Z1720

Happy New Year, Z1720!

Happy New Year!

Z1720,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

HMS Vanguard (1909) TFA

Hi Z1720, and thank you for your contributions. The Vanguard is a fine ship indeed, but I am here to politely ask if you would consider rescheduling the TFA. I understand that I am making a very late proposed add to the TFA list, but I have been entirely reworking a very old album FA of Green Day's Dookie from the depths of 2007, and this seminal, iconic rock album turns 30 on 1 February. I'm afraid I'm too late for that deadline, but I have been rapidly translating a fully-developed French version into the English page, and 22 February was the day its lead single "Longview" debuted on MTV and began to propel the band into rock legend. I plan to have it fully functional by tomorrow evening, and I'm assuming this FA is old enough to be re-run (I don't know if it is, so you can stop me here if it isn't). I see the nominator was someone else but they have not yet offered support on the TFA proposition; if you would like me to consult Sturmvogel I would be happy to.

I completely understand if you or Sturmvogel wish to decline, as it has appeared on the front page once many moons ago and you have a canonical anniversary date set, but 30 years is a big milestone for this record, and it's not just any record. Again, your decision, but I figured the worst I could hear is no. Happy new year, dannymusiceditor ^oops 20:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: I am not a TFA coordinator, so I only propose articles for TFA's consideration. I have no objections to swapping articles, although I have not taken a close look at the Dookie article. Pinging @TFA coordinators . Z1720 (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

As it is, it wouldn't pass; I'll need until no later than the end of the day tomorrow night (EST) to finish the touches to Dookie. It's gone unnoticed as a decaying article for a long time until I picked it up and started sporadically improving it in bursts starting just about a year ago. But 30 years is 30 years, and if you'll humor me I can do the rest in one run of a handful of hours. dannymusiceditor ^oops 20:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: When you are done, I'd appreciate it if you could mark it as "Satisfactory" at WP:URFA/2020A. Thanks. Z1720 (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Gog the Mild is scheduling February. Wehwalt (talk) 20:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

• DannyMusicEditor you are cutting this damn fine. I am in the middle of a run of scheduling and am five away from Vanguard. I am not necessarily preferring either of these at the moment. So I shall stop at Vanguard and possibly sleeping on it will bring clarity. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

  I completely understand. I'll get cracking on Dookie to make it as presentable as possible to you tonight. dannymusiceditor ^oops 21:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

DannyMusicEditor, once you have it more or less as you want it, could you nominate it at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests immediately below HMS Vanguard to give the community at least some chance to comment. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Gog the Mild, it's about a quarter to one in the morning in eastern America, and after taking a break for a few hours from my last message, I've spent roughly the last four and a half translating French. I'm going to sleep for a little bit, but I should have this done imminently - I still have to polish the live performances and write about this album's legacy (of course it has one, it's a diamond record), but I do not work tomorrow and I could not be happier spending my free time completing this. Any further updates I will send to your talk page. dannymusiceditor ^oops 05:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations from the Military History Project

		Military history reviewers' award
		On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (2 stripes) for participating in 7 reviews between October and December 2023. Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Question from Vargibu (16:00, 6 January 2024)

Hi mentor, what is "Tags: possible BLP issue or vandalism"? Is it good or bad? Why my edits are being tagged so? Can you look into it? --Vargibu (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Vargibu: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! WP:BLP stands for biography of living person: an article about a person who is alive falls into this category. BLPs have extra scrutiny, which means that when editors add information about them it is important to always cite the information to reliable sources. If edits are being tagged so, I would post a message on the talk page of the article that asks the person who tagged the article for more information. Don't forget to ping them using a Template:Reply to so that the person is notified of your question. Let me know if you have any other questions. Z1720 (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Question from Shrimaa Singh (18:40, 6 January 2024)

Hi, what is the impact of Wikipedia on web, as we have numbers of websites similar to Wikipedia. --Shrimaa Singh (talk) 18:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Shrimaa Singh: Thanks for your question. I do not know the answer to that question, but the article Wikipedia might have some of the information you are looking for. Z1720 (talk) 18:41, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Question from Suprisedr (18:19, 9 January 2024)

Hello how long does it take for one to have permissions to write their own wikipedia articles? --Suprisedr (talk) 18:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Suprisedr: Your account needs to be at least 4 days old and have made 10 edits. This is called "autoconfirmed", which you can read about at WP:AUTOCONFIRM. Z1720 (talk) 18:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Yonkers Peer review 2

Hi, I responded to you on the peer review again. The Cadillac Ranger (talk) 00:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	Thank you for participating in Toronto's Wikipedia Day :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

2024

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy New Year

2024

-- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I see another 300 coming up: St John Passion, first performed on Good Friday 1724. It was 7 April then, and is 29 March this year. I think it belongs there, for its meaning. Right? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks like I misunderstood the "no answer" to this question. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Today a friend's birthday, with related music and new vacation pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Question from Velosaint (16:02, 17 January 2024)

Hello, I'm obviously brand new to participating in articles. I would like to start contributing articles based on my interests and experiences. Going through the help and guides I'm going to setup a sandbox and I was wondering if I can share an article I've created in my sandbox with another editor to get advice. The only option i see says publish but I don't really want my sandbox public. Thanks --Velosaint (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Velosaint: Thank you for signing up for Wikipedia! Yes, you can share and article you are working on in your sandbox and ask for feedback from other editors. However, please note that all edits in your sandbox are still public. The wikilink to your sandbox will look something like User:Z1720/sandbox12 (this links to my sandbox article about the Brown-Dorian administration). Let me know if you have other questions. Z1720 (talk) 18:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Question from Ratndip 2004 (10:25, 22 January 2024)

How u create a backlink --Ratndip 2004 (talk) 10:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Ratndip 2004: What do you mean by "backlink"? Are you talking about a wikilink? This is created by surrounding the term with two square brackets. So for example, if I want to link to the Wikipedia page for lion, I would type in [[lion]], which creates the lion link. Let me know if you have other questions. Z1720 (talk) 14:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

numbers moving to queue

Hey, Z! Didn't want to start a tangent...Re this edit, where did you go to see the numbers of admins who had moved to queue each month? Valereee (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: Thanks for starting this discussion, hopefully we can build momentum to some kind of change. I counted the number of admin who updated Template:Did you know/Queue/NextPrep. Z1720 (talk) 15:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I think I do remember that!

Just FWIW, I hope I'm not coming off as simply a crank. I became an admin to work at DYK. I used to move preps to queue often. There were months I was doing one per day when needed. Then one day I burned out to the point I completely stopped editing, realized one day that I hadn't edited in literally months, and I'd been a daily editor for years. I decided to figure out why, so I handed in the mop and found I was interested in editing again. Went back to building preps when I felt like it. Then one day DYK got desperate, and I said I'd try to build a prep in the next day or so. Didn't edit at all for days. That was when I realized it wasn't adminning that was burning me out, it was DYK and the feeling of duty to the other workers there -- which is not them or anything they said or implied, it's me, it's my own problem I feel that way -- and that's when I hit on doing a move for each nom I made and picked up the mop again. I feel okay because I'm still doing more work than I'm causing, and I more or less can remain mostly ungrumpy. Usually. :D Valereee (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: I don't consider you a crank at all! My frustration is from the immense work I did in December promoting queues, and how other admin are not coming in to help. Taking a look through the edit history of the NextPrep template, you can see the names of admin who used to be active but haven't promoted a queue in over a month: leeky, Premeditated Chaos, Cwmhiraeth, Cas Liber, BorgQueen. And I think less than 20 admin have promoted queues in the past year, out of over 400 sets. DYK is burning through admin, and is not sustainable. I don't know what the solution is, but something needs to change, and more admin need to help out. I don't know how to make that happen though. Z1720 (talk) 16:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

