Open main menu
There is no Cabal


RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
Girth Summit 118 1 0 99 04:54, 26 October 2019 4 days, 15 hoursno report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 13:08, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Canyon dam.jpg

Contents

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup!Edit

Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

  Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

  Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Rex Lassalle for deletionEdit

 

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

  • As it stands it looks like advertising. Rathfelder (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    • @Rathfelder: - I cut the spammy stuff, added scholarly sources and a profile in a leading national newspaper. Haven't had time to do more, nor do I have access to a library that has any depth of coverage of the topic. Guettarda (talk) 06:40, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Sanctions for off-wiki writingEdit

Hi, without wishing to derail that conversation any further (because this isn't really relevant to it), there are a number of globally blocked editors who have been sanctioned for opinions expressed off wiki - an example would be some who have spoken or run websites that support child pornography or paedophilia. Black Kite (talk) 12:36, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I see. It's rather different a universe than what I was thinking about, but I understand what you mean now. Thanks for following up. Guettarda (talk) 13:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Company AccountsEdit

Dear Guettarda,
since you're my favourite admin, please allow me to ask you a question about the local system of rules: How does en.WP handle paid editing in form of copmpany accounts writing articles? I'm a mentor at de.WP and have a mentee who's working for the PR department of a company and has rewritten the article about her company. She did good work, keeping the NPOV and providing good, notable sources. In es.WP she wouldn't have had a chance as commercial authors get blocked and all their edits are reverted. What's the policy in en.WP? If that topic is beyond your scope, where could I look that up?
Thanks and kind regards, Grueslayer 21:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@Grueslayer: There are two issues I'm aware of: paid editing and conflict of interest. en.WP has no specific policies on paid editing, only the Foundation requirement that paid editors disclose their editing. In practice, undisclosed paid editors are usually blocked, and their edits are frequently reverted. When it comes to COI, it's best to disclose any potential conflicts.
There's also a somewhat helpful essay Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations; I think the short version is it's best not to edit Wikipedia articles directly. Draft the content on the talk page or in a sandbox and ask an editor to make the edits for you. New articles by paid editors should also go through Articles for Creation. As long as someone isn't adding promotional content, and their edits are obviously aimed at improving the encyclopaedia, I think there will always be people willing to help out.
If I've gotten anything wrong, hopefully someone will chime in. Guettarda (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, that helps a lot! Kind regards, Grueslayer 22:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

2019Edit

 


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

begin it with music and memories

Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda Arendt, and Happy 2019 to you as well! Guettarda (talk) 14:55, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Facts About Myers not allowed?Edit

[Deleted, per WP:BLP - Guettarda (talk)--Apemonkey1 (talk) 04:02, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

You can't accuse people of criminal acts on Wikipedia without solid supporting citations. Read the policy page, it's all there - WP:BLP. Guettarda (talk) 04:48, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
It isn't about what PZ did - you can say "Why is the fact that he [x] not reported in this article." Obviously, you need to back that up with reliable sources; you can't expect other people to track down sources for you.
What you can't make a statement that what Myer did constituted wrongdoing. You especially can't do that when, iirc, the civil suit against him was either dropped or thrown out. Guettarda (talk) 05:03, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

What lawsuit are you referring to? So what was wrong with the last item about improving the article? (I removed the part you complained about before.) Who do you say I accused of committing a crime? As I did not! (You should really read things properly before replying so you dont make such mistakes in future!) So its not wrong to accuse a person of rape without any evidence! ah ok thanks for that info! Bet if I did that to you tho, it would be wrong right?--Apemonkey1 (talk) 05:58, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Who do you say I accused of committing a crime? As I did not! You accused him of committing slander, which is a crime. Even if it wasn't, it's an accusation of wrongdoing, so without supporting sources it's a violation of the WP:BLP policy. You also repeated the allegations he made, which is also a problem because that spreads the accusation far wider than a blog post ever would (even talk pages on Wikipedia get a whole lot of traffic).
You can discuss how to use reliable sources to include this information in the article. I'm not sure this would be the wisest thing though, since it probably draws more attention to the claims. Whatever you do, you need to discuss this in terms of what reliable sources say. Guettarda (talk) 14:51, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, got my wires crossed on the lawsuit thing. It was threatened, but never actually filed. Guettarda (talk) 15:01, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2019Edit

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

  Administrator changes

  EnterpriseyJJMC89
  BorgQueen
  Harro5Jenks24GraftR. Baley

  Interface administrator changes

 Enterprisey

  Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
  • Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

  Technical news

  • A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

  Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:15, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for SabinariaEdit

 On 7 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sabinaria, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when taxonomist Gloria Galeano first saw pictures of the newly discovered Sabinaria magnifica she described it as "the most beautiful of all Colombian palms"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sabinaria. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sabinaria), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Amakuru (talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 ReminderEdit

Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you have signed up to compete in this year's WikiCup! There are about 2 weeks left before the first round ends – if you haven't yet made your first submission, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SabinariaEdit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sabinaria you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 10:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SabinariaEdit

The article Sabinaria you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sabinaria for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SabinariaEdit

The article Sabinaria you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Sabinaria for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 March newsletterEdit

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  •   L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
  •   Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
  •   MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
  •   Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
  •   Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
  •   Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 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.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019Edit

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

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

  Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Main Ridge, TobagoEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Main Ridge, Tobago at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SounderBruce 06:58, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Main Ridge, TobagoEdit

