval Criminal Investigative Service#Pacific Operations Directorate instead. Regards SoWhy 09:22, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha @SoWhy: - I added that because of the removal I did where someone said there is no NCIS office in LA but I understand. Thanks for the clarification!--Galendalia (talk) 09:25, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Alan Abel (musician)

On 29 April 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Alan Abel (musician), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Issue 38, January – April 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

• New partnership
• Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

• Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
• Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
• A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
• A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

• The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
• Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Question

Good morning. I am just trying to clarify how to do this. I am new to this. I have no no paid interest on The Elephant Project. I am the founder of the non-profit and education about the need to protect elephants and our unique ways to do I thought would be good to have on wiki. There is nothing nefarious going on. Me and the whole team are volunteers.

Additionally, I made some factual changes to the page about me - that I did not create and so didn't realize that was not authorized.

So how can I get a page created for The Elephant Project.

Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1006:B16F:C408:A09F:313B:CE4A:10AB (talk) 13:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

I suggest you start by reading Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide which hopefully will help you understand why you writing about yourself or something close to you is not a good idea. If after all that you still believe you can create an article that follows all our requirements, which includes verifiability and neutral language, I strongly suggest you use Wikipedia:Articles for creation to create a draft for your article. Remember that you cannot use any text that appears somewhere else unless it's licensed under a compatible license, i.e. one that allows anyone to edit and use it for any purpose. Creating a draft will allow your article to be reviewed by an experienced editor to determine whether it meets both the notability requirements and is written in an acceptable way, thus drastically decreasing the risk of deletion compared to what would happen if you restore the article directly. Regards SoWhy 13:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: What Now (band)

Thanks for reviewing, I raised it as AfD now. Btw, I created that article myself, but later someone (I believe) close to the band decided to rewrite history and all the properly referenced information was deleted, with a claim it was false. I don't think the page and artist meet notability criteria anymore. Mayast (talk) 16:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mayast: I see, thanks for the message. Remember though that notability is not temporary, so if they were notable back then, chances are, they still are. Regards SoWhy 18:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

can you add death?

S. David Freeman has died from Virus few hours ago. posted on the California. https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/obituaries/article242692871.html Ryan Pikachu (talk) 03:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ryan Pikachu:  Done except the virus part since the source does not mention cause of death. If you have a source that does, feel free to add it. Regards SoWhy 06:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Found Cause of death

S. David Freeman has died of heart attack. His daughter said. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-13/s-david-freeman-public-power-chief-and-energy-adviser-dies-at-94 Ryan Pikachu (talk) 15:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for S. David Freeman

On 15 May 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article S. David Freeman, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 22:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Siegfried & Roy

Selbst die deutsche Version von Siegfried & Roy gibt keine Angaben bezüglich "Bundesland". Warum haben Sie noch kein "Niedersachsen" oder "Bayern" dort hinzugefügt? - Iscoak (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

@Iscoak: The German Wikipedia does what they are doing and we do what we are doing. Saying other stuff exists or does not exist on another language edition of Wikipedia is not a valid argument in any discussion. Our templates (cf. {{infobox person}}) explicitly use the city, administrative region, country specification and this is the standard for basically all biographical articles, including those for German subjects (featured article/good article examples: Franz Kafka, Albert Speer, Simon Wiesenthal). Changing an article because you don't like the style this project uses is not helpful. I do concede that Lower Saxony did not exist back then, that was indeed a mistake, however, removal instead of correction is not the right approach. Also, since talk pages are an open forum, please use English on this project when communicating with others, so that other users know what you are saying. Regards SoWhy 08:05, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Impersonating

You may want to look here how an IP is trying to impersonate you. --Saqib (talk) 11:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

@Saqib: Interesting. Thanks for bringing this to my attention although they have been blocked by now. I can't remember if someone tried that before. Maybe I should feel flattered by that? Regards SoWhy 15:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Can you review it please