That's exactly how I was feeling, and I sincerely hope you'll find a way to prevent yourself from becoming completely burned out to the point you walk away like I did. I was feeling actual resentment, and I didn't like feeling that way toward people I genuinely like. And I kind of realized it was my problem. None of those people were telling me I had to do the work. They just didn't want to do it themselves and hoped someone else would do it. Although I do have to say that every time I see a vote by the majority to increase the workload for the minority, I feel completely justified in doing only more work than I cause. If DYK implodes because no one's willing to do the work...well, my philosophy is that in volunteer work, if no one is willing to do a task, maybe it's not worth doing. I hope it never happens because I do value DYK as a way to get eyes on new creations, and the process always seems to improve the articles. But oh, well. I'm doing more work than I cause. I don't have to carry the entire project just because 98% of people don't value it enough to do their share. Valereee (talk) 16:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: I think one big reason why I got addicted to editing Wikipedia was to improve articles that appeared on DYK. That's why I want to keep DYK going: so that new editors might catch the Wikipedia bug. I think I am stretching myself quite thin, with DYK, OTD, and ArbCom, so that's why I'm hoping to build a roster of admin who can help out in the first two. I'm hoping these proposals will help find admin who can help. I also need to write an article one of these days, or I'll do terrible in the Wikicup... Z1720 (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

You know...it would be interesting to know how many moves we'd get each week if every time an admin made a nom, they made a move to queue. I'm not sure how many queues I see that don't have a nom from an admin. If we could even get admins to commit to making a move of one single prep set to queue when they make a nom, we might not have a problem. Valereee (talk) 17:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: I'd be in favour of replacing their QPQ requirement to a "move to queue" requirement. Z1720 (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

That would work for me. That would actually lessen my own workload from 9 to 8 reviews, so for me personally a decrease. But for the average high-frequency admin nominator, it represents an 8x increase in workload plus the increase in risk, tedium, frustration, unpleasantness associated with reviewing 8 hooks that may or may not have been carefully scrutinized by reviewers and promoters. Getting folks on board for that...well, we can try. Valereee (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

When I promote to queue, I don't check as much as I do for the average review. When I promote from prep-to-queue, I only check to ensure that one fact is in the article and verified to a reliable source (not 2+ ALTS), skim for article tone, use earwig to check for copyright, and use a tool to check the article to ensure everything is cited. Major problems should have been sorted before it gets to this stage. Perhaps if we make it an either/or (an admin can promote a set or review an article) it might encourage more promotion.

I just posted in Discord's Admin thread asking for help, and the feedback about DYK is interesting (and not positive). Might be a good readthrough to see why admin are staying away. Z1720 (talk) 18:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm sure it would be an interesting readthrough, but I don't use discord. If these are admins who don't nominate, do we care what they think? And if they're admins who do nominate, why aren't they discussing it at WT:DYK instead of there? Sorry to be grumpy, but why is this even being discussed by admins somewhere else when literally everyone affected by it is at WT:DYK? Valereee (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm still processing this, and the more I think about it, the more dismayed I feel. Admins are discussing a Wikipedia project off-wiki in a way that is discouraging other admins from helping out at that project. That's really troubling. Valereee (talk) 10:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

February music

story · music · places

My calendar story today is about Michael Herrmann celebrating his birthday. Perhaps I can get the festival into OTD, - you said birthdays don't count ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Today I am happy about a singer on the Main page (at least for the first hours), after TFA the same day last year. - I still have the Good Friday question open (see January), but take your time, just don't forget please, over all the amazing things you manage to do for OTD and DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

more music and flowers on Rossini's rare birthday --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

still in the context: I added Rossini's Petite messe solennelle on its premiere day, 14 March 1964, which is 160 years ago. I believe that the time to repeat Mikado (1885) will be next year ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Rogmike (22:03, 5 February 2024)

Hi Z1720, you are my mentor and I want to say hi and ask a question. Several months ago I suggested a minor edit to a page GINI coefficient. I am not sure what should happened next.

Thank you

rogmike --Rogmike (talk) 22:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rogmike: It looks like the edit was reverted in this edit. I suspect that the editor who reverted your edit thought that you were adding a source to an article that you authored yourself. Wikipedia considers it a conflict of interest when editors add sources that they authored themselves. If you want to add this information to the article, I suggest finding another source that verifies the information you tried to add that was authored by someone else. Z1720 (talk) 22:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Z1720. Thank you for this insight. I am not sure how to proceed. I found the statement on the page to be incorrect and wrote the proof that I put on SSRN. Proof itself is rather trivial, but I do not know if anybody looked at this relationship before, so I do not have any other source to support my claim. I do not think I am unique, so probably you can guide me on how to incorporate proposed change to the page. Will it help if I just remove the link to the article I put on SSRN? Rogmike (talk) 22:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Anyone with a conflict of interest can propose an edit to an article by using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Once the request is made, another editor will determine if the edit should be added into the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Regarding: Did you know nomination of 'Ingush towers' article

Hi Z1720, I am unable to reply to you here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Ingush_towers, however I have already replied on WT:DYK earlier. See diff Muqale 16:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

OTD

Hi. I saw your comment on errors that we have a backlog and I'm willing to help. It looks like the default is that the previous years entries roll over. This is confusing as you cannot tell what has changed from year to year without going through the history!I think we should try for different stuff every year, of we can. Do you have any tips or tricks for this area? Secretlondon (talk) 13:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

@Secretlondon: Thanks for helping out in this area. When I swap the hooks, I try to use different hooks every year. The OTD helper here shows which hooks have appeared on the Main Page and when. You can also find new hooks using a Wikidata query; the links are at the bottom of the WP:OTD page. Ensure that a hook placed in the OTD set is eligible for the main page: the date that the event happened or the person was born/died needs to be cited in the article, there are no orange banners anywhere in the article, and there are few (or ideally zero) uncited passages, and the article has not been featured on the Main Page in the past year.

Feel free to swap a set and send me a message, and I will check the articles you placed there. When you finish swapping a set, please indicate that you have done so at WT:OTD. Thanks again for offering to help! Z1720 (talk) 16:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Peer Review Barnstar
		Thanks for all your help and feedback on pages submitted to Wikipedia:Peer review ! GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 18:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:Today's featured article/April 26, 2024

You nommed this one at TFAR. Any objection to switching the image from one co-star to the other? April TFAs are a bit heavy on white-male images. - Dank (push to talk) 23:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Dank: No objection. Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

GA nomination

Hi @Z1720: I am thinking about nominating 'Pornography' for Good article review if you be willing to take it up for review anytime soon. Rim sim (talk) 06:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Rim sim: If you nominate it to PR, I'll take a look. Z1720 (talk) 13:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Z1720: Nominated it for PR under 'General' topics here[1], you may examine it now. Rim sim (talk) 17:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Peer Review - Etika

Hi Z1720, I wanted to thank you for your suggestion for a peer mentor on the Etika PR. It's been several months and I haven't received as much feedback as I'd like outside of a few suggestions, so I wanted to ask if you would like to leave any more feedback, if you have the time? If not, may you please archive the review tomorrow? Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 22:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@PantheonRadiance: I don't think I will have time to review the article. Instructions on how to archive PRs is at WP:PRG, and I highly recommend using the script mentioned there, as it makes the process easier. Good luck with the article! Z1720 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you so much! PantheonRadiance (talk) 22:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Your WikiCup submissions: 3 GAN reviews