 On 21 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Main Ridge, Tobago, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tobago's Main Ridge is one of the oldest protected areas in the world set aside for conservation, having been created by the British Parliament in 1776? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Main Ridge, Tobago. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Main Ridge, Tobago), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

About your commentEdit

I saw your comment at [1], and to a degree it is a moving statement. I understand that people and links opposed to your existence are worrisome. But to me, it seems like racists have been very solidly defeated, and censorship is a counterproductive practice that risks bringing them back from the dead. By contrast, some of us are more prone to notice other things that are still ongoing right now [2][3]. Note the map in that article. There are more than a billion people who have copies of what you may or may not dare to choose to call hate propaganda that inspires things like that. The authorities of the world do not put people in jail for ten years for possessing it, or censor links to it, and with that I also agree, in the same narrow sense as you accepted my position at ANI. I think that where any wrong belief is concerned, the best progress can be made by leaving it out in the open for all to see and think about, in the hope that human beings are capable, by thought and introspection, of choosing what is right above what is wrong. If I am confident in the ability of people to overcome error by reason, then I must attribute the tenacity of wrong beliefs throughout the world to other methods which prohibit the application of reason. Wnt (talk) 09:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Coccothrinax jimeneziiEdit

 On 4 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coccothrinax jimenezii, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Coccothrinax jimenezii, a palm tree native to the island of Hispaniola, was listed as a critically endangered species within two years of its formal description? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coccothrinax jimenezii. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coccothrinax jimenezii), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Granting accountcreatorEdit

Hi there! Just as a heads-up, I noticed you granted +accountcreator to Jami430 the other day - I've now revoked that as Jami430 is not active at WP:ACC, but I've also granted them +eventcoordinator, which grants similar rights to +accountcreator. This does not include the ability to override AntiSpoof or the title blacklist, and also includes the ability to grant +confirmed to users. Cheers! stwalkerster (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Stwalkerster, that's what I meant to do, but when I scanned the list of userrights, I picked the older and more familiar option. Thanks for fixing that. Guettarda (talk) 14:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019Edit

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

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Coccothrinax jamaicensisEdit

 On 9 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coccothrinax jamaicensis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while the fan palm Coccothrinax jamaicensis is the only Coccothrinax species native to Jamaica, the neighbouring island of Cuba has 39 native species? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coccothrinax jamaicensis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coccothrinax jamaicensis), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK for History of TobagoEdit

 On 12 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article History of Tobago, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/History of Tobago. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, History of Tobago), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:23, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

it's cancerEdit

I don't see how your edit here doesn't violate WP:REFACTOR. Thewolfchild's comment was not "off-topic, uncivil, unclear, or otherwise distracting material" and (to my knowledge) we don't require medical certification for talk page conversations. Maybe you overstepped and you should just revert yourself. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:16, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, but practicing medicine without a license is against the law. Trying to scare newbies is (at the very least) a violation of CIVIL. Guettarda (talk) 13:34, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Other stuff aside, with out without off-wiki qualifications, nobody on Wikipedia should be giving medical advice. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Chris troutman: Not to mention that at least three of my cats in my lifetime have done exactly the same thing. So that advice was complete fuckwittery - and I have warned them on their talkpage that if they do that again they'll be indeffed. Black Kite (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Main Ridge, TobagoEdit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Main Ridge, Tobago you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk) 19:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Stella AbidhEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Stella Abidh at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 ReminderEdit

Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 2 of this year's WikiCup! There are only a few days until the second round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 05:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

Unsourced additionsEdit

Hi, regarding what you wrote to me about my unsourced additions to Geography of Trinidad and Tobago, I based them a lot upon this file: "File:Koppen-Geiger Map Caribbean present.svg". I figured it is from Wikimedia, and when I looked at the summary and how many authors had worked on it, and also the fact that it was broken down to a 1-km resolution, it seemed very reliable. When I looked at the part of the map that depicted Trinidad and Tobago it was essentially 50%-50% tropical rainforest and tropical monsoon climates, with isolated pockets of tropical savanna, and that's where I drew those conclusions from. How should I properly reference that? I am curious, I want to contribute to Wikipedia, but do so in a reliable way.

When it comes to my addition of the climate table in the San Fernando article, I truly did look for more reliable data, but there was very little to find about the town, which makes sense since it is not very big. I did find a few more, but none seemed more reliable than the next. One of them was Meteoblue, but in my past experience with that website they always severely understate the precipitation levels of most tropical places at least, and almost all other sources point to a much wetter climate than their website would suggest. Anyways, with Climate-data.org, I just figured the data seemed in line with other nearby towns that data existed on, and also the file I previously mentioned.

