A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your contribution at State Public Libraries (Spain). Keep up the good work. Cheers! - Hatchens (talk) 00:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Hatchens! I'm glad to have been able to help with it a little bit, although it was MJSB73MP who did most of the work to get it restored to mainspace! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 04:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for telling me how I had to improve the article-list. Cheers! --MJSB73MP (talk) 13:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Teamwork Barnstar
For making {{uw-ewsoft}} (permanent link) the perfect information template, in teamwork with Generalrelative. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:57, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, ToBeFree! It was a pleasure to work with Generalrelative, and I hope the result helps steer editors along a non-warry path. In general, I hope we devote more effort to improving user warnings—if they're designed well, they don't have to come across as impersonal the way many of them still do. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 17:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Marc Los HuertosEdit


Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Marc Los Huertos".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:12, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Bad page for beginnersEdit

 Template:Bad page for beginners has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 08:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for your insights and inputEdit

Hi. If it is okay for me to do so, then I would like to ask if you could please kindly provide some input. Are there any conditions under which I could please ask you to support the template below, perhaps here, or at the discussion at Village Pump? The proposed template is below.

Please note, I will gladly make any, and all changes and revisions to this template above that you may request, seriously. I simply want to get the basic concept and idea behind this template into a working form, namely, to approach the goals listed at Village Pump.I would like us to really try to reach some positive consensus on this. I will welcome any revisions that you may request. Is it possible for us to please have a collaborative dialogue on this, where we might work through any possible issues and problems,. and arrive at a mutually beneficial consensus, that allows us to add this as a positive community resource?

I would welcome any input you may have. Please feel free to reply. thanks.


Thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sm8900, just as it is not possible to save a non-notable article no matter how much one edits it, you won't be able to make adjustments to that navbox that would cause me to support it, as the fundamental issue is its existence: we do not need a new introductory navbox, as we already have {{Basic information}} and several others. Myself and several other editors have patiently explained this to you at the village pump discussion and deletion discussion, but you continue to ask questions that we have already answered (e.g. here) and seem determined to persist, which raises concerns that you are not listening. Please take in the advice you have been given and drop the proposal to create this navbox. Regards, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:23, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
ok, fair enough. I have begun to create a revised version of Template:basic information, in my user space, as you recommended. below is the draft so far.

--Sm8900 (talk) 04:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Pomona College scheduled for TFAEdit

This is to let you know that the Pomona College article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 7, 2022. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 7, 2022, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:08, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Your requests for spoken articlesEdit

Hello. I see you've requested several prominent articles be spoken allowed by someone willing to read them. I recently joined the Spoken Wikipedia project, and rather enjoy doing so. I've read only one article, and one stub so far: Tehachapi_Energy_Storage_Project and I rather think I mangled some of the sentences and especially the last paragraph. I've been looking for feedback on my work but it seems no one is really willing to listen to a thirty minute talk to criticize it for speech errors, myself least of all. Before attempting any of the rather large articles you've requested, I do hope to get some feedback, or perhaps even assistance in finding and editing out any problems in the recording, as well as any suggestions for improvement. Finally, may I ask your opinion on whether articles such as English_Language should be broken into multiple recordings or posted in one long blast? It is my intent to keep all original audacity files for future modification as needed. Thanks for your eyeballs, and perhaps for your eardrums. Gallomimia (talk) 06:12, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Gallomimia; thanks for reaching out! I have to say that my thinking on spoken articles has evolved somewhat since I posted those requests. Fundamentally, the issue is that (as you've discovered) it takes a ton of work to create them, and consequently they almost never get updated, thus going out of date and diminishing in value over time. Given that text-to-speech technology is constantly improving, I think the best thing we can do for spoken Wikipedia is to encourage developers to pursue support for machine reading of articles and to promote practices good for accessibility like image alt text, rather than reading out big articles ourselves. If we're going to read out any more articles manually, English language is probably the one that'd be most useful (I'll happily offer the {{Spoken Barnstar}} to anyone who reads it), and I'd say single files are better than multiple. But overall, if you're trying to find a high-priority task, I'd have to say you'd be better off looking elsewhere. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
@Sdkb Thanks for getting back to me! It's actually my finding that actually speaking the article and recording it is very easy; it is the refining and editing mistakes that takes a long time. Or at least, I think it takes a long time, because I have not done it yet. The article I linked as an example, my first try, took just over an hour to complete, and I like volunteering for this specific work in order to make a resume. So, I will plod on, and hopefully anyone who listens might point out errors in the text which I can revise. Gallomimia (talk) 21:08, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
  Best wishes! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:25, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for your effortsEdit