Hi, I'm user of urwiki. This article is a translation from Arabic and Urdu Wikipedia. This article is available on those wiki for years. I translated and had mentioned sources but someone (you have warned him multiple times for nominating article speedy deletion) drafted it. He was the father of Ibn Taymiyyah.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shahbuddin_Ibn_Taymiyyah

Known Stranger (talk) 12:08, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ulubatli Hasan: While I agree the draftifying was probably in error, could you maybe complete the references you used? I cannot really judge whether they are sufficient to establish notability even with Google Translate. Regards SoWhy 16:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi SoWhy, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for telling me the Wikipedia guidelines. Herobrine303 (talk) 06:25, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

add Funeral King nepal?

King of nepal died in 1955 at the hospital Switzerland. Tribhuvan body was taken back to Nepal where he had states of funeral. and later he was cramated at the river and later at sea from Pashupati Aryaghat. following youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9nhlooO6lk Ryan Pikachu (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
• The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

• A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

ECOHOS

Hi Dear Friend, Before You Deleted Our Company Page Named: ecohos i think because of we did not add any reference to our page, currently we had an interview with cnn turkey, 8tv, fox news turkey, but still not added to their websites. but crunchbase and goodfirms is okay for reference and all of our company data is completely entered. when we wanted to create again our page on wikipedia, we received an alert that we must first get permission from you. Thank you for understanding us. your sincerely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farzam.iman (talk • contribs) 09:41, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Farzam.iman: Wikipedia is not a company directory and not for advertising your company. Please use a different platform to advertise your services on. Regards SoWhy 09:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

ECOHOS

Dear Friend We Are Registered Trademark Brand in Turkey, and we want to give information about our activity, not advertising! for example we work with Municipality, Customs, And we have a bunch of lawyers and government officials next to us. As you said, we advertise through Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. And you're aware that every brand needs a Wikipedia page. If you need evidence to support our claim, we will provide it to Wikipedia, regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farzam.iman (talk • contribs) 10:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Farzam.iman: We don't care about whether you "need" a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia articles are created and kept based on notability, not existence. There are plenty of websites out there that are happy to host your information. This is not one of them. I suggest you stop trying, lest you will be blocked from editing altogether. Regards SoWhy 10:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

• Library Card Platform
• New partnerships
  • ProQuest
  • Springer Nature
  • BioOne
  • CEEOL
  • IWA Publishing
  • ICE Publishing
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Mark at WidgetsUSA

Hi, SoWhy! I see that you blocked this user for a violation of our username policy, but I don't see how he/she was in violation of it. As I understand it, "Bafana Buthelezi at Proteger Holdings SA" is a fully acceptable username of the "Mark at WidgetsUSA" form; for that reason I didn't block, but did ask the user to make a WP:PAID disclosure. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:00, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I was just about to ask the same question... - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 19:01, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers and Rich Smith: And you are both correct. I made a mistake when reading the username and overlooked the "at" somehow. I thought the username read "Bafana Butheleziat Proteger Holdings SA". Thanks for the notification, I reversed the block. Regards SoWhy 19:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

OTRS confirmation

SoWhy, confirmation of Wiselauren has been recieved. Could you unblock? Thanks, Sam-2727 (talk) 04:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sam-2727:  Done, thanks for the notification. Regards SoWhy 14:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

G12-related questions

Hello So Why! I wonder if you could please consult me on some of the questions regarding CSD G12 criterion I find it hard to understand. I understand the guidelines for G12 and Revdel, however what's difficult for me at the moment is:

1. What should I do if the creator removed the G12 nomination (not using the contest button)? ( I guess warn him and put the tag back, but not sure) 2. What should be done if having seen the G12 nomination, the creator removes or rewrites the violated text (probably it should be revldeled, but i'm not 100% sure). 3. Behavior number 2 is lowering the percentage of correctly nominated articles per CSD in my log. Is is being considered when making a decision about granting NPP rights (it's what i'm currently studying in the academy for)? (I know, this is probably the wrong question for you, but I will still ask just in case you might know). Thank you in advance! Best, Less Unless (talk) 11:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Less Unless: If the creator removes a tag without addressing the issue, warn and revert is usually the right way to go. If they do address the problem, tag the article with {{copyvio-revdel}} instead (providing the information required). When granting NPP related rights, admins will usually consider not only whether entries are blue-linked but also why they are blue-linked (i.e. not whether they were deleted or not but whether the tagging was correct at the time of tagging). Regards SoWhy 17:42, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Anon block