Thanks in advance for your help. Timothy2b (talk) 17:49, 26 April 2019 (CET)

@Timothy2b: Per WP:USERGENERATED, user-generated sources, including Wikipedia, are regarded as generally not reliable sources, so we cannot use Wikipedia as a source in Wikipedia. - Donald Albury 19:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Donald Albury. Guettarda (talk) 22:19, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
@Timothy2b: With regards to the Climate-data.org, they don't explain where their data comes from, so that's a big problem. In addition, a site needs some external evidence of reliability - for example, some evidence that it was connected with some major research institution, or that the people behind it were recognised experts. In this case, the person behind the website (per this) appears to be this person, who lists their profession as "Digital Marketing Expert". I can't see how this meets our reliable sources policy.
As for the map, reading a map that's that tiny and extrapolating Trinidad's climate from it is unreliable. In addition, I'm curious about your conclusion that it has a tropical monsoon climate. While Wikipedia is not a reliable source, if the Köppen climate classification article is correct, nowhere in Trinidad has a monsoon climate - the trade winds blow reliably from the northeast.
In short, we need reliable sources that say the thing we're adding to Wikipedia. Not sources that say things that we can extrapolate are probably true. So please fix your additions - either add a source, or remove them. Guettarda (talk) 22:47, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
@Guettarda: I see what you mean. Regarding your questioning of my reasoning of why parts of Trinidad have a monsoon climate, sure it does not say in the Köppen climate article that it does, but nowhere does it say that it does not. Also trade winds reliably blowing from the northeast does not mean it cannot have such a climate. If you look at the article about the tropical monsoon climate and what defines it, there is simply a formula for rainfall and the general tropical standard that all months have mean temperatures above 18°C. You can also find this in a lot of places if you Google it. So that the trade winds blow from the northeast is not evidence against what I wrote. But again, I based it on the map and I used Climate-data.org, my bad. I have tried to find data from NOAA, Deutscher Wetterdienst, World Meteorological Organization, among other climate data collectors, but I do not know how to access their data. I have seen other climate tables use them as sources, and those are reliable data collectors. I would like to at least find out if it is possible access that data before I remove my additions, but if I am not able to or the data shows otherwise, of course I will remove or edit my additions. Would you happen to know how to do that? I want to have reliable sources. Please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy2b (talkcontribs)
@Guettarda: Hi, just wanted to let you know that I found historical climate data on San Fernando from The World Bank Group, more specifically a page on their website about climate change and historical climatic data. It was possible to select countries, and for Trinidad and Tobago they had cooperated with four sources, including universities. This allowed them to create an interactive map (sort of, hard to describe) where one could choose location and get data from that area. I zoomed in and clicked on San Fernando, which gave me the data for that area (the website gave data for those coordinates). I made the edits on the San Fernando article, and referenced it properly. By the Köppen climate classification system, the climate did indeed fall under tropical monsoon. Tomorrow I will try my best to find information on Trinidad and Tobago as a whole, and if I don't I'll remove my additions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy2b (talkcontribs)
@Guettarda: I have now cited all my additions to information I found on reliable websites, including the World Bank Group, as I mentioned earlier, and NASA, among others, for the other articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy2b (talkcontribs)
@Timothy2b: I checked all the sources, and none of them supported the claims you added. The source you added to the geography of Trinidad and Tobago and Trinidad and Tobago articles had maps on urban land-use, and none of them were of TT. The link you added to the San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago article had some data for the country as a whole, but said nothing about San Fernando, and did not have the data you added to the page. It's one thing to add uncited claims, or to use unreliable sources, but adding fake sources, as you seem to be doing here, is a big problem.
And please sign your talk page comments with four tildes, which will produce a signature. Guettarda (talk) 20:26, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
@Guettarda: I just double-checked the link to the World Bank Group source, and it turns out it directed to the wrong place. I will try to fix that. If you go to the link, then country, the TT, then Climate Data you will find what I am referring to. As for the NASA thing, you have to add the tags "Climate" and "South America". I will try to improve that so as the link brings the user directly to the map I used. I did not make these things up as you claim, I will try to make the links work the way I thought they did.
@Guettarda: I think I fixed the link for the San Fernando data, it works for me now at least. Let me know if it does not for you, because then there is something wrong. I swear on my life the data is there, I am not lying. I edited the San Fernando page so it says the data is for the San Fernando area, as opposed to the actual city, as it appears the data is for that part of TT rather than the city itself. Only the area close to the city has this data, and when you click farther north, other data appears, meaning it is for that general area. Since it isn't necessarily from the city itself, I specified that, so now one could say it's more of a pointer to the climate of the area. Just so you are aware, in order for the data to appear, one must select the TT page from the list of countries available on the website, and then click on San Fernando (or the area around it) on the map available. The data should then appear to the left of the map. I hope this works, and that you will find I did not make these things up.

As for the Climate additions to the TT and Geography of TT, I revisited the map I looked at, and I was mistaken. I mistook the color for tropical monsoon climate for grey, so I was incorrect. I apologize. I removed everything I wrote on both those articles. Timothy2b (talk) 22:47, 28 April 2019 (CET)

Thanks for sorting out the University of connecticut AfDEdit

I appreciate your advice. I hope I didn't upset the student. Logophile59 (talk) 20:48, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Stella AbidhEdit

 On 30 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stella Abidh, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Stella Abidh is believed to be the first Indo-Trinidadian woman to become a medical doctor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stella Abidh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stella Abidh), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Main Ridge, TobagoEdit

The article Main Ridge, Tobago you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Main Ridge, Tobago for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk) 13:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 May newsletterEdit

The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

  •   Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
  •   Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
  •   Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
  •   Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

Other notable performances were put in by   Barkeep49 with six GAs,   Ceranthor,   Lee Vilenski, and   Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and   MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

HI! 👋🏽Edit

@Guettarda: a very short message to say hello. Again! Great speaking to you earlier. MassiveEartha (talk) 12:46, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@MassiveEartha: Great meeting you! Guettarda (talk) 13:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
@Guettarda: as discussed Digital Library of the Caribbean MassiveEartha (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circularEdit