  COVID-19 Barnstar
Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to COVID-19. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Cdjp1! Was there a particular edit of mine that prompted this? {{u|Sdkb}}talk 23:46, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, it's for your collective edits to the article COVID-19 pandemic. I've been going through COVID related articles and giving stars to some of the most prevalent editors helping to expand, verify, and maintain the articles. --Cdjp1 (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Got it; thanks again! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 23:53, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
31,875   Kyiv offensive (2022) (talk) Add sources
82,857   War in Donbas (talk) Add sources
12   Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations (talk) Add sources
576,524   Volodymyr Zelenskyy (talk) Add sources
14   Feza Gürsey (talk) Add sources
95   Oor Wullie (talk) Add sources
114   History of the Jews in Afghanistan (talk) Cleanup
9,507   2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine (talk) Cleanup
85   Hasty Pudding Theatricals (talk) Cleanup
9   State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc. (talk) Expand
417   U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking (talk) Expand
485,519   Russo-Ukrainian War (talk) Expand
420   Attack the Block (talk) Unencyclopaedic
204   Wizards of Waverly Place: The Movie (talk) Unencyclopaedic
170   Wikipedia in culture (talk) Unencyclopaedic
2,741   Disinformation in the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis (talk) Merge
329   Criticism of Wikipedia (talk) Merge
1,784   Molon labe (talk) Merge
3,812   Reactions to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk) Wikify
16   Cambridge Public Library (talk) Wikify
45   Traquair House (talk) Wikify
6   Mathieu Laplante (talk) Orphan
1   Li Jindou (talk) Orphan
6   Dipen J Parekh (talk) Orphan
461   Turkey–Ukraine relations (talk) Stub
77   State Street Bank and Trust Company (talk) Stub
47   Tula pryanik (talk) Stub
11   Moses Cabrera (talk) Stub
3,472   Sergey Kozlov (politician) (talk) Stub
373   SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (talk) Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:08, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Those Little "I am a mammal" boxesEdit

Please teach me how to do that... I've tried, just take a look at my user page... the formatting is off and I'm not sure what exactly I'm doing wrong... Please help... :/

Tschau, Dwightol102 (talk) 20:40, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dwightol102! Those are called userboxes; see WP:Userboxes. The mammal one is Template:User mammal; to add it to your userpage, just place the code {{User mammal}} and save. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 23:25, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Replace with English language referenceEdit

I have not paid a great deal of attention to the section of Russian information war against Ukraine about the Russian-language Wikipedia since this is the only part of the article that anybody else seems interested in editing, but in general, unless the Russian or Ukrainian source is clearly unreliable for what it’s being used for, I am letting the sources in these languages stand and adding additional sources in English. I am not concerned enough about this to go see what happened with this particular source, but please be aware that I am not necessarily in favor of replacing sources, even POV sources, unless there is a clear reason to do do. So please do discuss if you feel a need to do this in the other article sections, as the entire article is about POV pushing and the references are often used as examples. That said, if you speak Russian or Ukrainian I do encourage you to help in the rest of the article. The talk page is full of questions Elinruby (talk) 20:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Elinruby! I've followed the Mark Bernstein arrest fairly closely and read the coverage of it both in English and (through Google Translate) in Russian/Belarusian. The reason I made this edit was that, per the WP:NONENG policy, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when they're available and of equal quality and relevance. In this case, I felt that the Verge article was a comprehensive overview of what's known so far, so I replaced the other sources with it. I hope that helps explain! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:00, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
I somewhat disagree with your reading of that policy, especially for this article. However, Verge is offhand fine, and I have not looked at the Russian article. That section is a small subset of the article that seems to have a lot of volunteers and there are more urgent fish for me to fry. I am simply asking that if you work on other parts of the article you refrain from doing this without discussing as there are many many foreign-language sources which have non-Anglophone points of view and that is usually why they are still there. As to this edit, I left a message for the editor who used the Russian-language reference, and as far as I am concerned if he has an issue you two can discuss. If he doesn’t then great. I am happy to have somebody working on at least that part of the article and am going to go back to figuring out what to say about all the closed, deplatformed and blocked media outlets on the various sides. TL;DR the article needs help but is being actively worked, so please discuss any other changes and by all means feel free to opine on some of the questions on the talk page. Elinruby (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Endurance (1912 ship)Edit