Hi, since you're around, any chance of a block on 2401:4900:41f8:3bd3:d4e8:1410:3bb6:7e75 (talk · contribs)? They're inserting unsourced stuff at the Valmiki caste article and their edit summaries suggest they aren't going to change (apparently my backside is going to be red, among other things). - Sitush (talk) 08:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: Blocked for the personal attacks. The edits in question seem to be in attempts of constructive contributions otherwise. Regards SoWhy 08:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. The edits are actually attempts at glorification and will never be sourced because no academic etc accepts them - all part of the sanskritisation process. - Sitush (talk) 08:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Why Did You Delete My Page?

I was editing my page and you deleted it why? You're a fucking cunt man what is your problem I can tell that you have no fucking life just let me finish making my fucking page and then decide whether it needs to be deleted you cunt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bary BadMan (talk • contribs) 09:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you learned that insulting others will get you what you want but it's definitely not working for me. Feel free to ask in a civil manner if you really wish to learn more. Regards SoWhy 10:00, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Copy of a deleted article

Hi, I found you on Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles. Could you provide me with a copy of Corky Boozé? Many thanks. −−− Cactus Jack 🌵 05:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@CactusJack: If you want a copy, enable your email and I will send you one. Otherwise, if you plan to work on it to possibly fix the problems that led to deletion, I can also draftify the article (which would be required for attribution purposes if you plan to use the content on Wikipedia again). Please indicate what you prefer. Regards SoWhy 06:56, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Administrator changes

Malcolmxl5

John • TheCoffee • Tim!

Creffett → GeneralNotability

DeltaQuad → AmandaNP

CheckUser changes

Bbb23

Interface administrator changes

TonyBallioni

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.

Technical news

• Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
• The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:UNSOURCED" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:UNSOURCED. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 1#Wikipedia:UNSOURCED until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Adam9007 (talk) 17:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Requests for permissions

Hello, SoWhy. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Page mover.
Message added Akhiljaxxn (talk) 19:20, 7 July 2020 (UTC)). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

That's a rather cheeky way to solicit administrative opinion at PERM. SoWhy, Akhiljaxxn has left you no message there. Primefac (talk) 22:19, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

They probably wished to raise attention that their request hadn't been processed for two days. Thanks for handling it Primefac Regards SoWhy 07:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Add Pucho son died and Reference?

His son Pucho III had died this year so heres Reference. https://world-today-news.com/reporter-leo-fernandez-iii-dies/ Pucho Fernández has Funeral service and cremated at Celestium The Crematory https://www.primerahora.com/entretenimiento/farandula/notas/muere-el-actor-pucho-fernandez/ http://latremendacorte.info/articulos/index_files/muere-pucho-hijo-de-tres-patines.php

There no Reference for Pucho Fernández. Ryan Pikachu (talk) 00:02, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ryan Pikachu: Since his son has no article, I'm not sure whether we need to include that in the father's article. I removed mentions of him instead. Regards SoWhy 09:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Fabiana Zedeno

Hello! Forgive my bad english. This section says that drafts can be erased Wikipedia:Drafts#Speedy_deletion. Anyway, my area is dance, this person was currently irrelevant, as you can see in the references. She was "very happy" on facebook for her article... But I am obedient and I accept your decision. Regards, Laura Fiorucci (talk) 14:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@Laura Fiorucci: Only speedy deletion criteria listed under Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#General can be applied to drafts. A7 is in the section "articles" and thus can only be applied to pages that are in mainspace (i.e. that do not contain "Draft:" or similar in their title). Drafts are not articles and not visible to readers unless directly opened via the URL. They especially do not appear on web searches. Regards SoWhy 15:16, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:War Leaders - Clash of Nations cover.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Nice articles, dude! BenzingtonBarbarell (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