 
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)Edit

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – May 2019Edit

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

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

  Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Tree of Life NewsletterEdit

April 2019—Issue 001


Tree of Life


Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  Sturgeon nominated by Atsme, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Eastern brown snake nominated by Casliber, reviewed by Opabinia regalis
  Cactus wren nominated by CaptainEek, reviewed by Sainsf
  Bidni nominated by PolluxWorld, reviewed by DepressedPer
  Crinoid nominated by Cwmhiraeth, reviewed by Chiswick Chap

Newly nominated FAs

 Cretoxyrhina nominated by Macrophyseter
 Eastern brown snake nominated by Casliber



WikiCup heating up

Tree of Life editors are making a respectable showing in this year's WikiCup, with three regular editors advancing to the third round. Overall winner from 2016, Casliber, topped the scoreboard in points for round 2, getting a nice bonus for bringing Black mamba to FA. Enwebb continues to favor things remotely related to bats, bringing Stellaluna to GA. Plants editor Guettarda also advanced to round 3 with several plant-related DYKs.

Wikipedia page views track animal migrations, flowers blooming

A March 2019 paper in PLOS Biology found that Wikipedia page views vary seasonally for species. With a dataset of 31,751 articles about species, the authors found that roughly a quarter of all articles had significant seasonal variations in page views on at least one language version of Wikipedia. They examined 245 language versions. Page views also peaked with cultural events, such as views of the Great white shark article during Shark Week or Turkey during Thanksgiving.

 
Seasonal variation in page views among nine bird species
Did you know ... that Tree of Life editors bring content to the front page nearly every day?

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Ismith KhanEdit

 On 20 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ismith Khan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that novelist Ismith Khan's relative obscurity may reflect the fact that he was not based in London, the "literary capital" of the English Caribbean? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ismith Khan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ismith Khan), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Biotemperature is the arithmetic mean of all temperatures (including those adjusted to 0°C)Edit

Hello,

"It is measured as the mean of all temperatures above freezing, with all temperatures below freezing and above 30 °C adjusted to 0 °C"

This assertion about biotemperature is wrong.

"Mean of all temperatures above freezing" means that temperatures below freezing aren't taken into account in the arithmetic mean whereas it is the case in the calculation of the biotemperature.

Imagine that, by simplification, the annual biotemperature is estimated as the mean of mean monthly temperatures. Let's say that 2 months have negative mean temperatures and 10 months have positive mean temperatures. The two negative temperatures will be adjusted to 0°C and the biotemperature will be equal to the sum of the 10 positive temperatures divided not by 10 as "Mean of all temperatures above freezing" suggests but by 12 with 12 being the number of all the monthly temperatures including the 2 negative monthly temperatures.

Biotemperature is the arithmetic "mean of all the temperatures (adjusted to °C or not)" and not the arithmetic "mean of all temperatures above freezing".

This is why I reverted your edit. Carlo Colussi (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@Carlo Colussi: The wording was unclear, and I thank you for trying to fix that. I'm familiar with biotemperature - I've dissected Holdridge's Life Zone Ecology, discussed the merits of biotemperature with the author of the cited source, I've done biotemperature calculations. Please try to assume good faith - after all, it is Wikipedia policy - and don't assume that the people you deal with here are stupid or ignorant like you have here.
I removed your parenthetical comment because it makes the sentence less clear and harder to read. Guettarda (talk) 20:23, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I still think that originally the phrase "Mean of all temperatures above freezing" was wrong because it strongly suggests that the denominator enumerates only the strictly positive and under 30°C temperatures and not, as it shall, all the temperatures.

I don't think that people are stupid or ignorant but I think that Wikipedia shall make the reader understand as much as possible and that sentence was "clearly" "unclear". If someone has never heard of biotemperature it is very important to make him understand how to estimate it and the original phrase couldn't let it at all. This is why I gave you an example to make clear that the mean applied to all temperatures, even those corrected. I still think this is possibly the most important thing to say in this article : to explain the difference between temperature and biotemperature. An article in Wikipedia is supposed to bring new knowledge but it wasn't the case with this sentence which was completely misleading.--Carlo Colussi (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019 Tree of Life NewsletterEdit

May 2019—Issue 002


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  Cretoxyrhina by Macrophyseter
  Bramble Cay melomys by The lorax/Vanamonde93, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Chimpanzee by LittleJerry/Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Tim riley
  Spinophorosaurus by FunkMonk/Jens Lallensack, reviewed by Enwebb
  Trachodon mummy by Jens Lallensack, reviewed by Gog the Mild
  Megabat by Enwebb, reviewed by Jens Lallensack

Newly nominated FAs

  Spinophorosaurus by FunkMonk/Jens Lallensack
  Trachodon mummy by Jens Lallensack




Fundamental changes being discussed at WikiProject Biology

On 23 May, user Prometheus720 created a talk page post, "Revamp of Wikiproject Biology--Who is In?". In the days since, WP:BIOL has been bustling with activity, with over a dozen editors weighing in on this discussion, as well as several others that have subsequently spawned. An undercurrent of thought is that WP:BIOL has too many subprojects, preventing editors from easily interacting and stopping a "critical mass" of collaboration and engagement. Many mergers and consolidations of subprojects have been tentatively listed, with a consolidation of WikiProjects Genetics + Molecular and Cell Biology + Computational Biology + Biophysics currently in discussion. Other ideas being aired include updating old participants lists, redesigning project pages to make them more user-friendly, and clearly identifying long- and short-term goals.

