User talk:Barkeep49/Archives/10

Latest comment: 15 days ago by Isaacl in topic Rules

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:David Lammy on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I think I'm blocked by an admin that you blocked?

Hi!

I just added something to the talk page of Cuba/Israel relations, and followed the link to my IP account. It shows some edits that I didn't make, and the claim that I am blocked by a user called Lourdes. I went to their page to try to ask why this IP was blocked, and what that means, but it said that you blocked them. What on earth is going on? 1.136.104.255 (talk) 05:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

It was revealed that the admin who blocked you was not who they claimed to be. As such they have been blocked and are no longer an admin. This block was placed on your ISP to handle some disruption in September and October. This was recently reviewed and found to be a good block. You could avoid the block by registering an account - which you can do anonymously if you wish. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:24, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Ok! I'm with Telstra. It's possibly the biggest ISP in Australia. Is that normally the source of disruption? I'll have a look at registering if I find something I'm blocked from doing. 1.136.106.151 (talk) 02:56, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
It looks like Telstra rotates IPs fairly frequently which is part of the issue so that the same person can have multiple IPs within a short time. Barkeep49 (talk) 04:06, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

hmm (1st-time voter question)

you aren't running again?? I ask in some dismay Elinruby (talk) 13:14, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

(somewhat later, after some clicking) Oh. I think I see. You were elected in 2022 to a two-year term? Feel free to ignore this first-time voter question, unless I am wrong about that. Elinruby (talk) 14:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
@Elinruby yes people have two year terms and so I am on through 2024. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Would you be cool with answering some questions?

That section title probably seems more omnious than I intended but I'm not sure what a good alternative would be. You're not obligated to answer anything, I'm just trying to interview as many experienced editors as possible here. If you'd be willing to take a look at it, I'd appreciate your input. :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

@Clovermoss you just want me to answer the questions there? If so happy to do that. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Yeah. Thanks! Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Done, @Clovermoss. One possible section title you could use with others is "Editor experience invitation". Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

November music

November songs
 
story · music

Hevenu shalom aleichem is my story today. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I added some images from Aachen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

... and some more. My story today is about my song of defiance, - it was a great pleasure to hear it performed today! The line "Ich steh hier und singe" (I stand here and sing) is in the movement with the music pictured, which begins with "Trotz -- Trotz -- Trotz", sounding much tougher than "defiance" ;) - in this YouTube it's at 4:55. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:06, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Performers of the 4 Nov concert now pictured on my talk. - I proudly remember having sung in an oratorio premiere seven years ago OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Today I have three items on the Main page, almost too much of a good thing! Bach's amazing cantata with the unusual scale, first performed 300 years ago OTD, the nun for the prostitutes, and Schumann's wedding gift for Clara. Also first day of vacation pics uploaded. - On AN, was I clear enough? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Today is St. Martin's Day, which stands for sharing. Sharing one more day of vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Enjoy your last day! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I'm back for over a week, but uploading is slow, one reason people keep dying whose articles need work (one of them from stub to GAN), the other the continued waste of time of certain "discussions", Feydeau to AN (was I clear enough?), Rossini with the latest weapon: that a link from a composer's bio to his list of works somehow violates policy, - I mean, how kafkaesque can one get? - But today is Sunday, mushrooms found and eaten, pics to come, just slowly. Three of those who died on the Main page this one day (just not all at the same time). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
I began another day of vacation pics, with the deepest blue of the sea ;) - we celebrate the birthday of a friend who wrote quite a book about the compositions of a man who will turn 300 soon. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
What a story! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for highlighting her story. "What a story" indeed. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! - vacation pics now complete, and we sang a good concert today, User Talk:Gerda Arendt#Mozart Requiem --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Today: in memoriam Jerome Kohl who said (In Freundschaft): "and I hope that they have met again in the beyond and are making joyous music together" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Comment on the latest arb brouhaha -- ?

You have, of course, written quite extensively on the whole issue -- but if you want to add anything to what's at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/News and notes, let me know, and I can quote you. jp×g🗯️ 06:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@JPxG thanks for the opportunity but I am focused on providing my comments at ACN so as to be transparent and not splinter the conversation. On reading the signpost article, I find it fascinating that Sdkb says most editors were supportive and then only quote things critics said, with Worms quote not noting his second and more recent comment which I'd say was more equivical. But that's more media analysis than a comment. Barkeep49 (talk) 10:15, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Growth team newsletter #29

18:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

Restore

Hello Barkeep49, I hope you're doing well. Can you restore my rights. Thanks for your consideration. — C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 19:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

  Administrator changes

 
 
  BeeblebroxJust Step Sideways
 

  CheckUser changes

 

  Oversight changes

 

  Guideline and policy news

  Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
  • The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
  • Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

That humongous yellow banner...