Red Phoenix

Euryalus • SQL

Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

GB fan

Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

• There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
• Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
• Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
• There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Spyridon Panagopoulos

Hi, you deleted the page Spyridon Panagopoulos today, but I don't see either an RfD or a speedy deletion request. This is someone involved in a growing, large-scale case of potential plagiarism [9]. I'd like to see the rationale for the deletion. --WiseWoman (talk) 20:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@WiseWoman: The page was deleted per WP:A7. It was tagged as such but strictly speaking, a prior tagging is not required. There is no reason to believe that this person is in any way significant outside the very small circle of the "Society for the Medieval Mediterranean", itself not a notable organization afaict. Additionally, claims of plagiarism are negative claims about a living person and thus run afoul of WP:BLP unless proven and notable. On that note, I cannot find a single reliable secondary source talking about this person (the source you mention is a primary source). Regards SoWhy 08:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

jens soering

hi,

i did not leave a citation on my last edit of the jens soering page because the short phrase did not warrant one. i wrote something like, According to some interpretations.... Without this phrase it looks like the following words are gospel truth, that the DNA evidence exonerates Soering. Moreover, in the next paragraph, also my edit from some weeks ago, it is clear that the DNA evidence must be interpreted.

i hope this is clear. cheers, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannydunnontheoceanfloor (talk • contribs) 17:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Dannydunnontheoceanfloor: No, it does not. It says the DNA does not match and that is a fact which the reliable source confirms. Whether that exonerates the person or not is a conclusion based on this fact which the source did not make and neither did the article. However, the content you added afterwards is based on one guy's blog posts who furthermore is not a scientist but indeed someone who has published a number of articles clearly biased against the subject. Such content is not allowed in articles, especially not biographical articles (see WP:RS for more details). As such, I removed all the content you added that was solely based on such sources. Regards SoWhy 18:34, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

Eddie891

Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
• A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
• A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
• An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

September

September

Dahlias in Walsdorf

I like today's Main page, with the TFA (thank you for peer review comments) on the anniversary day (of both dedication and our concert), a DYK, and a great photographer who didn't make it soon enough, Jürgen Schadeberg, - more on my talk, mostly about the tribute to Brian who shared his sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Congratulations! Regards SoWhy 16:02, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit request follow-up

First, thanks a lot for responding to my edit request last week at Talk:Project Veritas and for implementing the first two parts of the request. Regarding the third part of the request (changing "contained the following apology" to "stated"), the source that you cited was already discussed in the RfC (now found at Talk:Project Veritas/Archive 1#RfC on verifiability in ACORN section) and the consensus was still in favor of removing "apology." The reason the source referring to an "apology" was dismissed was that it was not from a normal news article in The Atlantic (a reliable source), but rather from a blog aggregator, The Atlantic Wire, quoting a piece from Wonkette - neither of which is a reliable source. In addition, a piece by Conor Friedersdorf in The Atlantic (here) explicitly states: "As you can see, the resolution didn't require O'Keefe to admit wrongdoing or to fully apologize for the wrong he did Vera." In light of this, I would greatly appreciate if you could implement this part of the edit request as well. Thank you, Sal at PV (talk) 13:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Sal at PV: Upon re-reading, I agree that you have a point. I reworded it. Regards SoWhy 16:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Hello Michaelchan1013. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to SI Partners, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Michaelchan1013. The template

can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:

. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. SoWhy 12:24, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Michaelchan1013: Totally understand your concern. Yet, I promise that I'm not entitled to any compensation or benefits of creating and editing the page of SI Partners. The reason for creating such a page is that the company is reputable in the field of media and communications M&A advisory. Also, as you can see, their international network proves that they are famous in the finance world. Hope this can solve your enquiries.