 On 14 March 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Endurance (1912 ship), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 11:52, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

A kitten for you!Edit

Thanks for getting the ball rolling again on the main page portals. It's looking like a very high likelihood of passing :D

A. C. SantacruzPlease ping me! 10:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Growth Newsletter #20Edit

17:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for Pomona College, "about a liberal arts college in California", for education, not battle! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Question for the all mighty SdkbEdit

Sdkb!! How are you? I recall seeing a map where one can use a blank map and put down markers for important locations. It was different than the map you have in the Campus section of the Pomona College—but I could have sworn I saw you using it somewhere. Do you have any idea what I'm talking about? I'm working on Josquin des Prez#Life where there is a dispute over his birthplace, so I'd like to have a map of France/Belgium with some markers for the candidates. Though it would be preferable, I can't find a suitable pre-made map of the area from his time on the commons unfortunately. Best – Aza24 (talk) 20:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Aza24 all mighty? Not sure about that haha 😅 But to your question, I think you're probably looking for {{Location map+}}; is that it? Wikipedia:Maps for Wikipedia has some other options. All else being equal, {{Maplink}} is the newer and more capable format. Best of luck with the article! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! I may try and commission a map, otherwise I think {{Location map+}} will work well. Best – Aza24 (talk) 04:33, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

In appreciationEdit

  The Reviewers Award
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Gog! It's an interesting area and I'm happy to be able to help! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2022 Fukushima earthquakeEdit

 On 21 March 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2022 Fukushima earthquake, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 01:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Removal of {{current}}Edit

I noticed you made a BOTREQ for this a while back, that Naypta dealt with by filing Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yapperbot 2. Seems the task is currently not working (?), as {{current}} has ~190 transclusions. Am I missing something or do I presume that bot task is dead? If so, I can probably file a new one to run Naypta's code since it is open source, but just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something before filing. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi ProcrastinatingReader! Naypta hasn't been around since 2020 (I've missed them!), so I'd presume that any tasks their bot was handling are inactive and in need of resurrection. Thanks for taking this on! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 17:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Likewise, hope they're doing well! I've filed the task at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ProcBot 10 to take over using their source in the interim. The utility of OS bot tasks reminds me I should get around to doing the same with ProcBot at some point. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 17:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Absolutely—open sourcing is such a huge WP:ENDURE consideration for any bot. Thanks again! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 18:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)


I know I just replied to you, but looking back through my responses today I might be coming off as a bit abrasive (I am quite tired) and just wanted to apologise if I have come off in that way. Thanks, Terasail[✉️] 18:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Terasail! No worries—you didn't come off as abrasive in the discussion at all. I agree with you that the current icon is rather lacking, so it makes sense you'd want to use a different one. Hopefully someday Wikipedia's iconography will get a more comprehensive reboot and standardization. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 18:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Socratic Barnstar
For a well cultivated, detailed, and helpful response to a comment at RfA. ––FormalDude talk 22:01, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, FormalDude! I try to help where I can. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:31, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Dru C. GladneyEdit

