Open main menu

Hello Mojoworker, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! VanTucky Talk 18:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help



Hi, Mojoworker, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles and content that have been nominated for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable, and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles and content to quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again — Welcome! Northamerica1000(talk) 18:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)


  The Guidance Barnstar
Dear Mojoworker, thanks for your kind words on my talk page, including your good faith and advice to make me a better Wikipedia editor. I wish the best to you and yours, AnupamTalk 16:51, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

User:Scott DelaneyEdit

Changed his name, issues came up again, [1], I had to block an IP who got rude with him over tagging as well. Just keeping you in the loop. Just not much I can do at this point.

Thanks Dennis. I'll try to keep an eye on him. Mojoworker (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for reverting edits that were constructive. I promise to be more careful from now on.--Scott Delaney (talk) 22:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


Hello, Mojoworker. You have new messages at Scott Delaney's talk page.
Message added 00:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Scott Delaney (talk) 00:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC) You will find there an Apology for All the vandalism mistakes I made.--Scott Delaney (talk) 00:43, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


I'm about to file something at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding our friend. Dennis Brown - © 03:14, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


I've added a plan at WP:AN#Disruptive Editing (CIR issue with) User:Scott Delaney that I think you will approve of. As before, it only requires you and I observe from a distance. It is a bit of a last chance, but perhaps it will work out well. Of course, we both hope so. Dennis Brown - © 23:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me in the loop. I saw this morning on the AN thread that he's only 14. That explains much. And i saw that Adjwilley accepted your call for a mentor – I considered it, but I'm busy writing a proposal, so haven't been doing much else today, and If I get the work, I may be scarce for a bit... I'm heading out the door, but I'll read your latest update when I get back. Mojoworker (talk) 23:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


Just got your message. Thank you, I knew there had to be a more formal way of doing it. Yes, I was the original creator of the template, but I have since found it unnecessary to have a template (at least a campaignbox template) for Indian wars/conflicts in specific states/territories. Often, Indian wars occurred in multiple states/territories. For example, I dont think it would be a good idea to have the "Indian wars in California" campaignbox template in addition to an "Indian Wars in Nevada" template on the same article since none are really needed in the first place. It could be misleading as well I suppose, but, again, they just arent needed. I may make a new template(s) for the information, which would go at the bottom of the article, but I have yet to decide if that is really necessary either. Apart from my thanking you, I left this message just in case you were interested in understanding why I wish to have the templates deleted (I am not the best at explaining things and I know I did not leave an explanation like this anywhere else). Thanks for your concern.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 22:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


Hello, Mojoworker. You have new messages at Anderson's talk page.
Message added 23:51, 8 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Calm As Midnight 23:51, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

did you vote?Edit

hi there, your vote in ArbCom elections triggered a spoof CSRF alarm. Would you be so kind as to please confirm that you actually voted? :) Apologies for the inconvenience. Pundit|utter 07:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did vote for a small number of candidates - I think it was four in total. Mojoworker (talk) 14:50, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you!Edit

Hello, Mojoworker. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 00:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Mind your accusationsEdit

Thanks for contributing a dose of reality but don't accuse "both" of edit warring only to revert back to my original on identical grounds of BRD... the user has reverted twice as many times and has yet to justify 1) their original revert and 2) subsequent edit... on grounds other than what they wish WP:ERA says.—Machine Elf 1735 19:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Didn't mean to accuse you – just trying to be somewhat even–handed. Basically, just trying to get you guys to discuss things. Mojoworker (talk) 22:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Foremost, I appreciate your participation... Perhaps you hadn't noticed that I did wait for the user to reply... their accusation of personal attacks, WP:IDHT and failure to self-revert leave nothing to the imagination. Please note that you incorporated a rather significant proportion of the contentious edits into your own revert, which nearly tips the balance... probably why the user has acquiesced for the time being. Also note that they've yet to make a case, per the current WP:ERA, that a History of physics article should use BC/AD... surely if either, is not the secular qualifier to be expected? Absent any rational ground on which the current consensus could be reversed, entertaining their request for a delay as ideal, merely invites further obfuscation and disruption.—Machine Elf 1735 01:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