Books & Bytes – Issue 40

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 40

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Protection level for Assassination threats against Donald Trump

Hey! Would you mind removing the protection level for Assassination threats against Donald Trump now? It's been three years, and since that time, the article has been renamed. The link is now a double redirect, and there's nothing I or anyone else can do to fix it. Thanks! Love of Corey (talk) 01:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I fixed the double redirected but I don't think removing the protection which was instituted as part of the AFD consensus is warranted or needed. If and when someone wants to write a real article on this topic, this can be revisited. Regards SoWhy 13:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Love of Corey (talk) 19:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

NewspaperARCHIVE.com

Dear SoWhy, you recently approved my request to access NewspaperARCHIVE.com on The Wikipedia Library. I am at a loss on how to access it. Can you help?
Thanks, Andrew nyr (talk, contribs) 21:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Andrew nyr: Logins are sent in a separate email once I receive them from the publisher. Please wait a few days and feel free to contact me again if nothing arrives. Regards SoWhy 08:21, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

just found cause of death.

i just found that Kazimierz Sabbat just collapsed at Sloane Square tube station where he died of a heart attack. so i added cause of his death in death place. i don't know how. https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/21/world/london-journal-a-president-a-cabinet-but-a-country-far-away.html?searchResultPosition=1 Ryan Pikachu (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ryan Pikachu: You need to use the death_cause = parameter in the infobox, see my change. Regards SoWhy 11:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you add Funeral of Thomas H. Ince? they said he was cremated at November 21 at Hollywood forever, and three days later his ashes scattered at the sea. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Resting_Places/FOHgDAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Thomas+H.+Ince+resting+place&pg=PA365&printsec=frontcover Ryan Pikachu (talk) 16:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ryan Pikachu: done but feel free to do it yourself next time. Regards SoWhy 17:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing SoWhy a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 10:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

Ajpolino • LuK3

Jackmcbarn

Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM

There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely 1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created.

Technical news

• The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).

Arbitration

• The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
• Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.

Miscellaneous

• The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
• Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Administrator changes

John M Wolfson

Bduke • Nilfanion • Philosopher • Rspeer • Yunshui

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

TonyBallioni

CheckUser changes

EdJohnston • Oshwah • Yamla

Yunshui

Oversight changes

Anarchyte

Yunshui

Guideline and policy news

• Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

• Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
• Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
• Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.

Arbitration

• The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
• The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.

Miscellaneous

• A reminder that standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. (American Politics 2 Arbitration case).

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Matthew Axelson

You closed a deletion discussion on this soldier as Redirect to Operation Red Wings. User:Delta fiver has submitted a draft, which I declined, but now have discussed with the author, who has pointed out that recently there have been various honors in memory of his heroism, such as the naming of a post office. I would like to accept the draft, and was about to go to Deletion Review, but I see that the instructions say to check with the closing administrator. So: Should I go to Deletion Review, or should I just accept the draft? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:45, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

The draft has been declined again by another reviewer. I will discuss it with the other reviewer and ask them whether they declined it because of the previous deletion, or whether they thought that it currently does not meet notability. If they declined it because of the previous deletion, I will send it to DRV. If they declined it because they don't think it satisfies notability, then the reviewer and the author and I will discuss it. This is not a case of disagreeing with your closure. I think that your closure was correct. This is a case of additional facts. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: As you said, my close was based on the discussion and the facts at the time. If new facts emerge that require reassessment of notability, it should be reassessed. No need for DRV in that case though. DRV is to review a decision, not to re-run the discussion with new facts. If a reviewer thinks the subject is notable now (either you or someone else), accept the draft. If someone else disagrees, they can start a new AFD. Regards SoWhy 06:59, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, reason 3 for DRV is if significant new information has come to light that would justify restoration of the deleted page, but reason 3 is usually considered a deprecated reason by the DRV regulars. Should it be deleted? Robert McClenon (talk) 07:41, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