 On 22 March 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dru C. Gladney, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 04:59, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Photo Request for Bay Area Figurative MovementEdit

Yes, all the examples for Bay Area Figurative Movement were stripped out for WP:NFCC back in 2019. It's a real shame. --Knulclunk (talk) 20:13, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@Knulclunk, indeed. I came across the issue when trying to put together a gallery for the new Culture of California#Visual arts section I just added. There are unfortunately no examples of funk art, either, unless you count this (that's a FfD link) or this (and I can't bring myself to use as the representative artwork for a state with 39 million people a piece that failed to clear the legal threshold of originality lol). I'm not a copyright specialist, but I feel like there's probably a fair use rationale for adding at least something for the Bay Area Figurative Movement—funk art does so for its lead, and an article on an art movement cannot be complete without an image. Best, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Sunshine Protection ActEdit

Hello Sdkb,

I wanted to ask you about changes made to the Sunshine Protection Act article. Recently, you reverted my edits to this article, but I did not understand why.

The reason you gave is "Reverting removal of well-sourced claims and addition of redundant see also section." I can see that the 'See also' section may be considered redundant - that much I understand. However, the mention of "well-sourced claims" isn't correct. Two specific of the sources, as I mentioned in my edits, put forth false information relating to the 'unanimous consent' procedure. Many of the sources did not have a neutral point of view. Some of the claims cited comments from lawmakers despite those claims pertaining to researchers. At the very least, it is untrue that these are reliable sources.

I had explained my rationale for removing some of these dubious claims in the Talk page. The discussion as to whether to adopt standard time or daylight saving time is far from settled, and the article on the Sunshine Protection Act ought to reflect this. In its current state - the state which you have reverted - the article contains some mention of suggested benefits of daylight savings time. This is inadequate considering it presents a slanted viewpoint to readers.

The article Permanent time observation in the United States has a rather more thorough investigation of the same matter. So, it would be sensible either to modify the Sunshine Protection Act article to contain a broader discussion of daylight time versus standard time or to excise the relevant parts of the Sunshine Protection Act article. I had done the latter since it seemed, to my judgment, most sensible.

In light of what I have described, then, I do not see why you would revert the entirety of the edits to the Sunshine Protection Act. Perhaps you have another reason?

A248 (talk) 16:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi A248; thanks for reaching out! I missed that you were also the one who posted to the talk page a few days ago; I'll take another look at things when I next have a moment, and I'll reply to you on the talk page. Source-text integrity and neutrality are both important qualities we should be monitoring as the article develops. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:45, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Desktop ImprovementsEdit

Hello, thanks for giving your feedback (such a detailed comment!) already. I was hoping you would see my announcement on the Village Pump. What do you think, where could I write to make it even more visible? I'm asking about the English Wikipedia pages, specifically. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @SGrabarczuk (WMF)! Hmm, I think the village pumps where you've already posted are the main places I'd expect to see an announcement like that. A post to WT:Usability wouldn't hurt, but I don't think many others actively follow that page. The next step up would be a watchlist banner like you did for previous prototypes; that'd only be necessary if you wanted to get dramatically more feedback. Best, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 03:44, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for youEdit

  The Original Barnstar
For sticking up for readers. Over time, I've noticed your advocacy for changes and policies that make Wikipedia better for everyday readers, not just for us editors. I think the reader's experience is too often overlooked, so I wanted to give you this! Ganesha811 (talk) 02:50, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Ganesha811! I think it's crucial work and I'm glad to do what I can   Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Signpost editorial affirmationEdit

In a poll in The Signpost newsroom you said "I do not think it's appropriate for us, as the house publication of Wikipedia, to take sides in any dispute not directly related to the encyclopedia's purpose". I agree with your statement, but fail to recognize how you are judging the Ukraine War to be unrelated to Wikipedia's purpose.

There is blocking of Wikipedia in Russia, the killing of Ihor Kostenko while photographing for Wikipedia, and the Detention of Mark Bernstein. I agree that The Signpost is generally not a place for taking sides in disputes, but this particular war seems to include opposition to Wikipedia.