Editor Spotlight: These editors want you to write about dinosaurs

Editors FunkMonk and Jens Lallensack had a very fruitful month, collaborating to bring two dinosaur articles to GA and then nominating them both for FA. They graciously decided to answer some questions for the first ToL Editor Spotlight, giving insight to their successful collaborations, explaining why you should collaborate with them, and also sharing some tidbits about their lives off-Wikipedia.

1) Enwebb: How long have you two been collaborating on articles?

  • Jens Lallensack: I started in the German Wikipedia in 2005 but switched to the English Wikipedia because of its very active dinosaur project. My first major collaboration with FunkMonk was on Heterodontosaurus in 2015.
  • FunkMonk: Yeah, we had interacted already on talk pages and through reviewing each other's articles, and at some point I was thinking of expanding Heterodontosaurus, and realised Jens had already written the German Wikipedia version, so it seemed natural to work together on the English one. Our latest collaboration was Spinophorosaurus, where by another coincidence, I had wanted to work on that article for the WP:Four Award, and it turned out that Jens had a German book about the expedition that found the dinosaur, which I wouldn't have been able to utilise with my meagre German skills. Between those, we also worked on Brachiosaurus, a wider Dinosaur Project collaboration between several editors.

2) Enwebb: Why dinosaurs?

  • JL: Because of the huge public interest in them. But dinosaurs are also highly interesting from a scientific point of view: key evolutionary innovations emerged within this group, such as warm-bloodedness, gigantism, and flight. Dinosaur research is, together with the study of fossil human remains, the most active field in paleontology. New scientific techniques and approaches tend to get developed within this field. Dinosaur research became increasingly interdisciplinary, and now does not only rely on various fields of biology and geology, but also on chemistry and physics, among others. Dinosaurs are therefore ideal to convey scientific methodology to the general public.
  • FM: As outlined above, dinosaurs have been described as a "gateway to science"; if you learn about dinosaurs, you will most likely also learn about a lot of scientific fields you would not necessarily be exposed to otherwise. On a more personal level, having grown up with and being influenced by various dinosaur media, it feels pretty cool to help spread knowledge about these animals, closest we can get to keeping them alive.

3) Enwebb: Why should other editors join you in writing articles related to paleontology? Are you looking to attract new editors, or draw in experienced editors from other areas of Wikipedia?

  • JL: Because we are a small but active and helpful community. Our Dinosaur collaboration, one of the very few active open collaborations in Wikipedia, makes high-level writing on important articles easier and more fun. Our collaboration is especially open to editors without prior experience in high-level writing. But we do not only write articles: several WikiProject Dinosaur participants are artists who do a great job illustrating the articles, and maintain an extensive and very active image review system. In fact, a number of later authors started with contributing images.
  • FM: Anyone who is interested in palaeontology is welcome to try writing articles, and we would be more than willing to help. I find that the more people that work on articles simultaneously with me, the more motivation I get to write myself. I am also one of those editors who started out contributing dinosaur illustrations and making minor edits, and only began writing after some years. But when I got to it, it wasn't as intimidating as I had feared, and I've learned a lot in the process. For example anatomy; if you know dinosaur anatomy, you have a very good framework for understanding the anatomy of other tetrapod animals, including humans.

4) Enwebb: Between the two of you, you have over 300 GA reviews. FunkMonk, you have over 250 of those. What keeps you coming back to review more articles?

  • FM: One of the main reasons I review GANs is to learn more about subjects that seem interesting (or which I would perhaps not come across otherwise). There are of course also more practical reasons, such as helping an article on its way towards FAC, to reduce the GAN backlog, and to "pay back" when I have a nomination up myself. It feels like a win-win situation where I can be entertained by interesting info, while also helping other editors get their nominations in shape, and we'll end up with an article that hopefully serves to educate a lot of people (the greater good).
  • JL: Because I enjoy reading Wikipedia articles and like to learn new things. In addition, reviews give me the opportunity to have direct contact with the authors, and help them to make their articles even better. This is quite rewarding for me personally. But I also review because I consider our GA and FA system to be of fundamental importance for Wikipedia. When I started editing Wikipedia (the German version), the article promotion reviews motivated me and improved my writing skills a lot. Submitting an article for review requires one to get serious and take additional steps to bring the article to the best quality possible. GAs and FAs are also a good starting point for readers, and may motivate them to become authors themselves.

5) Enwebb: What are your editing preferences? Any scripts or gadgets you find invaluable?

  • FM: One script that everyone should know about is the duplink highlight tool. It will show duplinks within the intro and body of a given article separately, and it seems a lot of people still don't know about it, though they are happy when introduced to it. I really liked the citationbot too (since citation consistency is a boring chore to me), but it seems to be blocked at the moment due to some technical issues.
  • JL: I often review using the Wikipedia Beta app on my smartphone, as it allows me to read without needing to sit in front of the PC. For writing, I find the reference management software Zotero invaluable, as it generates citation templates automatically, saving a lot of time.
    • Editor's note: I downloaded Zotero and tried it for the first time and think it is a very useful tool. More here.

6) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-wiki?

  • FM: Perhaps that I have no background in natural history/science, but work with animation and games. But fascination with and knowledge of nature and animals is actually very helpful when designing and animating characters and creatures, so it isn't that far off, and I can actually use some of the things I learn while writing here for my work (when I wrote the Dromaeosauroides article, it was partially to learn more about the animal for a design-school project).
  • JL: That I am actually doing research on dinosaurs. Though I avoid writing about topics I publish research on, my Wikipedia work helps me to keep a good general overview over the field, and quite regularly I can use what I learned while writing for Wikipedia for my research.