I always understood reason 3 to refer to old information coming to light afterwards (along the lines of WP:NEXIST), i.e. if the discussion had known about this piece of already existing information, it would have ended differently and thus the discussion was flawed. But if information only comes into existence after the discussion, the discussion was correct because no one could have predicted the change of information availability. I hope that makes some sense. Regards SoWhy 08:20, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bundesdruckerei logo.svg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:28, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Navigation without a compass

The section title describes how I feel when navigating TWL. I need access to newspaper.com and newspaperarchive.com - thought I already had access. I actually did for a while but something changed, and for some reason I no longer have that access. I need supervision as to how I can regain access...so can you please help? Maneurvering TWL's website is not as easy as it used to be - and not a good option for me. I tried it earlier this year, thought I had accomplished what I needed to do, but here I am. Atsme 💬 📧 23:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

@Atsme: Is the problem with the newspaperarchive.com page or with the TWL page? Your account was renewed in May 2020 and should still be working. Your account name is the email address you used and if you have forgotten your password, you can request a new one on the login page [10]. If you get an error message there when trying to login, you can probably get a faster response at customerservicenewspaperarchive.com but I can try asking as well if you give me more specifics. As for newspapers.com, I have no access to those details, you might want to ask Netoholic who processes those requests. Regards SoWhy 07:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I found my prior registration for newspaperarchive.com so all is well there. I'll contact Netoholic. Thank you! Atsme 💬 📧 09:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Add new Categories?

Can you add categories name called Burials in Nepal? because few people buried in that country. Gopal Gurung Lalbahadur Thapa Begum Hazrat Mahal and Kalu Pande. i just serached categories, there no found. Ryan Pikachu (talk) 20:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ryan Pikachu: I created Category:Burials in Nepal for you within the Burials by country category. Just add [[Category:Burials in Nepal]] to the pages in question. Regards SoWhy 08:55, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Draft:CJ Werleman

Hi, Can you review it? He is notable. I don't know why I'm failed to create CJ Werleman. Hasan (talk) 05:52, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ulubatli Hasan: While I understand that waiting for reviews is annoying, I usually do not review drafts on requests, especially not in areas I have no real knowledge in. Please continue to be patient until someone else has time to review it. Regards SoWhy 18:50, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 41

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

• New partnership: Taxmann
• WikiCite
• 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Matthew Axelson

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Matthew Axelson. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Eagles 24/7 (C) 06:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A touch of annoyance

I am slightly (only slightly!) annoyed that you moved WP:VPI#Creation of a CSD criteria for articles and drafts with no encyclopedic value to WT:CSD. My observation (and I am "guilty" of the same) is that WT:CSD does not move very fast on new CSD, and it especially tends to stomp out new ideas, especially those that have no semblance of meeting the criteria for a new criterion. Some topic first discussed at VPI should probably have the opportunity to be discussed there, rather than plopped on WT:CSD and summarily opposed by the choir there (something not possible for one following the rules at VPI).

Not a big deal, but thought that one might be worth pointing out. --Izno (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't think there is any kind of "trend" towards opposing on WT:CSD any more than on other boards although I do think that, given the power of speedy deletion, acting cautiously and carefully seems appropriate when new criteria are proposed. But even if we assume this to be correct, does this also mean we should be allowed to start discussions on incorrect venues just because we fear that the proposal will be (rightfully?) rejected when posted to the correct venue? 🤔 FWIW, those thoughts did not cross my mind when I moved the discussion. The discussion was already quite specific, so I thought it best to move to the venue that deals with specific CSD proposals. If the discussion had been about how to handle such drafts in general and not about already proposing a way to handle them, I agree that VPI might have been the correct place for that. Regards SoWhy 19:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

VPI was not an incorrect venue though, so I'm not sure why you attempt to generalize so :^). It's for ideas, and even if an idea is specific-enough to think of a specific other board it might have been proposed or discussed at, that should not prevent someone from presenting their idea (or gathering others) there. Besides that, I wouldn't say that a proposal that comes without wording is particularly specific or ready for action with regards to new CSD. (Maybe that's one to add to the new-CSD criteria if it's not already. :)