What is the nature of your opposition? If you posted thoughts elsewhere, I did not seem them in your edit history. Thanks. Also, thanks for commenting at all, because whatever you are thinking and feeling I expect that other people also have the same view. I want to understand. Bluerasberry (talk) 03:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Bluerasberry; thanks for reaching out! I agree that there are aspects of the war that are related to our purpose, and I think it's fine for us as a community to speak up about those—indeed, I considered opening up a community statement on Bernstein (although the political/legal sensitivity of that situation ultimately made it more prudent not to). The Signpost editorial, however, went beyond just open knowledge issues and instead ran the headline We stand in solidarity with Ukraine. That sort of blanket statement is what I objected to. I hope that helps clarify my stance. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:46, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Template:User's RfAEdit

Are you planning to continue work on {{User's RfA}}? There is a group of us trying to tidy up untranscluded template pages, and this one popped up on a recent report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Jonesey95! It's a functional template with a plausible usage, so I wouldn't see any reason to delete it. The main limitation is that it relies on {{If in category}}, which is very expensive as it requires a string search. Hopefully at some point it'll become easier to search a page's categories, as there are myriad possible applications. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)


Pinging SPECIFICO. I am currently dealing with a pattern with an editor that suggests a possible problem. Looking back at some of your comments, I noticed this one that stood out to me [1]. Can you tell me more about how this comment came about, or if there is some history to it? No allegations please, just facts and or diffs. Thanks for your time. DN (talk) 18:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @DN; thanks for checking in! Republican Party (United States) and similar pages, e.g. Donald Trump, unfortunately have a quite strained editing environment. While I try to assume good faith as much as possible, when you spend time monitoring those pages, it becomes pretty plain that some editors (on multiple sides) are there to POV push by reverting any information they don't want present and forcing others to go through an entire RfC for each fact. I don't have time at the moment to collect a bunch of diffs, but if you search through the talk page archives, you'll find plenty of examples. A few admins have given out warnings to some of the most blatant offenders, e.g. [2].
For this particular issue, the initial argument presented, that the Republican National Committee somehow wasn't qualified to speak for the Republican Party, was so absurd on its face that I found it difficult to parse as anything other than an attempt at status quo stonewalling. Editors later pivoted to a more plausible-sounding WP:UNDUE argument, but by that point the mask was off.
Overall, I'm increasingly coming to the view that it's not the best use of my time as an experienced editor to engage much with pages like that, since progress is just so slow when you have to fight over every change. When folks are that tense, even something as banal as adding alt text becomes likely to rustle feathers (for the record, I didn't mind the question linked there at all; I'm choosing it as a deliberately minor example). There will always be editors on each side, and the best we can hope for is that they'll balance each other out and that perhaps in the future, after the dust has settled, others will come along to neutralize biases and make improvements. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
I can appreciate your take, however I am not much one for the laissez-faire approach when it comes to observing behavior that perceivably wastes other editors valuable time. It can eventually lead to the interruption in the improvement of an article all together, and then continuing on the next article, and the next, and so on. I'm confused as to why some editors also feel this way when there are clear-ish policies and guidelines in place to keep things moving? Yes consensus is important, but letting editors twist the rules into a backwards version of itself is abhorrent. I would argue that hoping someone else will come along and somehow balance things out (eventually) can be folly, but I also want to listen and learn from more knowledgeable and more experienced editors, such as yourself, even if I disagree with them. What if we are actually that editor that is supposed to shine the light on the inconsistency, inequity and convolution? How do we know? Thank you for taking the time with me today, it is very appreciated. Cheers. DN (talk) 22:40, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
@DN, it's definitely about finding a balance. It can be worthwhile to !vote on some discussions or engage with a problematic editor if it helps limit their future disruption. But the effort-to-reward ratio is lower. When I think back on all the editing I've done, I've had a much greater impact writing in neglected topic areas than I have in marginally shifting the consensus at a few politics articles. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 04:01, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:White PearlEdit