Hi Z1720, thanks for participating in the WikiCup. You recently submitted Talk:Oakland California Temple/GA2, Talk:Abigail Larson/GA1, and Talk:Alison Frantz/GA1 for GANR points in the WikiCup, but you do not seem to have completed your reviews yet. As per Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, you may claim points when your review is finished. For GAN reviews, this means you may claim your points when the review is passed, failed, or closed. Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Sounds good. In previous years I had submitted GA reviews while they were in progress: in the future, I'll submit them when the reviews are complete. Z1720 (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Oakland California Temple GA Resubmission

Your recommendations have been taken into account and the Oakland California Temple page has been updated. Please take another look at the page for its subsequent GA review. Thank you! yoscotty (talk) 12:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

The page has been reworked according to your instructions. Please, take a look at the page let me know if I did not catch anything that needs to be fixed. Thank you again! Yoscotty (talk) 18:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your notes! I put more citations in the Christmas section–let me know if that is better for notability. The quote from Brigham Young has been removed from the lead section. Information about statistics for four out of five visitors to the FSC is a specific statistic for the Temple Hill FSC location. Let me know if there is anything else I should change. Thank you very much for your help! Yoscotty (talk) 19:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you again for your notes! The page has been updated according to your specifications. Please, let me know what else I can change! Yoscotty (talk) 17:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your notes. I've worked through the edits as you've highlighted them. Please, take a look and let me know if anything else needs to be adjusted. Yoscotty (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Anniversaries

story · music · places

Thank you for the work on the selected anniversaries, again! I enjoyed Rossini's mass especially. You pointed out that we shouldn't run the same fact two years in a row, - then we should not use BWV 1 on 25 March this year, but next year for the 300 years. I think that Feast of the Annunciation is better sourced now. How would it go to the top line? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: The hooks are usually swapped a few days before the date. When the hooks for March 25 are swapped, if Feast of the Annunciation is not added to the top of the template you can post a request on the selected anniversary date's talk page, and you are welcome to ping me in that message. If it is two days or one day before it is set to appear on the Main Page, you can post a message on ERRORS and an admin will take a look. Z1720 (talk) 14:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining! - I uploaded vacation pics (from back home), at least the first day, - and remember Aribert Reimann. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I tentatively moved Feast of the Annunciation to the "staging area" for the 25 March selection. - Pics of third day begun.

Thank you for handling that. - In WP:TFAR, I moved some articles that you requested to the summary, but only dates, titles and your support, - please add reasons. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for that. New pics: a calf in the mist and chocolate cake, and a story of collaboration --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I listen to Bach's St John Passion today, - 300 years after it was first performed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Two days later in time, a different music, - Happy Easter! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

And the following day another contrast. I added that "exhilarating" music to the anniversaries, and while I would have preferred it today, I wouldn't find 10 April impossible, with Eastertide lasting for 50 days. If an image, not old Bach again please, but perhaps the contemporary Nikolaikirche. (I added this here under March because of the context, April will follow.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

TFA nominations

This is to let you know that SMS Lothringen, 2019 FA Cup final, Mary Anning, Raymond Brownell and Take Ichi convoy have been scheduled as today's featured articles for May 2024. Please check that the articles needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurbs, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before each article appears on the Main Page. Thanks for the nominations. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Your work at OTD

Thanks for your sterling work at OTD. Just so you know, we had a WikiCon in Auckland over the weekend and I gave a presentation about the homepage. I made a plug for editors getting into OTD prep work. I hope that (at least) one of them will act on it and give you a helping hand. All the best. Schwede66 18:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Signups open for The Core Contest 2024

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. – Aza24 (talk) 02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

DYK for Edwin Atwater

On 29 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Edwin Atwater, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Edwin Atwater and his brother were the first people to import glass into Canada? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Edwin Atwater. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Edwin Atwater), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Selected anniversaries

Hello. How come Good Friday s not currently featured on Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/March 29? It seems quite odd that such a big international day is not featured on there. Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 06:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

@Therealscorp1an: The article has too much uncited text. If you would like it added this year, please add the necessary citations at the end of every paragraph or remove the information if it is not notable, appropriate, or unverifiable. Z1720 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Similar accounts

Hi Z1720. Could you please check whether Emirati08 and M5Ehistory are related? Similar edit history and Emirati08 is trying to restore an edit previously made by M5Ehistory on Al-Zaffa Clan. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@Daniel Quinlan: I can't do a check right now as I am about to go offline. If you suspect sock/meatpuppetry, I suggest filing a report at WP:SPI, where other admin can take a look. Z1720 (talk) 03:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, no worries. I wasn't quite certain enough to block so I thought a CheckUser made sense. Regards. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

On this day

Hello. How does one nominate an article for On This Day? Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Therealscorp1an: There isn't a formal nomination process. Any editor can add an article to the "eligible" list of the date that the event happened or the person's birthdate/deathdate. For articles to be selected for that year's OTD, the date of the event has to be cited, the majority or all of the article needs to be cited (except for the usual exceptions) and there cannot be any cleanup yellow or orange banners. Z1720 (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Z1720: Okay, so, let's say, how would this article — Cruise of the Kings — be added to the On This Day section? On 23 August, it will mark the 70th anniversary of the cruise, so how could this be placed on On This Day? - Therealscorp1an (talk) 05:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

@Therealscorp1an: Write a short blurb for the event and add the blurb to the "eligible" list on Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/August 23. Z1720 (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Dia Bridgehampton GA review

Thank you for your attempt to review Dia Bridgehampton at GAN. I unfortunately had some major life issue arise so had to step away from wiki for a few months. I am back now, have made your suggested edits, and have re-nominated the article for GA status. I would love for you to take another look at the article but completely understand if I missed my chance. Thanks. Found5dollar (talk) 17:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

The 50 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal

		The 50 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		For your work in getting 50 articles through the DYK process. --evrik (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		Thank you for participating in the March 2024 GA backlog drive. Your noteworthy contribution (14 points total) helped reduce the backlog by more than 250 articles! Here's a token of our appreciation. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

June music

story · music · places

Today's story is about the TFA, by sadly missed Vami_IV. In my support in 2018, I hoped to do justice to Schloss Köthen next - which I will begin today, finally, promised. Its Bachsaal was pictured to begin the year. For more related thoughts and music, look on my talk for 1 June. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Enjoy today's story, related to my topic of the year: 300 years Bach's chorale cantatas, and the first was written for today (as you know). The music opens with a French overture for a chorale fantasy, to mark the beginning. DYK that in this first the soprano has the cantus firmus (which usual), in the second the alto, in the third the tenor, and in the fourth the bass? He had a program ;) - We'll meet for the third. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Franz Kafka died 100 years ago OTD, hence the story. I uploaded a few pics from the visit of Graham87. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Today I wanted to write a happy song story, on a friend's birthday, but instead we have the word of thunder on top of it, which would have been better on 2 June, this year's first Sunday after Trinity (as you know). The new lilypond - thanks to DanCherek - is quite impressive. As my 2 Jun story said: Bach was fired up. - Today's Main page is rich in music, also Franz Liszt and a conductor. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Today is "the day" for James Joyce - OTD! Also for Bach's fourth chorale cantata (and why does it come before the third? - well, you know) - the new pics have a mammal I had to look up. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I added "the third" to 24 June 1724, always 24 June, relief, - that year it came between second and third Sunday after Trinity. Please check. Refs in the article if needed. - Today is Escher's Day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