The general point I want to make is that even though some specific proposal at VPI may have been rejected at WT:SomeOtherPlaceThanVPI, the responding editors at VPI may have developed an actual proposal from the initial thread at VPI that may not have been rejected. That's the point of VPI: to give form, build some backing for some change, and potentially identify showstoppers (and for the half-baked ideas that will definitely never go anywhere, but we don't talk about those), without the fear of "Oppose". --Izno (talk) 21:10, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

Izno

Guideline and policy news

• There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.

Technical news

• Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Clarissa Miller

Hi SoWhy -- What are you reading the claim as being here? I don't often speedy tag articles and I think this is my first ever decline. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 21:00, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@Espresso Addict: Coverage in multiple reliable sources. True, that coverage might be related to her daughter mainly, but it's still coverage. A7 is for subjects that clearly have no place in Wikipedia. I don't think that can be said about Agatha Christie's mother who should at least be covered in another article if not her own. But then merging or redirecting would be preferable per WP:ATD. Regards SoWhy 16:39, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Redirecting would be a good outcome; the article on Christie already covers her childhood in some detail. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:35, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Flyer22 and WanderingWanda

Hi there, do you know how I can get my statement into the preliminary statements? Please discuss with me before moving my remarks. Thanks. Onetwothreeip (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: You edited a page that clearly said This case is currently open, so no changes may be made to this page, and unauthorised edits may be reverted. and Do not edit this page unless you are an arbitrator or clerk. I'm not sure how that was unclear.

The community is invited to make statements on Case requests to help us in the Arbitration Committee decide whether to accept the request and open a case. Once opened, the case page serves as an archive to document the status of those statements. However, at this point, no further statements are allowed because the decision has already been made and adding more statements would create the incorrect impression that those statements were considered by the Committee before opening the Case. You are welcome to contribute evidence you have on the /Evidence subpage or help workshop proposals how to handle the Case in the /Workshop subpage. Regards SoWhy 20:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

That's fine, I didn't see the notice then. Where should the statement be moved to? Onetwothreeip (talk) 20:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: Again, while we welcome community members making statements to help us decide whether to open a case, there is no need or any place for them once the Case has been actually opened. Now the case has been opened, you and all other members of the community are welcome to contribute specific evidence and help workshop proposals. Regards SoWhy 21:20, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

The statement wasn't about whether the case should be opened or not, it was about the scope of the case. Onetwothreeip (talk) 07:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: Yes, I read it. The scope of the case however is not fixed. It was decided to open it as a Case to examine the conduct of two named editors and their interactions but as I mentioned, you are welcome to suggest remedies on the /Workshop page. The Committee can adapt more "generalist" remedies if the evidence shows that there is need for guidance outside the interactions and conduct that was initially the reason to open the case (e.g. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Magioladitis#Remedies). Regards SoWhy 07:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Alright, happy for it to be moved to /Workshop. Thanks for your help. Onetwothreeip (talk) 08:23, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

"Zoë Robins" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Zoë Robins. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 23#Zoë Robins until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:22, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Administrator changes

Hammersoft

Andres • Brion VIBBER • Rkitko • Thatcher

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek • Primefac

Oversight changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek

Joe Roe

Guideline and policy news

• Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.

Technical news

• You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

Arbitration

• By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
• Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

Could you please explain why you created User:SoWhy/Ten Commandments for Speedy Deletion, and then created Wikipedia:10CSD a minute later, and never moved the userspace version over the redirect, once you were satisfied with it? Geo Swan (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Geo Swan: I think Wikipedia:10CSD was only ever meant to be a shortcut to the userspace essay, and the userspace essay was never a "draft" to be moved into Wikipedia space. Adam9007 (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

• Adam9007, contributors are allowed to exercise WP:OWNERSHIP over userspace essays, and are not allowed to exercise ownership over wikipedia space essays. A relatively small number of contributors started userspace essays, and linked to them from the wikipedia namespace. I suspect that most people who did this didn't consider that it unfairly gives their personal point of view some extra credibility, because most readers who click on the link from the wikipedia namespace will assume it is a wikipedia space essay, that has undergone the greater scrutiny applied in the wikipedia namespace, and that it may have been tuned by other contributors, so it represents the views of more than a single person.