Get in touch with these editors regarding collaboration at WikiProject Dinosaurs!

Marine life continues to dominate ToL DYKs

  Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019Edit

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

  Administrator changes

  AndonicConsumed CrustaceanEnigmamanEuryalusEWS23HereToHelpNv8200paPeripitusStringTheory11Vejvančický

  CheckUser changes

  Ivanvector

  Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

  Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 ReminderEdit

Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 3 of this year's WikiCup! There are just over 2 weeks until the third round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 19:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Brilliant Insight Barnstar
Thank you for this, [4], Guettarda, it's the most insightful thing I've read in recent memory, and it's also remarkably simple. starship.paint (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks you Starship.paint. Guettarda (talk) 13:53, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

I have just read at User talk:Katherine (WMF) the message originally written by you at Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram in this edit, but copied to Katherine's talk page by Seraphimblade. It says things which for years I have been convinced are obviously true, but which in my experience most people don't see at all. Thanks for attempting to spread an understanding of those important points. (Whether the attempt succeeds or not is another matter.) JamesBWatson (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for this - Guettarda (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019Edit

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

  Administrator changes

  28bytesAd OrientemAnsh666BeeblebroxBoing! said ZebedeeBU Rob13Dennis BrownDeorDoRDFloquenbeam1Flyguy649Fram2GadfiumGB fanJonathunderKusmaLectonarMoinkMSGJNickOd MishehuRamaSpartazSyrthissTheDJWJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

  Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

  Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
That's a sad read. Guettarda (talk) 23:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 July newsletterEdit

The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

  •   Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
  •   Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
  •   SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
  •   Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics

Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

June 2019 Tree of Life NewsletterEdit

June 2019—Issue 003


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  Masked booby by Casliber and Aa77zz, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Rook (bird) by Cwmhiraeth, reviewed by J Milburn
  Vernonopterus by Ichthyovenator, reviewed by Super Dromaeosaurus
  Campylocephalus by Ichthyovenator, reviewed by Super Dromaeosaurus
  Unionopterus by Super Dromaeosaurus, reviewed by Ashorocetus
  Big Cat, Little Cat by Barkeep49, reviewed by J Milburn
  Félicette by Kees08, reviewed by Nova Crystallis

Newly nominated content

  Masked booby by Casliber
  Adelophthalmidae
  Plains zebra by LittleJerry
  Letter-winged kite by Casliber



Relative WikiWork
Project name Relative WikiWork
Cats
4.79
Fisheries and fishing
4.9
Dogs
4.91
Viruses
4.91
ToL
4.94
Cetaceans
4.97
Primates
4.98
Sharks
5.04
All wikiprojects average
5.05
Dinosaurs
5.12
Equine
5.15
Bats
5.25
Mammals
5.32
Aquarium fishes
5.35
Hypericaceae
5.38
Turtles
5.4
Birds
5.46
Australian biota
5.5
Marine life
5.54
Animals
5.56
Paleontology
5.57
Rodents
5.58
Amphibians and Reptiles
5.64
Fungi
5.65
Bivalves
5.66
Plants
5.67
Algae
5.68
Arthropods
5.69
Hymenoptera
5.72
Microbiology
5.72
Cephalopods
5.74
Fishes
5.76
Ants
5.79
Gastropods
5.8
Spiders
5.86
Insects
5.9
Beetles
5.98
Lepidoptera
5.98
Spineless editors overwhelmed by stubs

Within the Tree of Life and its many subprojects, there is an abundance of stubs. Welcome to Wikipedia, what's new, right? However, based on all wikiprojects listed (just over two thousand), the Tree of Life project is worse off in average article quality than most. Based on the concept of relative WikiWork (the average number of "steps" needed to have a project consisting of all featured articles (FAs), where stub status → FA consists of six steps), only seven projects within the ToL have an average rating of "start class" or better. Many projects, particularly those involving invertebrates, hover at an average article quality slightly better than a stub. With relative WikiWorks of 5.98 each, WikiProject Lepidoptera and WikiProject Beetles have the highest relative WikiWork of any project. Given that invertebrates are incredibly speciose, it may not surprise you that many articles about them are lower quality. WikiProject Beetles, for example, has over 20 times more articles than WikiProject Cats. Wikipedia will always be incomplete, so we should take our relatively low WikiWork as motivation to write more articles that are also better in quality.

Editor Spotlight: Showing love to misfit taxa

We're joined for this month's Editor Spotlight by NessieVL, a long-time contributor who lists themselves as a member of WikiProject Fungus, WikiProject Algae, and WikiProject Cephalopods.

1) Enwebb: How did you come to edit articles about organisms and taxonomic groups?

  • Nessie: The main force, then and now, driving me to create or edit articles is thinking "Why isn't there an article on that on Wikipedia?" Either I'll read about some rarely-sighted creature in the deep sea or find something new on iNaturalist and want to learn more. First stop (surprise!) is Wikipedia, and many times there is just a stub or no page at all. Sometimes I just add the source that got me to the article, not sometimes I go deep and try to get everything from the library or online journals and put it all in an article. The nice thing about taxa is the strong precedent that all accepted extant taxa are notable, so one does not need to really worry about doing a ton of research and having the page get removed. I was super worried about this as a new editor: I still really dislike conflict so if I can avoid it I do. Anyway, the most important part is stitching an article in to the rest of Wikipedia: Linking all the jargon, taxonomers, pollinators, etc., adding categories, and putting in the correct WikiProjects. Recently I have been doing more of the stitching-in stuff with extant articles. The last deep-dive article I made was Karuka at the end of last year, which is a bit of a break for me. I guess it's easier to do all the other stuff on my tablet while watching TV.