  Hello, Sdkb. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:White Pearl, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians assessed by WikiProject Users has been nominated for discussionEdit


Category:Wikipedians assessed by WikiProject Users has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:02, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

April 1Edit

The new citation template is one of the best 1/4 efforts I've seen. Thanks for brightening up my day. Nthep (talk) 09:56, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Nthep! I've been informed by some extremely authoritative squiggles in a local outhouse that the launch of {{Cite bathroom graffiti}} has been a success   {{u|Sdkb}}talk 19:22, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

  • For my talk page stalkers, my other April Fools pranks this year (and previous years) are catalogued at User:Sdkb/April Fools. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 23:44, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Question from McLoad 2 (11:33, 2 April 2022)Edit

How independent are you ? Who pay's you and for how much, to prevent the truth ? --McLoad 2 (talk) 11:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

McLoad, no one is paying us. Your edits at Talk:Michael Yeadon were reverted because they were vandalism. If you have a problem with that article's content, please make actionable suggestions for changes to the text supported by sources Wikipedia considers reliable. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 17:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Major topic editnoticeEdit

 Template:Major topic editnotice has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:User time zone editnoticeEdit

  Template:User time zone editnotice, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User time zone editnotice and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User time zone editnotice during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Micro-FaceEdit


Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Micro-Face".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Deleting my questionEdit

Hi, why you did delete my question I just asked a question and needed an answer.Simsala111 (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) WP:VPP where you posted to, is not a place to ask questions. It is for developing and altering policy. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Courtesy ping: Simsala111. Mathglot (talk) 19:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: @Vchimpanzee:I don't what courtesy ping means here and why someone replies to another person in a third person's talk page. then where is its the place for this question?! I brought it there as @Vchimpanzee: told me on my own talk page if it is not right place then transfer it to the right place not by deleting the whole thing.I just want my question to be answered. of course not by the same person.Simsala111 (talk) 20:03, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Simsala111 I can explain the courtesy ping. That was to let you know there was a response to your question. I see the practice of answering questions on another person's talk page all the time. If they can help, some people who watch other people's talk pages do so.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:12, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
@Vchimpanzee: But he also deleted my question from there and didn't redirected or gave me any help for doing it so.plus he is the same person that has different opinion from mine in this discussion so he could not be the best person to do that so.I need a neutral person.Simsala111 (talk) 20:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
I know. That's not right. They didn't delete my question but eventually hid it. I've been told several times I was asking the question in the wrong place. And I don't know what the place is. It seems strange to me that someone with a policy question can't ask it in WP:Village pump (policy).
The only thing I can suggest is going back to the Help Desk and maybe someone will answer this time or say where to ask. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:24, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Simsala111! I see you've been redirected a few times, so apologies for that—I know that Wikipedia's bureaucracy can be really difficult to navigate, even for those of us who have been around here for a while. Ultimately, the best place to figure out how to approach a question about an article is in a single thread at that article, in this case Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup#Usage of dialects in parenthesis for name of the game for host language. Trying to bring it up anywhere else using anything except {{Please see}} tends to get messy, as unfortunately happened here, as it risks splitting the discussion.
I haven't read the full thread at that article, but from a glance, it looks like the discussion so far isn't going the way you hoped. I certainly empathize with how frustrating that can be—it happens to all of us—but Wikipedia works on consensus, so after you've put forward your best argument, there's really nothing to do except sit back and see if it resonates with others, and if it doesn't, it's generally best to just drop the issue and move on to something else. Discussions do sometimes turn around, but there's less likelihood of that the more sprawly they get, so it's best not to respond to every comment.
More generally, if any questions come up in the future, I'd definitely recommend posting at the Teahouse, which is a dedicated friendly space where editors can give advice and help out. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:27, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. I left one very important detail out of my advice. Somehow there needs to be a way to ask before posting in the wrong place whether it is the right place.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)