What I'd like to see is for all contributors who have maintained an essay, in userspace, that they had linked to, from the wikipedia namespace, give serious consideration to either moving that essay fully into the wikipedia namespace, or, if they weren't interested in that, or thought it wasn't ready for wikipedia space, or just wanted to retain sole authorship, requesting WP:CSD#G7 on the redirect. Geo Swan (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any policy or guideline forbidding shortcuts from userspace to Wikipedia space. In fact, Wikipedia:Shortcut says that shortcuts are purely for convenience and can be made for any page. If you really believe that shortcuts from userspace to Wikipedia space are inappropriate, you should make a proposal, either there or at WP:VPP or somewhere similar. Adam9007 (talk) 21:12, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

• Adam9007, while it is not explicitly forbidden to make your userspace essay look like a wikipedia space essay, there is an implied distinction between user essays and wikipedia essays in the schema at Category:User essays. Some authors of essays that were formerly wikipedia space essays, that were demoted to user space, following an MfD, then subsequently created redirects from the wikipedia namespace to their deprecated essay. This seems misleading to me. I find it disturbing.

So, I decided to find the relatively rare instances where someone, like SoWhy, made the choice to have their userspace essay accessed through a redirection from the wikipedia namespace, and ask them why they did so.

I suspect I will find some people never considered that this practice appears misleading.

Maybe someone will offer an actual good reason for this practice. Great! Then I won't need to make a VPP proposal. You don't have a good reason for it, by any chance? Geo Swan (talk) 21:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

You don't have a good reason for it, by any chance? A good reason for the practice? Except perhaps for userfied essays, I actually can't think of any off the top of my head. Adam9007 (talk) 21:37, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: The essay was written back in 2009 when such distinctions as you discussed with Adam9007 above were not really made. A couple of essays like this (such as WP:WIHSD) started in the user space and many also stayed there. As you can see from Category:Redirects to user namespace, the practice was and is quite common, which is why I am surprised you are highlighting them now. I never moved it to Wikipedia-space because I saw this as my advice, just like many others did with their essays. I also see no need to actually do so. I noticed you have somehow gotten the impression that having such redirects is "misleading" and disturbs you but that actually requires you to assume that those redirects were created to mislead and that is not what happened.

I can offer a good reason (imho) from how it was handled back in the day™: Essays are left in user space if they intend to convey the advice of a single editor. This way, users can easily see who is giving the advice and can decide whether to follow it. On the other hand, essays should be moved or created in Wikipedia-space, if they are supposed to be worked on collaboratively and thus not be immediately linked to a single editor. WP:-redirects merely (per WP:R#KEEP #5) facility easy access to essays without conveying anything more than these are pages about Wikipedia itself in some form or another.

If you really believe that you have found a genuine problem that cannot be solved by changing the wording of the {{essay}} template instead, you should start a discussion to codify this as consensus because at the moment, WP:R#KEEP #5 imho clearly forbids these deletions. If you do, please leave me a courtesy ping or notification. Regards SoWhy 09:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, there are plenty of other WP:-style redirects to user space that almost everyone is okay with, such at WP:JIMBOTALK. I don't think anyone would argue that Jimbo's talk page appears as a Wikipedia-style page just because of that redirect. On the other hand, WP:SOP for example links to User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles and I'm sure Jimbo likes it that way but per aforementioned logic, it would also have to be moved to Wikipedia-space to avoid deletion of the redirect. Regards SoWhy 12:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Abyss (Star Wars novel) (cover art).jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Backlash cover.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)