2) Enwebb: Many editors in the ToL are highly specialized on a group of taxa. A look at your recently created articles includes much diversity, though, with viruses, bacteria, algae, and cnidarians all represented—are there any commonalities for the articles you work on? Would you say you're particularly interested in certain groups?

  • Nessie: I was a nerd from a time when that would get you beat up, so I like odd things and underdogs. I also avoid butting heads, so not only do I find siphonophores and seaweeds fascinating I don't have to worry about stepping on anyone's toes. I go down rabbitholes where I start writing an article like Mastocarpus papillatus because I found some growing on some rocks, then in my research I see it is parasitized by Pythium porphyrae, which has no article, and how can that be for an oomycete that oddly lives in the ocean and also attacks my tasty nori. So then I wrote that article and that got me blowing off the dust on other Oomycota articles, encouraged by the pull of propagating automatic taxoboxes. Once you've done the taxonomy template for the genus, well then you might as well do all the species now that the template is taken care of for them too. and so on until I get sucked in somewhere else. I think it's good to advocate for some of these 'oddball' taxa as it makes it easier for editors to expand their range from say plants to the pathogenic microorganisms of their favorite plant.
My favorite clades though, It's hard to pick for a dilettante like me. I like working on virus taxonomy, but I can't think of a specific virus species that I am awed by. Maybe Tulip breaking virus for teaching us economics or Variola virus for having so many smallpox deities, one of which was popularly sung about by Desi Arnaz and then inspired the name of a cartoon character who was then misremembered and then turned into a nickname for Howard Stern's producer Gary Dell'Abate. Sorry, really had to share that chain, but for a species that's not a staple food it probably has the most deities. But anyway, for having the most species that wow me, I love a good fungus or algae, but that often is led by my stomach. Also why I seem to research so many plant articles. You can't eat siphonophores, at least I don't, but they are fascinating with their federalist colonies of zooids. Bats are all amazing, but the task force seems to have done so much I feel the oomycetes and slime moulds need more love. Same thing with dinosaurs (I'm team Therizinosaurus though). But honestly, every species has that one moment in the research where you just go, wow, that's so interesting. For instance, I loved discovering that the picture-winged fly (Delphinia picta) has a mating dance that involves blowing bubbles. Now I keep expecting them to show me when they land on my arm, but no such luck yet.

3) Enwebb: I noticed that many of your recent edits utilize the script Rater, which aids in quickly reassessing the quality and importance of an article. Why is it important to update talk page assessments of articles? I also noticed that the quality rating you assign often aligns with ORES, a script that uses machine-learning to predict article quality. Coincidence?

  • Nessie: I initially started focusing on WikiProject talk page templates because they seem to be the key to data collecting and maintenance for articles, much more so than categories. This is where you note of an article needs an image, or audio, or a range map. It's how the cleanup listing bot sorts articles, and how Plantdrew does his automated taxobox usage stats. The latter inspired me to look for articles on organisms that are not assigned to any ToL WikiProjects which initially was in the thousands. I got it down to zero with just copypasta so you can imagine I was excited when I saw the rater tool. Back then I rated everything stub/low because it was faster: I couldn't check every article for the items on the B-class checklists. Plus each project has their own nuances to rating scales and I thought the editors in the individual projects would take it from there. I also thought all species were important, so how can I choose a favorite? Now it is much easier with the rater tool and the apparent consensus with Abductive's method of rating by the pageviews (0-9 views/day is low, 10-99 is med, 100-999 is high...). For the quality I generally go by the ORES rating, you caught me. It sometimes is thrown off by a long list of species or something, but it's generally good for stub to C: above that needs formal investigation and procedures I am still learning about. It seems that in the ToL projects we don't focus so much on getting articles to GA/FA so it's been harder to pick up. It was a little culture shock when I went on the Discord server and it seemed everyone was obsessed with getting articles up in quality. I think ToL is focusing on all the missing taxa and (re)organizing it all, which when you already have articles on every anime series or whatever you can focus on bulking the articles up more. In any event, on my growing to-do list is trying to get an article up to FA or GA and learn the process that way so I can better do the quality ratings and not just kick the can down the road.

4) Enwebb: What, if anything, can ToL and its subprojects do to better support collaboration and coordination among editors? How can we improve?

  • Nessie: I mentioned earlier that the projects are the main way maintenance is done. And it is good that we have a bunch of subprojects that let those tasks get broken up into manageable pieces. Frankly I'm amazed anything gets done with WikiProject Plants with how huge its scope is. Yet this not only parcels out the work but the discussion as well. A few editors like Peter coxhead and Plantdrew keep an eye on many of the subprojects and spread the word, but it's still easy for newer editors to get a little lost. There should be balance between the lumping and splitting. The newsletter helps by crossing over all the WikiProjects, and if the discord channel picked up that would help too. Possibly the big Enwiki talk page changes will help as well.

5) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?