  • I put a different list up for flist just to see how things work there. We'll see how it goes. Cheers. • ServiceableVillain 09:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll take a look at the list you nominated. Mojoworker (talk) 04:30, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Alas, I was rather curt when I was a FAC reviewer. And just as I feared, the FLIST reviewers have gathered their hurt feelings and spoken from them. My list will not pass. So, if the Civil War list is ever nominated, it would be best if my name were not on the nom, despite the nontrivial effort I have expended upon it. • ServiceableVillain 05:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Unfortunate – not much feedback there. I'm going to be pretty busy for the next month, but after that I was thinking of asking MILHIST to do an A Class List review. I'll see if I can split out the casualty list before then...if no one beats me to it. Mojoworker (talk) 06:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
        • I didn't expect anything else. Well, maybe I had some small hopes, but only small ones. It does not matter. :-) I'm not going to engage in useless, protracted discussion.... As for the Civil war list, don't forget to add Dalton III some day soon. I may not be any help. I'm pretty busy. I am not doing anything on Wikipedia, no articles etc., and may drop off the radar completely again for a while. Good luck! • ServiceableVillain 06:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) My oppose has nothing to do with "hurt feelings", I didn't even know you'd reviewed any of my FACs? Perhaps it was with another account? The oppose has to do with my concerns that the list doesn't meet 3b. In all honesty, can you see the point of the main article, pretty much all of which is then repeated in the list article? That's what 3b is designed to avoid, particularly when the main article is barely a screen-length in size. And the opinion is of just one single editor (me, not "the FLIST reviewers" as you claim), we base our promotions on consensus, not one individual's opinion. If, User:ServiceableVillain, you're not going to try to work this through, I suggest you withdraw the nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah. Of course I am willing to work with constructive comments. The examples I gave... should I look at the parent articles to see how tiny they are? The tingTings or whomever?... is that article large?... as for FAC, one reviewer at flist is the precise reason why I will never review at FAC again (well, him and the FAC delegate relevant to that thread). I also thought I remembered you from another time... but if not, then I am sorry. • ServiceableVillain 04:33, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I've got no idea who you are or what your grievances in previous accounts have been. It's got nothing to do with me, nothing to do with FLC, nothing to do with nomination. I'm not sure how many times you need to be told that the Ting Tings discog was deemed to be a reasonable fork from the main Ting Tings article. Given the size of the main article, there is no need to fork out the list in the case of the Harmon award. One article with a list is perfectly adequate, see Sakharov Prize or 1st Academy Awards or PDSA Gold Medal.... These don't have a "list of x winners" and a main article of "x", because there's too much overlap and not enough to justify two articles. That's why we have 3b. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:15, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:Snuggle is live at snuggle.grouplens.orgEdit

Snuggle, the newcomer socialization tool I've been building, is finally ready for general use. All you need to do to get started is point your browser to Let me know if you run into any trouble. I'll be watching WT:Snuggle. Or you can also just contact me directly. Thanks for your patience.

See also:

--EpochFail(talkwork) 19:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

IRC office hours for wiki-mentors and Snuggle usersEdit

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-officeconnect on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail(talkwork), Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I just wanted to post a reminder that this discussion will be happening in about 24 hours. If you haven't already used Snuggle, I recommend giving it a try before the meeting. I'll be in #wikimedia-officeconnect a half hour early to answer any questions you have. --EpochFail(talkwork) 15:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Athollgoon: Redlinks and Regimental ArticlesEdit

I have received notification of your message to Athollgoon concerning the redlinks in the American Civil War articles. Adamdaley (talk) 01:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I am very sorry if I have caused any inconveniences. I would love to help out with creating Regimental Articles. I am new here, and would love to learn how to create articles. Could one of you please help me in doing this? Athollgoon (talk) 01:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Sure, I'd be happy to help you. I'm pretty busy the rest of the week, but I should have some time next week. In the meantime, take a look at WP:Your first article, and WP:Article development, and take a look at some of the existing regimental articles as well, to get an idea of how they are structured. Most of them got their start with material from A Compendium of the War of the Rebellion by Frederick H. Dyer AKA Dyer's Compendium. Do you have any particular regiment in mind or a specific State or Territory? Let me know if you have any questions. Mojoworker (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I would love to help create the 109th New York, because that was the regiment in which my relatives served. I would also like to help out with Pennsylvania and Missouri regiments. And editing the First Washington. Athollgoon (talk) 22:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


Hello, Mojoworker. You have new messages at Anderson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FYI (For your information).--Anderson I'm Willing To Help 20:59, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


You were involved in a past discussion about this user, so you may be interested in this: WP:ANI#Request swift admin intervention to prevent further disruption to the Jesus article by User Strangesad.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 00:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


I'd forgotten about that conversation. It would seem though, that we have a different understanding of the results of the discussion. As I understand it, the England / Ireland / Scotland ensigns were to be replaced with the Union Flag and that the other flags would be the national flag, not the civil or maritime ensign. That is how the the table at Challengers and defenders is currently configured. Did we decide otherwise for the yacht articles?