New pics of food and flowers come with the story of Noye's Fludde (premiered on 18 June), written by Brian Boulton. I nominated Éric Tappy because he died, and it needs support today! I nominated another women for GA in the Women in Green June run, - review welcome, and more noms planned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Today - as you know - is a feast day for which Bach composed a chorale cantata in 1724 (and we had a DYK about it in 2012). Can't believe that Jodie Devos had to die, - don't miss her video from the Opéra-Comique at the end, - story to come. The weekend brought plenty of music sung and listened to, and some of it is reflected in the last two stories! + pics of good food with good company --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Sebastian Zouberbuhler

On 15 June 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sebastian Zouberbuhler, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a mob in Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, detained Jean Pettrequin and searched for Sebastian Zouberbuhler because of a letter? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sebastian Zouberbuhler. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Sebastian Zouberbuhler), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Jean Pettrequin

On 15 June 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jean Pettrequin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a mob in Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, detained Jean Pettrequin and searched for Sebastian Zouberbuhler because of a letter? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sebastian Zouberbuhler. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jean Pettrequin), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Rabearivelo

Thanks for adding Rabearivelo to OTD! I recently wrote L’Aube rouge, which you may find interesting. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

FAR

Hey there, not sure if you're not receiving pings for some reason, but there are a number of FARs awaiting a response from you. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• @Nikkimaria: Thanks for reaching out. I've had trouble getting motivated to review articles at FAR. I have been busy in real life, and when I get some wikitime I receive responses like "To note i am white knighting, which is more than you have ever done; your the MF who nominated (of which I was not the nominator of this FAR), and "I respect that you are busy improving the encyclopedia—but my time has value, too". It seems like there is an unrealistic expectation of reviewers to rubber stamp articles. Instead, I am spending hours reviewing articles that are languishing at FAR for months because no one else is reviewing, discovering that articles are not close to the FA criteria, then getting feedback that my reviews are not appreciated. This is time that I am taking away from my own projects, both on-wiki and off, and it has become exhausting. I'll try to return to these reviews this weekend to get them moving along again, but I cannot make any guarantees. I encourage others to review the articles and contribute to getting them resolved. Z1720 (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

• Thank you - I do appreciate your efforts, and I'm certainly not asking you to rubber-stamp articles that are not at FA level. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Just a comment as one of those quoted above, that I indicated my desire to help save FARs in the future, after Minneapolis is done. I had one save and one delist while working in between reviews, and think it's best for me to concentrate on one FAR at a time. Godspeed everybody, obviously we have a lot to do. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@SusanLesch: I appreciate that you want to work on one review at a time, as you know what method works best for you. There's no expectation that anyone would or should review any articles. I would appreciate it if that same expectation was placed upon me. Z1720 (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Of course I don't think you need to review at FAR unless you want to. We worked together well on Redwood National and State Parks, and I for one enjoyed your input. I'd withdraw from whichever reviews pose a problem to finish, as I had to do for Borobudur. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: I don't think you have that expectation, but I think some editors who fix up articles do. Some of these editors claim that FAR articles are "ready for reviews" when they would be quick-failed if brought to FAC. This is because those editors expect reviewers to point out all the problems so that they can fix the article, wasting hours of reviewer time per FAR. The opposite needs to happen: editors need to claim an article is ready for review when it would pass an FAC, instead of expecting reviewers to point out every example of a problem in an article and getting upset when reviewers refuse to do so. If an editor claims an article is ready for a review, but it is still far from meeting the criteria, the article should be delisted. If the editor is willing to fix up the article, they should do so and nominate it to FAC, not keep it languishing at FAR.

I see a lot of leeway and time given to editors who want to fix up article: they are given four weeks (minimum) to volunteer to fix it up when they could have done so in the years it deteriorated. Then, since they have volunteered to fix the article, they are allowed to post nasty comments against others unchallenged and devalue reviewer time and efforts under the guise of "I'm trying to fix the article, you are trying to delist it!" On the flip side, reviewers are limited to five nominations per editor because if they nominate an article, they are expected to return at an editor's or co-ordinator's demand and post every single instance of a mistake so that the editor can fix it (instead of the editor who volunteered to fix the problem being encouraged to fix the article first.) Reviewers deal with abuse from those same editors who are threatened when someone challenges their "star" or might say their work isn't good enough to keep an article at FAC. The same happens when a review comments to "Move to FARC" or "Delist": if an editor claims to fix up an article, a reviewer will be pinged and be told that they should review the article again. If the reviewer dares to suggest it still be delisted, they have to post every instance of a problem so that it can be fixed, instead of telling the editor that they need to review the article themselves first before wasting more reviewer time. If the editor can't determine the problems to keep the article at FA status, then they are the wrong person to be trying to save the article under the limited FAR timeframe. We need someone with authority to tell editors that they have run out of time and they can fix up the article for however long they want, then nominate it to FAC.

At FAC, editors review so that their own nominations will get reviewed, or to get interesting topics to TFA. At FAR, editors review out of the goodness of their hearts, or so they can open up another of their five slots to get another sub-par FA nominated. At FAR, the reward for reviewing is abuse, stress, time away from the articles they actually care about, and pings. All of our wiki time is precious, I just wish others appreciated the time reviewers put into articles before many of the regular FAR reviewers burned out and left this process. When I have time I'll probably come back to review FARs, but it will be when I want to come back and after I work on my own projects. I don't know when my frustration and burnout will be permanent, but I fear that has already happened to some previous FAR reviewers. Z1720 (talk) 19:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Understood. To a certain extent there will always be tension between FAR as an improvement process versus a weeding-out of unfit FAs, but I absolutely agree that reviewers should not be subject to nasty comments - please feel free to ping me (or @FAR coordinators: ) to the review if you see that again so we can address it. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 July newsletter

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
• Skyshifter (submissions) with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
• AryKun (submissions) with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

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

Administrator changes

• Elli
• HouseBlaster
• Pickersgill-Cunliffe

• Brianga
• De728631
• Georgewilliamherbert
• Hyacinth (deceased)
• ProveIt
• The Night Watch

Technical news

• Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)

Miscellaneous

• The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Narwhal at FAC

Hi Z1720, if you are free, I'd appreciate a review of the narwhal FAC. It's been lingering for a few days, so I thought I might as well write a neutrally-phrased message on editor's talk pages. I see you're a member of WikiProject Canada, and the narwhal article is categorised as high-importance within the project's scope, so I thought you might be interested. Thanks for your time, Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 16:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wolverine XI: If you are looking for reviewers, I suggest that you review other FACs. Reviewing articles gives other reviewers the confidence that you understand the FA criteria. If someone cannot identify concerns in other's nominations, I do not feel confident that they can identify concerns in the articles they can nominated. Z1720 (talk) 14:33, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

By the time I posted that message, I had reviewed three articles, and one nominator agreed to review my nomination (the in-question nominator will be inactive for the following few days). I was concerned that this would not suffice, so I left a message on a few user talk pages. It's been a week and there's been no review, so I was a bit concerned about inactivity. But I did manage to get another reviewer today, so that's a positive. You can still review the article if you want. Take care, Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Peer review at Ebelu

Hello, thank you very much for the review, I apologise that it slipped through the cracks.

I have a few follow-up questions, if you are willing to help:

• are point 1,2 and 4 good in your opinion, or did I miss something?

• The lede should still be expanded. The sentence in point 2 is cited. Some of the sentences could still be expanded. Z1720 (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

• I think most relevant things are in the lead now, and merged most of the more obvious sentences. Or should some more history be in the lead? FortunateSons (talk) 10:55, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• What are you looking for regarding architectural commentary? There are things such as this, would that be useful?