...at the top of the case talk page I only just noticed... no comment! Sorry for the time loss. In my defence I'm in bed with the flu so not in my best shape. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}talk 18:31, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

No worries @Gtoffoletto. I was doing a lot at once otherwise I'd have moved the comment myself. Barkeep49 (talk) 18:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Media Matters for America on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Antisemitism CTOP extension

I'm here because of this diff, where you majorly extended the ArbCom decision regarding antisemitism in Poland. Right now, there's an ugly discussion at ANI where several people including me have expressed a desire to extend the contentious topic status from antisemitism in Poland to either antisemitism in Poland and Lithuania or antisemitism in Eastern Europe. I asked, because I don't know, where this conversation is supposed to take place and two supporting editors have responded to admit they don't know, either. Are you able to start this or do you know where this should go? If not, do you know who would? Thank you very much in advance. City of Silver 01:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

@City of Silver that thread is longer than I have time to read (let alone dig into) but you could go to WP:ARCA to request some changes to either the Eastern European contentious topic or the antisemitism in Poland (APL) contentious topic. The big difference is that APL has an additional sourcing requirement. If you go to ARCA there will be - at least from me - some effort made to examine the conduct of people involved as well. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Oof, yeah, I definitely wasn't hoping to drag you into that so I'm glad you're not even tempted. So I'm clear, are you saying that to avoid dealing with what might be difficult and possibly unnecessary sourcing concerns, the next step should be to try to get either antisemitism in Lithuania or antisemitism in Eastern Europe as a separate contentious topic from APL? City of Silver 20:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
@City of Silver I'm saying that WP:ARCA is a reasonable place to go for the concerns expressed in that ANI thread. Going there would allow for a discussion about expanding the sourcing restriction beyond Poland. It would also possibly mean the Arbs would examine the conduct of the editors who were brought up at the ANI discussion. Barkeep49 (talk) 20:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

  Happy Holidays
Hello, I wanted to be the first to wish you the very best during the holidays. I have mad respect for you . Lightburst (talk) 03:22, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Learning by teaching

Hi Barkeep49, you helped me 6 years ago, perhaps you can help again! Psansoldo is changing the first sentence of the article "Learning by teaching": "I took away the reference to Jean-Pol Martin as a having originally defined the method, as other people, as Andrew Bell and Joseph Lancaster had already worked and used a similarly defined method before, as cited in the article itself." I think it's not usefull, because I'm the main autor about Learning by teaching since 1980 and everybody quoted my work if writing about "Learning by teaching". What do you mean? Here ChatGPT about LdL: "Learning by Teaching" (or "Lernen durch Lehren" in German), as a formalized educational method, was developed by Jean-Pol Martin in the 1980s. Jean-Pol Martin is a German educator and professor who introduced this approach primarily for language teaching. His method emphasizes the role of students as active participants in the learning process, where they take on the role of teachers to instruct their peers. This approach has since gained popularity and has been adapted in various educational settings beyond language learning, due to its effectiveness in enhancing understanding, engagement, and the development of a range of skills in students." Jeanpol (talk) 16:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I certainly remember you, but unfortunately I don't have a lot of time at the moment to help. Perhaps ask for a third opinion or do an edit request? Barkeep49 (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you!Jeanpol (talk) 07:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
@Jeanpol: I have left you two messages at your Talk page in response to your comment above. Thanks. (talk page watcher) Mathglot (talk) 08:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

A solstice greeting

❄️ Happy holidays! ❄️

Hi Barkeep! I'd like to wish you a splendid solstice season as we wrap up the year. Here is an artwork, made individually for you, to celebrate. It was great to meet you in Toronto and to hear your insights on the panels! Take care, and thanks for all you do to make Wikipedia better!
Cheers,
{{u|Sdkb}}talk
 
Solstice Celebration for Barkeep49, 2023, DALL·E 3.
Note: The vibes are winter solsticey. If you're in the southern hemisphere, oops, apologies.