Trappist the monk (talk) 10:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I had noticed lots of America's Cup related editing recently, coinciding with the interest in the just–finished edition of the Cup. While examining some of them I noticed a discrepancy in how the ensigns were being handled in the individual yacht articles. For example, Sceptre (yacht) was using the red ensign, while Endeavour (yacht) was not. I noticed you created Sceptre on 26 April 2012. I looked a little further and noticed Alinghi using the Swiss maritime ensign and the Shamrock series (Shamrock (yacht), Shamrock IV, Shamrock V) were all using the red ensign. While (in addition to Endeavour, Galatea (yacht), Cambria (yacht), etc. were still using the England / Ireland / Scotland country flags.
So, remembering the discussion from that time, I went back and looked at it. There was a very clear consensus to use the UK flag – Mattlore's: "I think using UK and the home countries flags is confusing and we should pick either style and stick to it. Based on the argument above for Shamrock and the modern challenges I have been convinced during this argument that the UK flag is the appropriate one" and Nuttyrave's: "Irish, Scottish and English clubs all represented under the Union flag is the simplest way forward". And, while most of the discussion concerned the table in the America's Cup article (and I think we are all in agreement on the style in use there), there were some complaints about the civil ensigns being difficult to distinguish when they were small. I did notice a couple of references to the individual yacht articles: your "For the individual articles, I likewise agree that the appropriate flag template is {{flag|United Kingdom|civil|size=48px}}.   United Kingdom" and my quote (discussing the table and the individual articles) "I would vote to use the   for all the UK challenges and the civil ensigns on the individual yacht pages where the icons are larger." I didn't see any dissension there, and seeing that you changed the table and some of the individual yacht articles in that time-frame, I assumed that you just forgot about changing the others. So I went ahead and made them all consistently maritime ensigns (and UK where appropriate).
Now it's possible I misinterpreted something in the discussion, but I just went back and read through it all again, and I'm still coming to the same conclusion. Let me know what you think I've missed there. Oh, and congratulations on your adminship. I have a script that highlights the admin signatures and noticed yours was highlighted. I went and looked at your RfA, and it looked pretty close – sorry I didn't see it earlier, or I would've supported you. Glad you made it anyway. For all the talk about the Admin bit being no big deal, it sure seems some people think it is a big deal. I mean really, what did the people who !voted against you expect that you would do – start blocking people willy nilly? There's too much immaturity around here sometimes... I'm sure you'll "grow into" the other admin duties if you ever have the inclination, but I'm sure the project will be just fine either way. Mojoworker (talk) 17:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you.
I think that the discussion worked because we were able to stay on track and decide the one issue and that was the flag icons in the Challengers and defenders table. Even though we mentioned the individual articles, I don't see them as part of the decision.
I suppose that the argument could be made that we should look at how flags and burgees are used throughout the whole range of America's Cup-related articles for reasons of consistency. If and when that happens, I'll be interested in participating.
Trappist the monk (talk) 23:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't know which would be more correct – my goal was to make them consistent. It was my understanding that the reason for using the national flags instead of the ensigns in the table was because, at the small size used in the table it was easier to tell the difference between the UK, Australia, and New Zealand national flags than their ensigns, while that wasn't an issue at the 300px size used in the individual articles...
In any case, after making the England / Ireland / Scotland ensigns consistent with the other articles using the red ensign, there were only a handful of articles using national flags, so those were changed to be consistent with the other ensigns. Mojoworker (talk) 20:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Blank WikiLoveEdit

Thanks for your messages Mojoworker & Stfg. Substitution or translusion (DEPRECATED) a part, there was a problem within the template footer message. Its code called BASEPAGENAME, which runs properly within the template page itself (and all of its subpages, sandbox included), of course, but not on user talk (and others) pages. I've fixed it by replacing
{{tls|Blank WikiLove}}
(as per other WikiLove templates). And, I've also added a default value→"this WikiLove template" for the "item" parameter (in case it is left blank by the poster).
I've made a series of tests here, and you can see the changes at
Happy editing! –pjoef (talkcontribs) 07:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