• I am looking for any reliable sources that have given their opinion on the architecture. Z1720 (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I’m not sure that those exist or I just can’t find them, here is what I found (mostly auto translated, would manually translated if I were to quote it in the article):

• The "memorial plaque" was created and installed in 1961 based on a design by Walter Brudi (1907-1987), director of the State Academy of Fine Arts in Stuttgart from 1959 to 1969 (Fig. 4). The massive, heavy iron plates, which extend as if broken out over a white outer wall at the exit to the open-air stage, have a monumental, almost oppressive effect on the viewer. Of the 570 victims, eleven died in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870/71, 123 in the First World War and almost 400 in the Second World War. The rest died due to resistance and persecution. "Mortui monent" (The dead warn) is the inscription and warns the living to prevent war and maintain peace.
• After the previous building in the city center was destroyed in the Second World War, a prominent architectural competition was held for the new building and an international jury was assembled. The previously little-known Stuttgart architectural firm Bregler won the competition with its design for a structured group of school buildings. Stuttgart's oldest high school has a humanistic profile and is now also a music high school. The property, in a prime location on the park grounds of the former Villa Zeppelin, corresponded to the much-discussed Swiss model of the "school in the countryside". Lying and towering buildings are arranged on the steeply rising terrain in such a way that they are perceived as individual houses. The differentiated facades also make orientation easier. House and garden, inside and outside are related to each other down to the last detail. The architecture implements the school building discourse of the 1950s in a textbook manner. Structure instead of large-scale form, light and green for the traffic areas and classrooms, break areas as places of retreat with a quality of stay reflect the reform themes of the time. Avoiding the pathos and representational formulas of the previous building, the architects designed the reception motif with particular attention: a wide landscape staircase leads from the street into the spacious foyer, where the curved main staircase takes up the upward movement.

Thank you :) FortunateSons (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• Regarding the last point, that’s a very good suggestion, but I’m not exactly sure which of the things have RS coverage or should be extended.

• You will have to take a look at sources to see what they say. Let the sources guide you on what should be in the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Sincerely, FortunateSons (talk) 13:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@FortunateSons: I responded under each of the bullet points. Z1720 (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I have responded under two bullet points and will look into it further, and really appreciate the help :) FortunateSons (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of John Rolph

Congratulations, Z1720! The article you nominated, John Rolph, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Congratulations! - Pictured on the Main page: Brian's Mozart family grand tour, my story today, and Mozart related to all three items of music on my talk: our 2023 concert, an opera in a theatre where a Mozart premiere took place, and those remembered, Martti Wallén, a bass, and Liana Isakadze, a violinist from Georgia (whose article would be better with more details about her music-making). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I remember today Bach's 1724 cantata for this Sunday which is unusual in many respects. The violinist made it to the Main page but another woman needs attention for RD, Marina Kondratyeva. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

She's on the Main page now. - My story today is - because of the anniversary of the premiere OTD in 1782 - about Die Entführung aus dem Serail, opera by Mozart, while yesterday's was - because of the TFA - about Les contes d'Hoffmann, opera by Offenbach, - so 3 times Mozart again if you click on "music" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Today's story is about a photographer who took iconic pictures, especially View from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Manhattan, 9/11, yesterday's was a great mezzo, and on Thursday we watched a sublime ballerina. If that's not enough my talk offers chamber music from two amazing concerts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

... and today's story begins with Psalm 124, paraphrased in 1524, and put to five (!) chorale settings in one cantata by Bach in 1724, for this Sunday. Nominated for GA. - It's scheduled for 30 Jul OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Main Page history/2024 July 30b had a baritone, a violinist, a composer and the Bach cantata, - almost too much, and the composer's article, Wolfgang Rihm, improved much over the last days, could still grow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled that 4meter4 received DYK credit for Scott Jarvis which is in prep3. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

TFA

I've probably got enough reruns for September. Thanks. One or two non-specific date wouldn't hurt, because I can pass them along to October if I don't use them. Thanks. for your help. Wehwalt (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Personal motivation

I'm commenting on your talk page (with a ping to @Barkeep49:) regarding your comment as this doesn't directly concern the outcome of the amendment request. I understand the sentiment that editors with valuable skills ought to focus on ways to enable them to be used. But I also appreciate that editors can feel demotivated by a very publicly-seen pronouncement about them which they feel is inaccurate. I totally get feeling frustrated; I'm only suggesting that expressions of this be tempered by an understanding that the circumstances can very understandably cause an editor to feel unmotivated to pursue the course you feel is best.

On a separate note, your comment changed the style of a first-level list item from * to :, which causes screen readers to make extra list end/start announcements. See User:Isaacl/On wikitext list markup § New paragraph within a list item for an example of adding a paragraph to a bulleted list item (the example shows this for a second-level list item, but the same approach is followed for a first-level list item). isaacl (talk) 18:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

sFN and other stuff

Hi there. Does moving citations at references section and sfn required at FaC? I am planning to send Ada Wong soon (peer review is active; feel free to leave a feedback if you have free time :D). Many thanks 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 05:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Boneless Pizza!: No, sfn is not necessary at FAC. Instead, the inline citations and references have to follow a consistent style and the references should have sufficient information about the source (author name, title, publisher, date, access dates for websites, etc.) Z1720 (talk) 15:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi again. I just wanna ask if you're able to review my FAC. Many thanks! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 11:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

@Boneless Pizza!: The best way to get others to review your FAC is to review FACs yourself. This will give other editors the confidence that you know the FA criteria and are willing to help reduce the backlog at FAC. Z1720 (talk) 12:34, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 219, July 2024

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Croton alabamensis

Regarding Template:Did you know nominations/Croton alabamensis, I received no notifications that a review of the nomination had been carried out. It is not fair to assume an editor is "not coming back" if they have not been properly notified. TDogg310 (talk) 03:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 63

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 63, May – June 2024

• One new partner
• 1Lib1Ref
• Spotlight: References check

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Sport 2024

		Wiki Loves Sport 2024 - Canadian campaign
		The Wiki Loves Sport campaign just started! This annual campaign aims to improve sport-related content in the Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia Canada encourages users to create and improve content about Canadian athletes, with a focus on underrepresented communities such as para-athletics, Indigenous groups, women, and sexual minorities. The campaign runs from July 17 to September 22. More info and how to join: https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Sport_2024

SophieWMCA (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

John Rolph

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 September 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/September 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 15:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Wells Cathedral

Thank you for nominating Wells Cathedral for TFA in October. Can I draw your attention to this comment I left on the talk page recently. While I would like to schedule the article, some of the prose could do with a bit of a brush up in places, and the couple of unsupported statements need to be cited or removed. Would you be able to oblige, which would mean it would be easier to schedule? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@SchroCat: I'll try to do a copy-edit in the next couple of days. If I forget by next week, please ping me. Uncited statements, if it's just a sentence, can probably be removed if no one steps forward to find a source. Z1720 (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

That's perfect - thank you! - SchroCat (talk) 16:08, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Advice needed on a user

Hello

I am not 100% sure of the protocol, but how do we stop a very new user from reverting good faith edits I have made on a daily particular page? I am referring to the Miss Universe 2024 page.

If I have done this approach wrong, please forgive me and advise how we can stop this particular user going towards the 3 revert rule.