{{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Great prompt engineering there. Thanks @Sdkb. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

Seasons Greetings

  Merry Christmas, Barkeep49/Archives!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity.
Onel5969 TT me 16:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 

Onel5969 TT me 16:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

A MERRY CHRISTMAS 2U!

  Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello Barkeep49, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024.
Happy editing,

Jerium (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Jerium (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Helms Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

RFA

If you are unaware that the candidate has has at least two prior usernames, you should reconsider your sponsorship. Banks Irk (talk) 03:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Banks Irk I'm well aware. I've just never heard of a renamed account being called an undisclosed username before at RfA. I've only heard it used in the sense of Wikipedia:Clean_start#Requests_for_adminship which does not apply here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:34, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Bizarre complaint. It matters not a jot how many times someone has renamed their account if all their contributions are still visible under the same account. Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


 
~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~
Hello Barkeep49: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas1}} to send this message.
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

December music

December songs
 
story · music

Today's story is about Maria Callas, on her centenary. - Aaron Copland died OTD, and Jerome Kohl (mentioned in November) said something wise on his talk, - yes, regarding a soft(ening) stance towards infoboxes. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:11, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Today's story is about parts of my life. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

How so? Barkeep49 (talk) 19:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
How much outing should I do ;) - I have an infobox on my user page (of my user, not of me), - it says "singen singen" a few times, with links to groups I sang with, and GD conducted two of those, and commissioned a Missa solemnis from CM, and we sang the premiere with the composer attending, and another performance at the Frankfurt Cathedral, and would have loved to also perform it in the UK once but the composer didn't live to hear it there. "singen singen" means "sing sing" as you will have guessed, and is taken from the Schütz Christmas Story (where it's repeated almost as often as in my box), and we'll sing it for Christmas as I just learned in rehearsal. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Today, I managed to get the pics to snow (on 28 Nov), and heard a lovely concert, after listening to a miracle of meditative dreaming on 6 December (or just click on music). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
... and today, to Paris (29 Nov) with a visit to the Palais Garnier, - to match the story of Medea Amiranashvili, - don't miss listening to her expressive voice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
My story today is about Michael Robinson, - it's an honor to have known him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Pics up to 3 December, with my shadow in one of them, and a story about Beethoven in memory of his birth. When the arb who wrote the infoboxes case installed the community consensus - in 2015! - I hoped these infobox wars were over, really. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Today, I have a special story to tell, of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded more pics, with Christmas trees and related artworks, and I have two women on the Main page (for a sad reason). Our Christmas singing (of my user's infobox music "singen, singen") was pictured! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Lithuania

I am pretty confused about the request for modification. I assume that since I am not seeing an announcement it is plain-vanilla RS I should be enforcing still? I am limiting myself to likely EE-acceptable sources in what I am adding, though. Is that about right? Elinruby (talk) 15:16, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Right now there has been no change to the rules. So normal EE rules still apply. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
I'll look those up. So far I'm working off a somewhat strict verifiability. Just had a doubt.
Lithuanian archivists disagreeing with IPN is shaping up as an issue, but I should probably say that at the request. Thanks for the answer Elinruby (talk) 00:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
I will make the above comment at the request but I have spent some happy time reading Arbcom decisions, and am still a little confused. Both Eastern Europe and Eastern Europe and the Balkans seem to both be about behaviour not sourcing, which is why we are doing this I guess? If possible, can you confirm that articles about pogroms in Lithuania fall under contentious topics whether or not the talk page says so? There are no particular restrictions on sourcing however? Just against edit warring and canvassing etc? Since I am the only person editing these articles right now (so far anyway) I want to be certain that I don't seem to be taking advantage of that to impose a PoV, not that I have one about Lithuania. If you wpuld prefer I put this in the request also, just let me know and I will do that. Thanks Elinruby (talk) 04:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year

  Happy New Year!
Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Barkeep49!

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

Abishe (talk) 20:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), and Frostly (talk · contribs · email). 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) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Recent RFA

I read through the RFA for Tails Wx with some initial puzzlement. I think I've resolved it in my mind but I'd be interested in your reaction. (I understand the awkward timing and I'm not looking for an immediate response.) I'll start by noting I don't recall any interactions with the nominee. The first oppose came from user:Banks Irk. I read optional question number 15, which started my puzzlement. Banks made an assertion about prior usernames, you responded, in essence saying that the assertion was false and banks doubled down. While I don't know you personally I know you by reputation, and my default assumption was that you must be right, and while I don't know banks and had no default assumption, I thought the assertion made was obviously true. That left me puzzled.