Hi, would you please move Wikipedia talk:Mass message senders/Shell-0105 to pretty much anywhere besides a subpage of WTMMS? (If you are the only one using this, move to your own userspace). — xaosflux Talk 15:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Oops, I missed the move instruction there. I've emptied out the shell, as I only needed it for a single use. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 17:59, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Barbara Ann WilcoxEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Barbara Ann Wilcox 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mujinga (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:John Arthur Stump portrait.jpgEdit


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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 8 April 2022 (UTC)


Since John Stump was recently deleted, can you update User:Bilorv/Challenges#Decadent with either a different article or removal? (50s is one of the decades I'm missing but then again, I am only halfway there...) — Bilorv (talk) 15:47, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bilorv lol you're a strict enforcer! Luckily I have a few options; swapped out for a different one. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 18:36, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Didn't you read the small print: Your challenges may be repossessed if you do not keep up notability defenses of your articles? Just happened to notice this when I was skimming through the page. Glad to hear you've got a replacement. — Bilorv (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!Edit

  Thank you for the new picture on the WP:BITE page! I really liked the old one, but I am glad we have SOMETHING again! Th78blue (talk) 17:22, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks; same! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 18:26, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yin Chang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Decider.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Already   Fixed. I suggested that the disambiguator extension be improved to include the source editor citation tool. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Double-check RfC you launched a few months ago at Talk:College and university rankingsEdit

I'm not sure if this RfC was set up correctly; you may want to double check it. ElKevbo (talk) 02:59, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

@ElKevbo, the RfC appears fine, but the tag was just removed by a bot once it expired. I'll list it at WP:CR to have it closed. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 18:23, 14 April 2022 (UTC)


Hi Sdkb. Just checking if you got my ping at Talk:Food#Splitting proposal. Regards Aircorn (talk) 21:18, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Aircorn! I did get the ping, but I'm not following the article closely enough to say whether your proposal adequately resolves the concerns. If it seems good, feel free to proceed boldly and we'll see what others think. If a discussion starts, I might look into it further and form an opinion. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:49, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
OK. There is no rush. I am back editing it now and working towards GA status. Any issues or comments are more than welcome. Aircorn (talk) 21:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bret PriceEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Bret Price 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ktin (talk) 20:18, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Redesigning the about pageEdit

Hi Sdkb,
I remember you said that you would like to redesign the about page on Wikipedia. I would be interested in hearing your ideas on what the new about page would look like since most about pages are short and sweet. Also, I would like to know what other areas of Wikipedia you feel need redesign. Please let me know. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Interstellarity! The conversation we previously had is here. My view is still the same—I'd like to see the page reconstructed from the ground up, with every piece of information run through a "do we really need this here or can we save it for elsewhere/Wikipedia?" test. Let me know if you have specific questions and I'll be happy to offer feedback. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 04:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello again,
I have created a sandbox of my idea of what the about page could look like. I do think it needs more work before it can replace the current about page. Of course, this would require a consensus before implementing such change. If you see a way that my proposed page could be improved, please feel free to edit my sandbox regarding what you think should be on the about page. I do think that on the current about page, most of the content is unnecessary. We could always use links so editors can get more information if they are interested. Let me know your thoughts and I'd be happy to work with you. Interstellarity (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
What's causing the delay in response? Did you take a look at my draft of a new about page? Interstellarity (talk) 18:38, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Interstellarity! I unfortunately don't have enough spare time to join you fully in a rewrite; apologies for not making that clearer above. But taking a quick look at your draft, it seems like a big step forward in terms of overall form. I'd suggest workshopping it to refine it further, and then presenting it once you're confident it's ready. Best, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 19:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
I don’t know what you mean by workshopping. Is it to work on the draft further or asking others for help regarding the page? Where could I go to get some help with designing a new about page? Interstellarity (talk) 21:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
By workshopping I mean mainly asking for feedback and ideally recruiting one or two other editors to work on it with you. You could ask at WT:Help Project, but I think you're more likely to find someone at e.g. the village pump idea lab. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 03:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Question from Quictelor on User:Quictelor (11:48, 26 April 2022)Edit