I appreciate your comments, but don't they belong on my talk page rather than the article's? Instaurare (talk) 05:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, the accusations of the other editors are largely unfounded. See the edit history rather than the other editors' unsubstantiated, undiscussed claims. Instaurare (talk) 05:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I was commenting on your editing of the McAuliffe‎ article – didn't look in depth at your edits at the Cuccinelli article, for example. Have you inserted similar criticisms there? Right or wrong, the other editors don't have the same clouded history that you do. Mojoworker (talk) 04:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Kafziel arbitration case openedEdit

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 29, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 22:33, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism by taggerEdit

My apologies: I misread what was going on and had no intention of accusing User:Mojoworker of vandalism. I was in the middle of reverting a ton of very bad deletions sparked by 777sms's very bad tagging, and by the time I reached the Little Rock campaignbox, I'd gotten to the point that I was deeply doubting 777sms's good faith. Your tag is completely different: I disagree with it, but I do not doubt your good faith. I disagree with the deletion on three counts: (1) Copyright. This is the situation in which {{Copied}} is appropriate for the talk page, and the source page may not be deleted because it serves to provide attribution. (2) Speedy deletion criteria. When we merge page1 to page2, we normally turn page1 into a redirect, and redirects aren't eligible for any of the template criteria. (3) Since it had been used for 2+ years, it's better to leave it a redirect than to delete it, since deletion hurts the appearance of old revisions of pages using the original template, and even ignoring my other two "counts", there's nothing harmful that would necessitate deletion, so I don't see why we absolutely need to delete it. Nyttend (talk) 23:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

@Nyttend:No problem. Thanks for the explanation. At the time, I wasn't sure which course of action made more sense. As I mentioned on your talk page, keeping it as a redirect might prevent someone from recreating the Campaignbox in the future, and as you point out preserves the history. On the other hand, the template was erroneously created with the wrong name by a problematic sock... That's why I consulted with Moonriddengirl. After giving it some more thought, I agree that the current state of the template (existing as a redirect) is better than it being deleted. Mojoworker (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

New proposals at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014Edit

Hello. Several new proposals have been submitted at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 since you last commented on it. You are invited to return to comment on the new proposals. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


Medicine is available for hookworm. You are right in the sense that there is not now a world-wide eradication attempt going on against the disease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)


wise cleanup
Thank you for quality articles on military history such as Battle of Pocotaligo, gnomish work on articles and fighting subtle vandalism, for illustrating "wise old thing" (with a ring to it), for working on cleanup in the tavern, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 836th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Two years ago, you were recipient no. 836 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

American politics arbitration evidenceEdit

Hi. You contributed to a recent RFC about this topic area. This message is to notify you that the arbitration proceedings at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics are underway, and evidence about all disruptive edits to articles within this topic is being accepted at the relevant case page. If you wish to submit evidence for the committee to consider in reaching its decision, please do so now. The evidence phase of the case ends soon, and evidence submitted after the deadline may not be considered. Further advice on submitting evidence, and what evidence the committee will accept, is linked at the top of the evidence page. Please contact me or the other drafting arbitrator if you require more time to submit evidence. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, AGK [•] 14:12, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Photo requestEdit

Yes, Building C is still needed. Please check for a photo. Thanks! WhisperToMe (talk) 09:16, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much! WhisperToMe (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

The problem with undo ...Edit

... is what if one part of the previous change was correct, and another part wrong, and simply undoing it in whole is just as bad as the previous change.

They did:

"South African Defence Force" -> "South African Defense Force"
"US Department of Defence" -> "US Department of Defense"

You reversed this to:

"South African Defense Force" -> "South African Defence Force"
"US Department of Defense" -> "US Department of Defence"

Now "South African Defense Force" is wrong, but so is "US Department of Defence". These are names and so not an WP:ENGVAR or WP:RETAIN matter. So who is winning here? :)

And, hey, I'm an ENGVAR nut (see recent edit - and yet even there it is unclear, as a Canadian First Nation organisation mentioned in the article has a name with 'organization' in it - confusing, and makes me nervous enough to go back and check again!) Shenme (talk) 05:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Good catch. I didn't look at it closely enough. I had noticed the lede discussed Rhodesia and South Africa and so changed it back to British English (and the change I undid was linking to the redirect instead of South African Defence Force. I've changed the other one back to US Department of Defense. Mojoworker (talk) 05:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library: New Account Coordinators NeededEdit

Hi Books & Bytes recipients: The Wikipedia Library has been expanding rapidly and we need some help! We currently have 10 signups for free account access open and several more in the works... In order to help with those signups, distribute access codes, and manage accounts we'll need 2-3 more Account Coordinators.