I think the light went on, and embarrassingly revealed that I may have been working under a misunderstanding for years. Wikipedia has long held that multiple accounts are not per se a violation of policy, but there are limitations on how they can be used, and there is an expectation that anyone standing for RFA will reveal the existence of all accounts. My misunderstanding is that I may have conflated usernames and accounts in my head.

I think Banks was emphasizing that Tails Wx has edited under other usernames and that wasn't disclosed. I think your response effectively was there's nothing to see here as there are no other accounts. If one is interested in reviewing any of the candidate edits in the candidate has edited for more than one account you need to know the names of both accounts, but if they've edited under multiple usernames but those usernames are simply a renaming of their username, searching the current username will reveal all edits including those made when using a different username.

Is it possible that Banks did not catch this distinction? Could it be that Banks thinks the requirement to disclose all prior accounts also includes all prior usernames? If so, it might explain why you and Banks appear to be disagreeing about facts, but it is simply a semantics issue. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick on the talk page Banks said he understood this distinction as I too wondered if that's all this was. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Seems clear, which leaves me puzzled, but maybe a mystery which will never be solved. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Reputable institution

In the context of WP:APLRS, is "reputable institution" defined somewhere? I'm seeing it applied as a synonym of "academic", while I think most editors would consider a generally reliable news organization to be both "reputable" and an "institution". What is the intent here? VQuakr (talk) 18:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Building off my response to a similar question the restriction doesn't just say a reputable institution. It says "an academically focused book by a reputable publisher". So most news organizations are publishing books and the ones that do are not, to my knowledge, publishing academically focused ones. Beyond that, my talk page is the wrong place - WP:ARCA is the right one - because it's not just my opinion that matters, and I think there are limits to discussing this in the abstract precisely because people are inclined to focus on a part of the phrase rather than looking at the entire phrase. Barkeep49 (talk) 18:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply! Those are separate clauses separated by an "and/or": When a source that is not an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution is removed from an article..., so if the intent is for the "article published by" noun to also be modified by the phrase "academically focused" then the language should be tweaked or a footnote or similar added. WP:ARCA looks terribly formal and complicated to be honest so I'll probably not do that (is there really no lightweight venue for informal Q&A like this?), but we agree this discussion here is an informal conversation and not "official". What do you mean by the abstract? VQuakr (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you add this page for deletion?

Bu (instrument) Heyandwhoa (talk) 23:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello? Heyandwhoa (talk) 21:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
You can find instructions about how to nominate something for deletion here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Welp, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bu (instrument). Heyandwhoa (talk) 22:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

NFL cent worthy?

It's not really about NFL, but about following P&G. Dicklyon (talk) 05:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Dicklyon, replying during a commercial break of the Browns/Texans game so I'm not anti-NFL. But we're not talking a wide enough scope to say it has potentially wide-ranging impacts and therefore require input from the community at large. in my judgement. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:29, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
It's an example of what can happen when a WikiProject makes a style that's at odds with the main MOS. Examples of other such situations are discussed in the RfC. Maybe we should have gone meta on it, and asked is WikiProjects should be allowed to enforce a style at odds with the MOS. Except that's been decided before, so we're dealing with this specific problem. Maybe it's not the scope you'd want to see there, but we needed to get more people who care about P&G issues to participate, since all sports WikiProjects were invited. Dicklyon (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail!

 
Hello, Barkeep49/Archives. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 05:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

DreamRimmer (talk) 05:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Yo! Uh...,

You mind trying to expand this page? Trajectoid. Heyandwhoa (talk) 23:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

That's not really in an area of my editing expertise. And unfortunately I don't have much time to edit content at the moment. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

City of Champaign v. Madigan

Hi! I know you're busy with other on-wiki responsibilities, and it's been a few years since you reviewed my GA nomination for City of Champaign v. Madigan. I just wanted to let you know that I've nominated it for FAC. You probably don't remember the article that well, if at all, but any feedback you have for the review would be greatly appreciated! Edge3 (talk) 04:54, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@Edge3 congrats on getting this to FA nomination status. Well done. I really can't promise anything but if you're at risk of delisting due to lack of input feel free to reach back out and I'll see if I can help at that time. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

i am elite

 

yessir ( my user is 2 days old )

Wicontrib4 (talk) 16:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes I believe I've written that you are. Congrats and good luck with your future editing. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

contentious topics alerts

Regarding this comment: Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Awareness of contentious topics says that ...anyone may alert the editor of the contentious topic designation using the {{Contentious topics/alert/first}} template. I'm not aware of any formal restriction that only uninvolved editors can place the alert. isaacl (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. That was discussed and not done. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

2024

Same location pictured as 2019. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy 2024 to you as well @Gerda Arendt. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
 
Five years!