  • Nessie: I'm not sure anything would be surprising. I focus on nature offline too, foraging for mushrooms or wild plants and trying to avoid ticks and mosquitos. I have started going magnet fishing lately, more to help clean up the environment than in the hopes of finding anything valuable. But it would be fun to find a weapon and help solve a cold case or something.
June DYKs

  Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.


sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Tree of Life NewsletterEdit

July 2019—Issue 004


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  List of felids by PresN
  Masked booby by Casliber
  Letter-winged kite by Casliber, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Plains zebra by LittleJerry, reviewed by starsandwhales
  Ornithogalum umbellatum by Michael Goodyear, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
 


Newly nominated content

  Letter-winged kite by Casliber
  Megabat by Enwebb
  Onychopterella by Super Dromaeosaurus
  Dvulikiaspis by Super Dromaeosaurus
  Kosmoceratops by FunkMonk
  Clussexx Three D Grinchy Glee by Hunter Kahn
  Giant golden-crowned flying fox by Enwebb
  Myxomatosis by Rabbit Vet

  Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019Edit

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

  Guideline and policy news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

It has...Edit

Treated me well -- life, that is. Thank you for the note you left on my page. I just happened to look today and was really touched by some of the messages people have left over the years, including yours. Has it really been that long? I guess it has. The reason I even bothered to check was the reporting in the last few days on 8chan and its split from 4chan. It reminded me of the circumstances that drove me from this place. No use in rehashing all that, you certainly know it well. But the parallels are stark. That aside, it was delightful to hear from you, and to see those expressions of love and kindness that I could never allow myself to see because of how painful that whole ordeal became. Take good care, you and everyone else reading this. · Katefan0 (scribble) 20:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of History of TobagoEdit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article History of Tobago you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kim Post -- Kim Post (talk) 15:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm glad to see you're continuing to improve History of Tobago. Could you ping me when you think it's ready for me to take another look at it? Kim Post (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
 
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:31, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda Arendt! Guettarda (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Fifteen years of editing!Edit

  Hey, Guettarda. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Chris Troutman (talk) 13:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year SocietyEdit

Dear Guettarda,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Chris troutman! Guettarda (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

August 2019 Tree of Life NewsletterEdit

August 2019—Issue 005


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  Letter-winged kite by Casliber
  Megabat by Enwebb
  Rock parrot by Casliber
  Adelophthalmidae by Super Dromaeosaurus
  Giant golden-crowned flying fox by Enwebb, reviewed by Starsandwhales
  Myxomatosis by Rabbit Vet, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Tylopterella by Super Dromaeosaurus, reviewed by Starsandwhales and Enwebb
  Kosmoceratops by FunkMonk, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Slender glass lizard by SL93, reviewed by Casliber
  Guano by Enwebb, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Dvulikiaspis by Super Dromaeosaurus, reviewed by Casliber
  Rock parrot by Casliber, reviewed by The Rambling Man
  Leptospirosis by Cerevisae, reviewed by Ajpolino
  Hepatitis E by Ozzie10aaaa, reviewed by Casliber
  Cardabiodon by Macrophyseter, reviewed by FunkMonk
  Clostridium tetani by Ajpolino, reviewed by Chiswick Chap

Newly nominated content

  Kosmoceratops by FunkMonk
  Western yellow robin by Casliber
  Pekarangan by Dhio270599
  Hibbertopterus by Ichthyovenator












  Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:43, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 September newsletterEdit

The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019Edit

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

  Administrator changes

  BradvChetsfordIzno
  FloquenbeamLectonar
  DESiegelJake WartenbergRjanagTopbanana

  CheckUser changes

  CallaneccLFaraoneThere'sNoTime

  Oversight changes

  CallaneccFoxHJ MitchellLFaraoneThere'sNoTime

  Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!Edit

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Diversity winner
  • Gender-gap fillers
For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 Tree of Life NewsletterEdit

September 2019—Issue 006


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  Kosmoceratops by FunkMonk
  Onychopterella by Super Dromaeosaurus
  Western yellow robin by Casliber
  Western yellow robin by Casliber, reviewed by Josh Milburn
  Apororhynchus by Mattximus, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Pekarangan by Dhio-270599, reviewed by Cerebellum
  Fritillaria by Michael Goodyear, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Embioptera by Chiswick Chap and Cwmhiraeth, reviewed by Vanamonde93
  Durio graveolens by NessieVL, reviewed by Dunkleosteus77
  Big brown bat by Enwebb and Gen. Quon, reviewed by Dunkleosteus77
  King brown snake by Casliber, reviewed by Dunkleosteus77
  Staffordshire Bull Terrier by Atsme, reviewed by FunkMonk
  Ambush predator by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Enwebb
  Belemnitida by Dunkleosteus77, reviewed by Chiswick Chap

Newly nominated content

  Apororhynchus by Mattximus
  Meinhard Michael Moser by J Milburn
  St. Croix macaw by FunkMonk
  Paleocene by Dunkleosteus77
  Orcinus meyeri by Dunkleosteus77
  Snakefly by Chiswick Chap and Cwmhiraeth
  Tricolored bat by Enwebb
  Halloween darter by Enwebb






  Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 22:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019Edit

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

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

  Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

ListgapEdit

Too hard to edit a conversation on my iPad. I was puzzled at first but MOS:LISTGAP's examples are discussions. I admit I wasn't aware of this, and I'm guessing were typical of most editors. Doug Weller talk 20:23, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Guettarda".