It takes about an hour to get up and running and then only takes a couple hours per week, flexible depending upon your schedule and routine. If you're interested in helping out, please drop a note in the next week at my talk page or shoot me an email at: jorlowitz Thanks and cheers, Jake Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Informal noteEdit

Hey, I notice that you have HighBeam access and you seem to have a few topicons. That being said, if you are interested, I've created {{Wikipedia:HighBeam/Topicon}}. No reply to this message is necessary (and I won't see it unless you ping me), just wanted to let you know it was available.   Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 23:58, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Regarding DatingEdit

Hello. Was curious about where to post query regarding use of BCE/CE; BC/AD; BC/E AD/CE. Because in an article that uses BCE/CE (which isn't widely used), I tried to make adjustments and was reverted (it was all AD). Then thought I'd insert AD/CE. I don't presume that there are problems with that, is there? If so, where do I post to do a vote? Thanks for the input! (talk) 00:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)Tom

Hi. I left the link to the relevant section of the Wikipedia Manual of Style in the edit summary when I undid your edit. The information is at WP:ERA. It's possible that CE can be removed if it doesn't result in ambiguity, but you should probably discuss it on the article talk page first. Let me know if you have any questions. Mojoworker (talk) 00:35, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (December 2014)Edit

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

A new reference toolEdit

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

AdminHighlighter script is fixedEdit

You asked to be notified here: User_talk:Padenton/adminhighlighter. Amalthea is back and has corrected the bug, so my version of the script and related pages are now deprecated. I'll probably CSD the scripts in about a week or so to give people some time to switch back to the script here: User:Amalthea/userhighlighter.js or here: User:Theopolisme/Scripts/adminhighlighter. ― Padenton|   19:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk response, Le Mans 1955 DisasterEdit

See the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

A review of the WP:RS guidelines demonstrates very clearly that the Sorakonich piece fails that standard, as discussed on the talk page. You have also used a citation of the Austin Healy Restoration Guide incorrectly. An editor of your seniority should know better. Do you have a response? (talk) 21:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll respond there, but I will say here that I resent your accusation. You damn well ought to read WP:AGF and take it to heart, or your career at Wikipedia will be short-lived. You have a flawed understanding of WP:RS and WP:V. User "I dream of horses" was nice enough to leave you a welcome message with lots of links on your talk page – I suggest you follow those links and read Wikipedia's policies and guidelines more thoroughly. Mojoworker (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!Edit

Warmest Wishes for Health, Wealth and Wisdom through the Holidays and the Coming Year! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 12:40, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

With reference to your edits on CobraNetEdit

First let me say that your edits were not unconstructive, however the article has too much details and most of the information can only be ascertained by a person with technical expertise in the field. Your first edit, Special:Diff/696655546 restores off-topic information. The page is about CobraNet, not latency issues and even though latency issues factor within CobraNet's field of work, that certainly cannot be a reason to explain latency issues within the article. The article is very intricate as is and just any reader will not be able to understand the information conveyed by it. As, for your second edit, Special:Diff/696656747, it's completely fine as you've chose to explain why CobraNet's technologies are expensive. My bad. --QEDK (TC) 07:58, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Since, you've given me a second opinion, I've explained my stance here and also kept your edits. --QEDK (TC) 08:01, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

CobraNet Community ReassessmentEdit

CobraNet, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --QEDK (TC) 13:16, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Respose to village pump forumEdit