Hello Good afternoon How can I publish my. Article --Quictelor (talk) 11:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, in your case, the first step is requesting you be unblocked. Follow the instructions on your talk page. After that, see Help:Your first article. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 16:49, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Inna DerusovaEdit

I expanded the article quite a bit, and thought you might want to know. It's still short, but I don't think it's a Stub any more. --GRuban (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I'd like to nominate it for WP:DYK - do you have any ideas for a hook? Straightforward "... that Inna Derusova was the first woman to be awarded Hero of Ukraine posthumously?" Something about the hospital visit hoax, like "... that Russian media accused Zelenskyy of faking a video of visiting a hospital accompanying a dead woman?" Something else? --GRuban (talk) 17:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the expansion, @GRuban! It's always so nice to see Wikipedia's collaborative spirit come out, and I'd definitely encourage submitting it to DYK. Personally, I'd find the hospital visit hook more compelling, as "first person to do X" hooks aren't always the most interesting, but you could try both and see what the reviewer likes. The challenge for the hospital visit hook is encapsulating it concisely—perhaps ...that Russian media falsely accused Ukraine of faking a hospital visit video that appeared to show Inna Derusova (pictured) after she had died? {{u|Sdkb}}talk 19:37, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/Inna Derusova. Went with your suggestion minus one "falsely" as it's redundant, and less "hooky". Thank you! Also pinged editor Grytsenko on UK Wikipedia. --GRuban (talk) 19:25, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

photo of michael kellyEdit

hey! normally, I'd go right to WP:FFD, but I figure you might have a reasonable explanation for this one. The file is credited to Getty images; WP:NFCC#7 says that those are unacceptable under the "respect for commercial opportunities" criterion. Any reason for inclusion? Do let me know, thanks :) theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 19:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Theleekycauldron, and thanks for checking! I found the photo here at New York magazine, where it was credited as "Getty Images/The Washington Post". My strong hunch is that it was a staff photo from The Washington Post, where Kelly worked (the same photo with altered lighting appears at this page from 1998), and that Getty just scooped it up at some point. With regard to respect for commercial opportunities, my stance is that it's extremely unlikely our use could harm them, as the file is already easily available at the top of Google Image search results from New York in a higher resolution than ours will be. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 19:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
ah, see, I knew you had something I didn't. Could you put that in the image rationale? thanks! theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 08:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Absolutely;   Done. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:09, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Mandrill GAEdit

Hello. Would you be able to do the GA review of Mandrill and prepare it for FAC? Thanks. LittleJerry (talk) 11:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi LittleJerry! I don't have the capacity to take that on at the moment, unfortunately, but I wish you the best with it! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia main pageEdit

Greetings, Sdkb. In a hurry as I often am, I only noticed today that the Wikipedia main page has a new look. So, this message is about the new look: Congratulations for the work you and/or anyone else who put in the work. From my own personal view, it's much better now, in many aspects too. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 18:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@The Gnome Much thanks! I think I've influenced most of the permanent sections of the Main Page at this point; glad to be able to help push it toward a more modern look! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Barbara Ann WilcoxEdit

 On 11 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Barbara Ann Wilcox, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that transgender pioneer Barbara Ann Wilcox (pictured) proposed to her husband on the day she met him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Barbara Ann Wilcox. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Barbara Ann Wilcox), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

  Hook update
Your hook reached 47,327 views (1,972.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2022—nice work!

theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 02:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron, wow, that's by far the most of any DYK I've done. Wouldn't have necessarily expected that, but very glad to see it! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 14:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)


Never even heard of this guy until today and... [3] [4]—was there in the lead for a month and seen by 11,000 people :( – Aza24 (talk) 06:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Aza24: Ack, that is...very not ideal. Thanks for catching it! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 13:51, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Bret PriceEdit

 On 12 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bret Price, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bret Price built a 1,500-pound (680 kg) zipper in his backyard? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bret Price. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bret Price), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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) 00:03, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/BostonEdit

 Template:