Talking about the same time ;) - I discovered a story today per OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

The 2023 picture (above) is from the Abel Fest in Köthen, celebrating the tercentenary of Carl Friedrich Abel, a viol virtuoso, composer and concert organiser in London (together with Bach's youngest son), born on 22 December 1723 in Köthen, where the new catalogue of his works was introduced, - my story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:28, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

 
story · music · places

Today a friend's birthday, with related music and new vacation pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

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

 

  CheckUser changes

  Wugapodes

  Interface administrator changes

 

  Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

  Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

  Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer   Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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) 17:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

Secret ballot

Regarding this comment: although I do think there would be more opposes coming from voters with personal agendas, I think there is another category of voters who currently go unheard from. Being critical of another editor is an unpleasant thing to do, so I think there are potential opposing editors who demur from participating in the current RfA process. I also think most editors aren't collecting diffs on everyone they encounter just in case they might have to weigh in on them someday, and they aren't so motivated to participate in an RfA to spend extensive amounts of time hunting down past diffs, so they don't contribute. I appreciate of course that relying on people's unreliable memories makes the system more vulnerable to gatekeeping and unconscious bias. Historically, I haven't been a fan of moving to a voting system, but the community is no closer to agreeing on something like my proposal for a pros-and-cons evaluation, so it might be time to consider voting, the other approach commmonly used by organizations everywhere. isaacl (talk) 00:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I think the current system discourages opposers and so yes that is a substantial part of the reason why I think opposes would go up if we moved to secret ballot. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations on a "WikiProjects and collaborations" request for comment, and at Talk:Black Irish (folklore) on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

February music

 
story · music · places

My calendar story today is about Michael Herrmann celebrating his birthday. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

same kind of birthday for Josef Protschka --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 5 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. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Quite the globe trotter. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Very selectively, - images just updated. - 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) 15:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Listen to music from Ukraine if you like, - I heard it in 2022, and the November concert (at a different church) raised a truckload of winter clothes. My story today is also from my life: I heard the singer in 3 of the 4 mentioned musical items. I sang in yesterday's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Rinaldo (opera) was premiered on 24 February, which OTD on the Main page recognized, pictured. I gave it an infobox. What do you think about what happened then? For context: Carmen, The Bartered Bride, L'Orfeo, Nixon in China ... all by the same user who sadly died years ago. The last time an infobox opera was disputed was Robert le diable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, but I won't be able to answer your infobox question at this time. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
more music and flowers on Rossini's rare birthday --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Your comments

It's always quite disconcerting to find out that one has been discussed somewhere without a courtesy ping to be allowed to speak for themselves, as I did today. That said, I wanted to specifically thank you for what you said, and for initiating a (gentle) rebuke on your own cognizance.[9][10] I was taken aback by that accusation, then puzzled, and then incensed. It took quite a bit of restraint to respond the way I did at the time, when a fairly significant part of me was screaming stuff about hypocrisy and (especially) tone policing hypocrisy and the weaponization of AGF and so on. I greatly appreciate that you made an effort to correct that and to push back against the characterization of my observation, even as you acknowledged not agreeing with it yourself.

Not coincidentally, given your comment at the proposal and above here about secret ballots at RFA, the furor we have in reaction to Oppose votes can contribute just as much to toxicity at RFA as actual bad Opposes. Certainly the accusation leveled against me is the sort of thing that can be used to silence editors, and someone less experienced might come away from that RFA afraid to lodge an Oppose in the future, worried they might be bullied by an admin suggesting they violated AGF. Grandpallama (talk) 23:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to   Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. 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 it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges 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) 00:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Barkeep writes a blog

I have started a new blog. Talk page watchers might be interested in following that. The first entry: Why do arbs often need stuff explained to them clearly and multiple times despite having the evidence right in front of them. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

HJP

In your comment on the Palestine-Israel ARCA you say This was demonstrated in HJP. It took me a minute to realise you were referring to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland not to an editor named (or abbreviated) HJP. To avoid others (especially those not familiar with that case) getting similarly confused it would be good if you link to the case. Thryduulf (talk) 03:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