Kindest regards

Heidi bradshaw (talk) Heidi bradshaw (talk) 06:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Heidi bradshaw: When one of my edits is reverted, I start a discussion on the article's talk page describing my edit (with a link to the diff from the article history) and an explanation of why I think the edit is a net-positive for the article. I also ping the user who reverted my edit, asking them to describe their thoughts on the edit and what can be done to improve upon it. Posting on the talk page allows interested editors to give their thoughts on the edit and hopefully come to a consensus on what should be included in the article. Do not re-add the text until the consensus is formed: this will cause you to violate WP:3R and considered edit warring. After some discussion, hopefully editors will come to a consensus of what should be included in the article Z1720 (talk) 15:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. I shall bear that in mind. Is there a possibility I can block this user from contacting me at all in the future, as I have a feeling they’ll get nasty. Heidi bradshaw (talk) 15:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Heidi bradshaw: You can refuse to engage with the user by not responding or commenting in any sections where they have posted a comment. If the user says anything inappropriate, you can ask them (nicely) not to say things like that or ask them not to contact/ping you. If things get really bad or persist, you can report them to WP:ANI, though reporting here means your behaviour will also be looked at. Z1720 (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Ann Arbor FAR

I responded to the Ann Arbor FAR, but since it's been a while since I last edited, can you be more specific as to what is needed? Thanks. Pentawing^Talk 01:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• Just an update concerning the FAR - I think the issues have been addressed but want to see if there is anything more to be done. Thanks. Pentawing^Talk 03:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Archived peer review

Hi. Just wanted to let you know that I totally forgot to respond to your ping here. I would have wished for the peer review to remain open because I did not receive any meaningful feedback during the time when it was open. I was wondering if the review could be reopened or if I need to put the article up for a new peer review some time in the future. Keivan.f^Talk 05:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Keivan.f: Before reopening the PR, I suggest reviewing some more articles at WP:FAC. This will help you understand the FA criteria, demonstrate your knowledge of the FA criteria (as FACs are supposed to be ready for promotion and not require a lot of work to get there) and build goodwill amongst the FAC community. After a few weeks, I suggest reading through the article to ensure it meets the criteria as you understand it, open a PR, and ask a mentor to comment on the article. Let me know if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 05:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, to be honest I have had an article go through FAR though it was not promoted. But I'm familiar with the process and some of the community members and I think this article which did pass a GA review rather recently has the potential to get to FA status. That's why I wanted a PR to ensure a smooth FAR process, but I guess I have to actually find an experienced user who has the time and motivation to pick up any potential PRs. If not, then I'll work on the article as much as I can and send it straight to FAR. Thanks for your input. Keivan.f^Talk 05:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Keivan.f: Editors are more likely to review articles at FAC and PR for nominators who actively review other articles. The gap between GAN and FAC is vast, and there are a lot of small, nitpicky rules that can cause an FAC to stall. I highly recommend reviewing FACs while waiting for comments at a PR; doing that helped me learn the FA criteria and apply those corrections to my own article. Z1720 (talk) 06:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

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

Administrator changes

Isabelle Belato

• Ian.thomson
• Modussiccandi

Interface administrator changes

Izno

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

August music

story · music · places

Today I have two "musicians" on the Main page, one is also the topic of my story, watch and listen, - I like today's especially because you see him at work, hear him talk about his work and the result of his work - rare! - I added another Bach cantata to OTD for 13 August, but not yet to the selected anniversaries, then I'll give it a pause until we get to fixed days again. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

... and a third, like 22 July but with interview and the music to be played today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

On 13 August, Bach's cantata was 300 years old, and the image one. The cantata is an extraordinary piece, using the chorale's text and famous melody more than others in the cycle. It's nice to have not only a recent death, but also this "birthday" on the Main page. You know that I don't like much to reflect the calendar day instead of the liturgical day, but this one coincides nicely with private celebration ;) - find a rainbow in my places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

DYK for MJP

Hello Z1720, I see you have left a message for me on a DYK page. Yes, the ALTOa hook works fine for me for Mary Jane Patterson. I am unsure where I should leave this message though so do go ahead and move it/ copy it if it should be somewhere else! Thanks! Balance person (talk) 06:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@Balance person: Responses about the nom should be left on the DYK nomination page, located at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Jane Patterson. Z1720 (talk) 14:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I think I have done it correctly now Balance person (talk) 15:57, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Z1720, thank you for the FASA nomination on Andrew Jackson. It became more involved than I ever expected. I'm not sure I would've have made it through the dark woods of the article without the much-appreciated support of two other editors: Carlstak and ARoseWolf.

But while I'm here, this gives me the opportunity to share a bit of well-earned reciprocity that I've noted for a while but haven't felt the opportunity to put into writing. I'm so impressed with your constant monitoring of the GAR and FAR processes. It's clear you play a key in role in keeping those processes effective and active. I also want to mention that I very much appreciate your editing style. It is strikes me that you always aim to be constructive, kind and considerate. Wikipedia is a better place and a little nicer to edit in because of your efforts.

With appreciation, Wtfiv (talk) 18:38, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wtfiv: Thanks for your kind words. I didn't nominate others because FASA recognises the editors who contribute a lot of new text and sources to the article during the FAR process, and used the FAR and article history to make that determination. If others helped with the article, I'd recommend giving them a barnstar (and I think it would mean more coming from you than it would from me.) Z1720 (talk) 19:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand how it works and wasn't making a request, I just wanted to acknowledge them even as I thanked you. I've gave ARoseWolf one some time back. I think I need to give Carlstak one as well. Thank you again! Wtfiv (talk) 20:09, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 220, August 2024

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at two works on logistics and one on the Battle of Arnhem

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Wells Cathedral

About Wells Cathedral- It is an architectural work of supreme importance. It is hard to overstate just how very important it is, in the history of both English and European Gothic architecture. Because it was constructed over several periods, it is a very complex building and all its innovations are of significance, then it requires a lot of illustrations. You will notice that each illustration has noted that contain information, and that it has been written byu someone who actually understands their subject.

This is not just a clutter of pictures on the same theme. They are images which direct the student of architecture to look and see, with an observant and critical ete.

There are many pages on Wikipedia where large galleries of images tell you nothing. William-Adolphe Bouguereau has half a dozen similar nudes , many more somilar classical works, little girls and Blessed virgins. All in the same style. 6 paintings would give you the entire range of the artist's capabilities.

But we are dealing with a building that evolved over several centuries, and is stylistically more complex than St Paul's Cathedral or Florence Duomo, although both are much larger and more famous. Other cathedrals that warrant this amount of illustrative material are Lincoln Cathedral and Canterbury Cathedral. They are similarly architecturally important. I also need to mention Worcester Cathedral, the importance of which is overlooked. Conversely, everyone knows Salisbury Cathedral as an icon, but from the point of innovation, it is not of great importance; the architect had seen Wells and see Lincoln.

In consequence, I have simply reversed your heavy-handed removals, because what you left behind failed to indicate this as one of the World's significant buildings. Some of your edirs might be useful and should be returned. .

Amandajm (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Now I'm cross! The fact that you reduce the main, the most significant, the most important internal picture of any cathedral in every cathedral article to a tiny little thumbnail!! indicates that you are not the person to be making twenty edits and delations. You also deleted the St Andrews Cross arches. How could you?

Do not delete or minimise the long view down the nave in 'any article about any church. Amandajm (talk) 19:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 August newsletter

The fourth round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 29 August. Each of the 8 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 472 points, and the following contestants scored more than 700 points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,150 points, mostly from 3 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 7 good articles, and 13 did you know nominations;
• Arconning (submissions) with 791 points, mostly from 2 featured lists, 8 good articles, 4 did you know nominations, and plenty of reviews;
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 718 points, mostly from a high-multiplier featured article on Genghis Khan and 2 good articles; and
• BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 714 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Susanna Hoffs, 2 featured lists, and 3 good articles.

Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated. Contestants put in extraordinary amounts of effort during this round, and their scores can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 36 featured articles, 55 featured lists, 15 good articles, 93 in the news credits, and at least 333 did you know credits. They have conducted 357 featured content reviews, as well as 553 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 30 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed during Round 5, which starts on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Remember to claim your points within 14 days of earning them, and importantly, before the deadline on 31 October.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

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

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

• Courcelles
• GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Bruckner

story · music · places

(ping) I left a note on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/September 4 about hopefully including Bruckner on his 200th birthday tomorrow. I forgot over Alexander Goehr, sorry. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Schwede66 explained that there were too many "citation needed", sigh. Today's story has 3 composers, I couldn't decide for the one on the Main page or the one who didn't make it on his bicentenary, so took both, and the pic has a third. Listen if you have a bit of time. The music, played by the Kyiv Symphony Orchestra in Germany in April 2022, impressed me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Sorry that I did not respond sooner: I have been busy in real life. I agree with Schwede that this has too much uncited text to run on the Main Page. Please keep recommending articles, as OTD is always looking for diverse options to feature. As a typical rule, an article is OTD eligible if there are no orange banners and all the text is cited. Z1720 (talk) 17:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Did you know that I didn't even look? - Sorry about that. All year it was so clear to me that this was a Bruckner year, - festival to close with the Third Symphony on Saturday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

To celebrate the day, I listened to Bruckner's Eighth on radio, conducted by Dennis Russell Davies. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you today for TFA John Rolph, "about an Upper Canadian lawyer, politician doctor, and medical teacher. This figure's career is characterised by moderate Reform stances and constantly switching between a political life and practicing medicine."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

OTD: Schoenberg's 150th birthday! On display, portrayed by Egon Schiele, with music from Moses und Aron, and with two DYK hooks, one from 2010 and another from 2014; the latter, about his 40th birthday, appeared on his 140th birthday, which made me happy then and now again. - See places for a stunning sunrise, on the day Bruckner's 200th birthday was celebrated (just a few days late). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Oxford zero emission zone DYK review

I saw that you reviewed my Oxford zero emission zone page. I have already pinged you a while ago and added citations where it said "citation needed" on the Oxford ZEZ page so this is another reminder. I think its time to review it again now that I did that. I saw that you pinged voorts on the Jubilee Bridge page after my ping, and hasn't responded/reviewd until you did it. JuniperChill (talk) 10:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@JuniperChill: In my comment I noted that it was not a full review. Your DYK needs a reviewer to look at all of the criteria. I have indicated so in the DYK. Z1720 (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

My bad. I read it too fast. Its because of the use of the symbol that made me think that you will review it and that threw me off. JuniperChill (talk) 12:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@JuniperChill: No problem. Hopefully the red arrow will encourage a new reviewer to step forward. Z1720 (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 64

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 64, July – August 2024

• The Hindu Group joins The Wikipedia Library
• Wikimania presentation
• New user script for easily searching The Wikipedia Library

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Forestry in the United Kingdom

Forestry in the United Kingdom has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

The Bugle: Issue 221, September 2024

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hog Farm looks at the bayou battles for Vicksburg

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Question from Wikinmo (00:28, 28 September 2024)

Hi, I just made a typo correction on this page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=H._D._Kumaraswamy&diff=prev&oldid=1248158108 but it looks like the change is not visible on the main page anymore. There are no changes after mine. I am confused. Could you please help me understand? --Wikinmo (talk) 00:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Wikinmo: When you made your edit, you change the parameter of the template from "nickname" to "Nicknames". The template didn't know what "Nicknames" meant, so it ignored it. I have fixed the template. Z1720 (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Admin assistance please?

Hi, Z1720. Since you have been reviewing GAs of late, would you please take a look at Staffordshire Bull Terrier, which is a WP:GA. This particular breed has been the target of pit bull haters, advocacies, and pet owners who strongly dislike this particular breed of dog, apparently believing in the false and unreliable information by fear mongers and advocacies that have repeatedly been debunked. Will you please look into the recent few edits which began with an IP edit, and escalated even after my attempt to restore the article to its GA status. I actually further clarified a ubiquitous term, "nanny dog", that has long been associated with the breed. This article passed a rather rigorous GA review, and now my edits are being reverted, as if to coax me into an edit war, obviously by editors who are not knowledgeable about or simply dislike the breed as being wrongly associated with fighting pit bulls. The last revert claims the sources used are not reliable for support of a quote made by a former editor of a reliable kennel club magazine. The sources cited include the highly reputable American Kennel Club (AKC), the long established Staffordshire Bull Terrier Kennel Club, and The New York Times which directly supports the quote. The AKC is highly regarded and is noted in a list of sources provided by Cornell's Animal Science Dept. for its temperament testing. The editor who last reverted my work has falsely claimed the sources are unreliable. I do not want to be baited into an edit war so will you please review the recent activity, and restore the article to its GA status? Thank you in advance. Atsme 💬 📧 12:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

@Atsme: I don't have the time to actively monitor this article, but I appreciate that you are trying to avoid an edit war. I would advise that if another editor adds prose that is uncited or supported by an unreliable source that it can be removed. If an editor wants to remove properly cited material, I suggest that you revert it and post your concerns on the talk page: if it is removed again the conversation can continue on the talk page while the prose is discussed. If there is lots of disruption from IPs, I suggest getting it page protected, but this cannot be used to end legitimate concerns from IPs. If things do not improve, going to WP:ANI is a good option as editors with more experience can help navigate the article's concerns. If there is anything specific that you need, feel free to reach out. Z1720 (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

If I revert the removal of reliably sourced material, then I will be accused of edit warring because I restored it twice now. The advocacy editors outnumber me. It's going to require admin help because they are removing material from a GA that passed a rather difficult and highly scrutinized review. It also indirectly reflects on the work you've done trying to maintain the integrity of GAs. If what happened at Staffordshire Bull Terrier remains, it tells me the GA process is a waste of valuable time, and that is sad. Atsme 💬 📧 23:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

@Atsme: I would try to have a discussion on the article's talk page about the sources. Another option is to ask WP:RSN if they would consider a source reliable: this will allow other editors around Wikipedia to comment on a source's reliability. If RSN considers it reliable, and editors still try to remove information sourced to it, then I would post on ANI explaining the situation. If information has been removed, I would keep it out of the article until the situation is resolved. While this whole situation may feel frustrating, it is important that every editor is able to have their say, and that might mean information is missing from an article for a small length of time (relative to how long an article will continue to exist). Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough at FAR

I have nominated Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 13:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

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

Administrator changes

• Asilvering
• Significa liberdade

• Good Olfactory
• Hesperian
• I JethroBT
• TommyBoy
• Woody

CheckUser changes

• Barkeep49
• Izno

• Doug Weller
• Spicy

Guideline and policy news

• Administrator elections are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to requests for adminship (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with candidate sign-up from October 8 to 14, a discussion phase from October 22 to 24, and SecurePoll voting from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections.
• Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an administrator recall process.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Historical elections has been closed.
• An arbitration case regarding Backlash to diversity and inclusion has been opened.
• Editors are invited to nominate themselves to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until 23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC).