Hello, Mojoworker. This is Zee money. This is in response to the village pump forum. Please do not assume ip 119 is me because I talk directly to people and instead of through a forum. My points: 1. I think ip 223 exaggerates my work. I have created less than 1,000 articles (Lugnuts has almost 26,000). Nobody has told me that if I can do something on wikipedia, they can too. That has never happened. The concern about wikipedia being a soldier and politician 'database' and 'directory' is an overstatement. Let's take the American Civil War for example. The deaths for the years 1861-1865 has less than 5,000 articles. Over 99% of the people who died in that war do not have an article. World War I and II killed millions yet the number of articles for the deaths is less than 10,000 for 1914-1918 and less than 20,000 for 1939-1945. Again, over 99% of those who died in those wars do not have articles. 2. Every state governor, congressman and senator in the US has an article, along with the majority of the mayors. People in equivalent positions in other countries (eg China) do not (at least before I started creating them). I would to like to know if there is fairness in that. 3. Another user, Sander v. Ginkel, has been creating articles with brief summaries on LIVING people without creating talk pages, without putting up any photographs or without any links to other wikis. Myself and others have created talk pages for him and he puts up these articles at an incredibly fast pace. He goes from one article to the next without regard to what country his subject is from and rarely updates previously created articles. I suggest you speak with him about this. 4. Some of the articles were created to facilitate the creation of new categories (transferred from existent ones on other wikis), reduce the number of red links in other articles or templates or in response to an article request (eg Lu Dachang on WP China). They would have been created eventually by other users if I did not create them. My articles are generally not read, much less edited by others (there are a few exceptions). I do update them if I find new info (I just created 3 categories from ja wiki and added them to Takji Muranaka, an article that you brought up) Zee money (talk) 03:31, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

As terrible as it is, lots of people have died in wars. But, according to the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia, not all of the people who served in the war are deemed notable, even if they died in action. Please try to adhere to WP:SOLDIER when creating articles. And please advise your associate, IP 119, to refrain from editing or removing the comments of other editors. Thanks. Mojoworker (talk) 05:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Vote (B) for bannedEdit

Well played We have a leader in the best post of 2017. Regards   Aloha27  talk  03:20, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Snyder's BluffEdit

Hello Mojo,

Thanks for your helpful answer. I did visit the Vicksburg National Military Park long ago, but could not remember whether Snyder’s Bluff was within the main park or separate from it. I was shown round by the most charming lady tourist officer, with whom I am still in touch. And the atmosphere in Cedar Grove was so enchanting that I almost dropped down on one knee! Valetude (talk) 17:15, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military HistoriansEdit


"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Nominating cnote templates for mergeEdit

Hi! The {{cnote}} templates has been nominated for merging with the {{efn}}/{{notelist}} family of templates. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 06:29, 31 March 2018 (UTC)


Thanks for reverting this article. The user doing this has been doing this for some time now, which I reported to the CVU and at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Nothing has been done about it to date (except for someone trying to hack my account once I reported the vandalism...). If you know of any way of getting someone to take action, please do. I've linked some of the vandalism in the CVU request. -Yupik (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Civility Barnstar
yes Bondboy9756 (talk) 23:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
thank you for turning the citations into same numbers, but how did you do that? Bondboy9756 (talk) 02:10, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Citation Barnstar
Thanks for actually showing me how to cite my sources! NumbnessOfDestruction (talk) 10:51, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Talk to us about talkingEdit

Trizek (WMF) 15:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-09Edit

21:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 32Edit

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • New and expanded partners
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-10Edit

16:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLV, March 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-11Edit

19:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Guns, Germs, and SteelEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Guns, Germs, and Steel. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-12Edit

19:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-13Edit

18:04, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Save Template:Chronology of military events in the American Civil WarEdit

Ciao, Mojoworker,
please, it is possible can you help the Wikipedia Community to save this template from (senseless) deletion?
You give your help at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 March 25#Template:Chronology of military events in the American Civil War.
Thank you and Ciao!! User talk:FDRMRZUSA (26 March 2019, 16:00, UTC+1).

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Template namespaceEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Template namespace. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-14Edit

16:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-15Edit

18:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVI, April 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of photographersEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of photographers. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-16Edit

23:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Barnstar of Good Humor
Absolutely inspired :D ——SerialNumber54129 11:57, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ha ha seconded. :-) ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 13:41, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-17Edit

19:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force/ColoursEdit

Tech News: 2019-18Edit

22:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-19Edit

16:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVII, May 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:04, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-20Edit

00:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China and Chinese-related articlesEdit

Tech News: 2019-21Edit

13:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 33Edit

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-22Edit

15:33, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/May 23Edit

Tech News: 2019-23Edit

15:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-24Edit

17:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1Edit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVIII, June 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-25Edit

20:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-26Edit

17:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject TaiwanEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Taiwan. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-27Edit

21:23, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-28Edit

20:12, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes Issue 34, May – June 2019Edit

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019

  • Partnerships
  • #1Lib1Ref
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIX, July 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:RecusancyEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Recusancy. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-29Edit

15:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-30Edit

13:07, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-31Edit

21:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AviationEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-32Edit

13:24, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-33Edit

18:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:CategorizationEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-34Edit

15:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Mojoworker".