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

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

A request

This is the second time in as many weeks that I've seen a member of the committee speaking to an editor on the Administrators' Noticeboard with phrasing like "I think that if it weren't for this, they would be complaining about something else." I've generally found you to be a responsive and respectful editor and committee member, so I hope you'll take on board my suggestion that you (collectively) consider retiring this phrase, as it comes off (to my ears at least) as disrespectful, imperious, and lacking in empathy. I'm sure it's not your intention to talk down to others based on your position on the committee, but phrases like that can give the impression (to me, at least) that you are, intentionally or not. 28bytes (talk) 20:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I have struck the comment. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. I appreciate that. 28bytes (talk) 05:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

  • Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
  • Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
  • Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
  • Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
  • Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
  • Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
  • Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
  • Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
  • Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
  • Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
  • Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
  • Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
  • Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
  • Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
  • Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
  • Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
  • Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Please remove me from this list and note that I wish to recieve no notifications or pings about this. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 11:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure if you mean you don't want anything to do with RFA review anymore, which would be understandable with everything else that's going on, but I was wondering what your opinion might be on whether a non-admin close of proposal 3 was inappropriate. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
I have decided to step away from RfA and so have no opinion of what you're asking about because I haven't been following. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
I feared as much. I think I will leave it alone too. Thank you for taking the charge in the past. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Could you strike or delete this?

Hello Barkeep49. I was tussling with Laura over on Commons regarding a Ukraine-related Category, and noticed that he has an account here. I then saw that he didn't really have one anymore, but I did see the note you left on his talk page awhile ago.

It is kind of awful what he wrote, and you properly flagged, see this and similarly, this. Might you be able to delete both en situ, i.e. on the Cfd entries where they were written? They are entirely gratuitous, and add nothing to the discussion other than to be unpleasant in the style of Karl Marx and Martin Luther (although I forgot the title of his uh tract).

Thank you for considering my request.-- FeralOink (talk) 15:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @FeralOink. I believe the comments have been removed from the "live" page of those discussion and are only available in the edit history. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Wow, you're so fast! I was just doing some fixing up and you answered already! Okay, I understand what you're saying. I'm glad those comments aren't visible to anyone passing by on the live pages, as they are mean. Thank you.--FeralOink (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2024 United States presidential election on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Need help with something

Hi, I'm sorry if I'm disrupting anything, but some of my edits are being incorrectly marked as vandalism.

I don't know why this is happening, as my edits are all in good faith.

If you could somehow check my contribs and see if I'm doing something wrong, I'd appreciate it- I don't want to get banned anytime soon. Again, sorry if I'm disrupting anything or if this is the wrong place to ask. (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 13:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@3OpenEyes can you provide some examples? Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
I added a template on Poverty gap index (by a template) and it got marked as vandalism, as well as adding another template for plagiarism/very close paraphrasing on A5114 road that got marked vandalism, and added a reference on Campbellsville, Kentucky that was also marked as vandalism. There are a few more. I tried to upload screenshots but ran into issues while doing so. (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 17:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
So from what I can see they're not showing as marked as vandalism. I know you can't do screenshots but where are you seeing that? Barkeep49 (talk) 22:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
@3OpenEyes have you turned on WP:TWINKLE by any chance? Barkeep49 (talk) 22:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I have turned it on. I see them in the interactive page history, while comparing any previous edits to my own. (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 00:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
@3OpenEyes So a guess of another admin who I shared this discussion with is that you're seeing the vandalism button there and it's not that your edits are marked as vandalism. Both of us independently looked at WP:ORES to see if that was it and it's not. So bottomline: good news your edits aren't being marked as vandalism and you don't need to worry about them at this time. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Oh, alright. Thank you so much! (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 14:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

does the exemption for Mschwartz1 apply to the new filing you suggest?

Just wondering because I felt it didn't, but clearly I'm not sure. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Doug Weller the exemption was made specifically so that they could file an arb request (or a request to the community at AN/ANI) so yes this if fitting with the intent. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. My bad, I didn’t look closely enough and thought it was to take part in a current case. Looks like it might be interesting. Doug Weller talk 18:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

 

Thanks for helping me with the problem I was having. Enjoy your wikikitten

(3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 14:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

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

 

  Administrator changes

 

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Barkeep49/Archives,

 
New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

 

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox person on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Some mischievous editors are deliberately removing the following cardinal section from the “Metallic Mean” page. Kindly help.