Miscellaneous

• If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	Thank you for being the room volunteer for my mobile editing presentation. I appreciate it. :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

		The Original Barnstar
		To Z1720 on the occasion of the Minneapolis FA being kept. Your review made the difference. Thank you! -SusanLesch (talk) 17:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Seeking urgent assistance in WP:ANI

Heya Just wondering if you could help take a look at this case. An IP address is persisting with wholesale addition of Tamil scripts without consensus (and displaying identical behaviour to a blocked user) and I think it best to request urgent intervention on this. Thanks! hundenvonPG (talk) 01:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Please slow down with the GA concerns

I appreciate you raising concerns about several GA articles in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Higher education. Please be careful not to raise concerns about too many articles too quickly - it's a very small project with very few active editors so it's really easy to overwhelm them which would be unproductive and not collegial. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 03:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

• @ElKevbo: I appreciate that higher ed is a smaller project, but no article has to have GA status. Editors use GAs as templates for writing articles: if higher ed has articles that don't meet the GA criteria, other editors might make errors in articles they are writing that would take longer to fix. I do not list articles for GAR when an editor is working on it, and I try to only nominate one article in a category at a time. However, when I skimmed through the first section of education articles it was not hard to find articles with serious concerns. It might be time to discuss the situation with the Wikiproject and determine how editors will maintain these articles more easily. Z1720 (talk) 04:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Further reading is not a GAR concern

Z1720, I'm concerned that in multiple GARs, you have mentioned 'Further reading' in similar terms, as if the section was somehow wrong or reprehensible. It is not. The six GA criteria do not state that a 'Further reading' section is forbidden or even undesirable. Accordingly, it is not an appropriate ground to mention when bringing an article to GAR, or indeed before that when raising what you call "GA concerns". What could be a valid concern with any sort of list, including 'Further reading', is an excessive amount of detail (a gigantic list that unbalances the article, just as a coatrack section is inappropriate), or wandering grossly off-topic (loss of focus). You also seem to be making an issue out of excessive subdivision of chapters into sections: this is a very minor issue, and readily fixed by a minute's work removing stray subheadings. Like 'Further reading', it has little to do with the GA criteria, and so once again should rarely be a concern. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Thanks for reaching out about these concerns. Responses below:

• Regarding "Further reading" sections: The GA criteria number 3 says that an article "addresses the main aspects of the topic". While not every major topic needs to be covered, I am not a subject matter expert and feel uncomfortable making that determination. If an article has a lot of sources listed in "Further reading", it can sometimes be an indication that there is information missing from the article. Furthermore, many articles I post concerns about have citation issues: if an editor wants to add these to the article, the "Further reading" section might have sources. Sometimes "Further reading" sections also contain unreliable or promotional links, and encourage those who care about the article to determine if the sources should be there. I will always combine "Further reading" concerns with other concerns, as it would probably be inappropriate to send an article to GAR with the "Further reading" section as the only concern.
• Regarding MOS:OVERSECTION: 1b states that the article should comply with MOS:LAYOUT, of which OVERSECTION is a subsection. I appreciate that some editors can fix this quickly, but I spend longer making these fixes because I need to figure out how to link the sections. Also, sometimes a section should be expanded upon, or shouldn't be there: I would rather have a subject matter expert figure out how to do this. As with the "Further reading" section, I combine this with other concerns.

I hope the above helps explain my thought process. Z1720 (talk) 22:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I find the reasoning vague and overblown. You are right that it is based on generalisation rather than knowledge; the problem with it is that in every particular case, it may well be wrong or simply nothing worth worrying about, which is why I call it a smokescreen: it is not a substitute for actually looking at the individual case. In other words it's basically worthless as an approach. If instead you said "Smith 1987 should be cited on his discussion of disc harrowing" then that would be a direct input to the review. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

• @Chiswick Chap: My initial comments in a GAR or "GA concerns" are intentionally vague. About 2/3 to 1/2 of GARs receive no responses: to spend hours writing comments on those would be a bad use of my time. The ones that get a response do not always need specific comments: giving opinions on what should go where is sometimes met with hostility and anger, and I am not a subject-matter expert. I would rather editors who care about the article do the work to fix it. When asked, I try to give more specific comments: if there's an article you are working on that you would like me to leave more specifics on, feel free to ping me. In the future, I'll try to make it more clear why I am mentioning the sources in the "Further reading" section. Z1720 (talk) 14:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

  Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joseph Stalin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Warsaw.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

October music

story · music · places

My story today is about a composer and choir conductor, listen to his Lamento. - My story on 13 October was about a Bach cantata. As this place works, it's on the Main page now because of the date (but Bach wrote it for the 20th Sunday, not the Tuesday after the 21st Sunday after Trinity). I sort of like it because today is the birth date of my grandfather who loved and grew dahlias like those pictured. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Happy whatever you celebrate today, - more who died, more to come, and they made the world richer. Greetings from Madrid where I took the pic of assorted Cucurbita in 2016. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 222, October 2024

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on US Army divisions in the Pacific War, Nick-D on the First Indochina War

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:03, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 November newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round being a very tight race. Our new champion is AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who scored 2,283 points mainly through 3 high-multiplier FAs and 3 GAs on military history topics. By a 1% margin, Airship beat out last year's champion, BeanieFan11 (submissions), who scored second with 2,264 points, mainly from an impressive 58 GAs about athletes. In third place, Generalissima (submissions) scored 1,528 points, primarily from two FAs on U.S. Librarians of Congress and 20 GAs about various historical topics. Our other finalists are: Sammi Brie (submissions) with 879 points, Hey man im josh (submissions) with 533 points, BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 432 points, Arconning (submissions) with 244 points, and AryKun (submissions) with 15 points. Congratulations to our finalists and all who participated!

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 7 FAs, 9 FLs, 94 GAs, 73 FAC reviews, and 79 GAN reviews and peer reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the featured article prize for 3 FAs in round 4, and 7 FAs overall.
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize for 23 FLs overall.
• MaranoFan (submissions) wins the featured topic prize for 9 articles in featured topics in round 1.
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize for 110 FA/FL reviews overall.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize for 58 GAs in round 5, and 70 GAs overall.
• Fritzmann (submissions) wins the good topic prize for 6 articles in good topics in round 2.
• Sammi Brie (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize for 45 GA reviews in round 2, and 78 GA reviews overall.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 131 Did you know articles overall.
• Muboshgu (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 15 In the news articles in round 1, and 36 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2025 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

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

Administrator changes

• Crisco 1492

• Babajobu
• Daniel
• Elf
• Jayron32
• Thue
• Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

Maxim

Oversighter changes

Maxim

Guideline and policy news

• Following a discussion, the discussion-only period proposal that went for a trial to refine the requests for adminship (RfA) process has been discontinued.
• Following a request for comment, Administrator recall is adopted as a policy.

Technical news

• Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

• RoySmith, Barkeep49 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2024 Arbitration Committee Elections. ThadeusOfNazereth and Dr vulpes are reserve commissioners.
• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections.
• The Arbitration Committee is seeking volunteers for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:22, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Activity report?

Hi Z. Hope all is well with you. You mentioned at AN Moving checkuser blocks to the community has lightened our workload to devote more time to other activities. I wonder if the committee would do some kind of activity report to show where that time has gone - perhaps similar to the activity reports that happened about CU blocks when I was on the committee to try and provide some transparency. I have my suspicions, but when a case is getting procedurally declined despite 50% of arbs voting for it because not all arbs weigh-in, a proposed decision has sat open for 2 weeks (and counting), and an ARCA has sat with partial action for 2.5+ months (and counting) it can be hard from the outside to reconcile the "not so much time" with the "this ArbCom is acting slowly across the board". Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: I think an activity report would be an interesting idea. I also think two things can be true at the same time: that moving checkuser blocks freed up time on the committee to do other things, and that other committee activities are moving too slowly due arbs devoting time to other activities both on- and off-Wikipedia. It's a question of what arbs have done with the extra time afforded to them because of the move of checkuser blocks. Z1720 (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 65

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024

• Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Wikipedia Library
• Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
• Tech tip: Mass downloads

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Looie496

User:Looie496 is deceased. -- Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 21:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)