Relation to Pythagorean triples

 
Metallic Ratios in Primitive Pythagorean Triangles

Metallic means are precisely represented by primitive Pythagorean triples.

In a primitive Pythagorean triple, if the difference between hypotenuse and longer leg is 1, 2 or 8, such Pythagorean triple accurately represents one particular metallic mean. The cotangent of the quarter of smaller acute angle of such Pythagorean triangle equals the precise value of one particular metallic mean.

Consider a primitive Pythagorean triple (a,b,c) in which a < b < c and c - b ∈ {1, 2, 8}. Such Pythagorean triangle (a,b,c) yields the precise value of a particular metallic mean   as follows :

 

where θ is the smaller acute angle of the Pythagorean triangle

and  

For example, the primitive Pythagorean triple 20-21-29 incorporates the 5th metallic mean. Cotangent of the quarter of smaller acute angle of the 20-21-29 Pythagorean triangle yields the precise value of the 5th metallic mean. Similarly, the Pythagorean triangle 3-4-5 represents the 6th metallic mean. Likewise, the Pythagorean triple 12-35-37 gives the 12th metallic mean, the Pythagorean triple 52-165-173 yields the 13th metallic mean, and so on. [1] Wanderer909 (talk) 12:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Rajput, Chetansing; Manjunath, Hariprasad (2024). "Metallic means and Pythagorean triples | Notes on Number Theory and Discrete Mathematics". Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

Outing

I saw you warn someone about outing. May I please email you about this issue? It is NOT about the question where I saw you warn them, but an entirely separate matter unrelated to that/those users. It's just that I saw you mention it and have something to ask you, please. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

My email open. Barkeep49 (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Just emailed you, thanks. DBaK (talk) 22:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Cut and Paste question

Hey there. I'm sure I've come across this before, but for the life of me I can't remember the correct procedure. DXYZ was changed into a dab page, but the editor cut and paste the article's content to DXYZ-AM. I reverted the dab conversion, but the article created by the cut and paste, what to do about that? The dab is the right move. Should I just do a dummy edit on the AM page, and give attribution? Onel5969 TT me 09:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

@Onel5969 so good to have you around my talk page again. The good new is nothing needs to be done. DXYZ-AM was properly attributed and is back to being a redirect so no further cleanup is needed. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 15:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Excuse me. Where is the attribution in Special:History/DXYZ-AM? Special:Diff/1218330866 has clues that a copy occurred, and Special:Diff/1218392470's edit summary links to DXYZ, but attribution is not stated clearly. Flatscan (talk) 04:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
For me Article transferred to DXYZ-AM to distinguish Iligan-based DXYZ-FM is enough in the context of the diff to provide attribution @Flatscan given that transferred is a close enough synonym of copied. If your concern is that it doesn't say from where and if you want to null edit or talk page message to clear that up don't let me stop you. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I have done so, following WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Repairing insufficient attribution (guideline, shortcut WP:RIA): dummy edit on the redirect and {{Copied}} tags on the talk pages of the source and the destination.
Three components were lacking:
  1. That a copy occurred Savvy editors can identify the creation as a likely copy, but an inexperienced reader may not see it as clearly.
  2. Link to the source DXYZ-FM was linked in the creation edit summary, but the source was actually DXYZ (cross-page diff). The redirect edit links DXYZ, but it does not mention the copy.
  3. Mention of "history" and "attribution" Most of WP:CWW's suggested edit summaries include this pointer to guide readers to the correct page's history.
Flatscan (talk) 04:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 April newsletter

We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. 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) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Your suggestion about noticeboards

Hi!

I just saw that in the Venezuela discussion you proposed GS applying arbcom-like restrictions to noticeboards. Mind elaborating further on what your idea is and why it would improve things?

Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@RadioactiveBoulevardier I wonder if the community would want to pass a general sanction to allow uninvolved administrators to impose word limits on involved parties at notice boards and, as a separate but complementary idea, to require involved parties to participate in certain sections. I genuinely don't know - there's a good chance the answer is no - but it's possible there's support for something like that. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Rules

Regarding this comment: perhaps you might be willing to provide a bigger hint on what rule you feel is being ignored? I understand of course if it involves a private discussion or if you just don't want to go into further detail. isaacl (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I have edited my comment. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the edit and subsequent comment. isaacl (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)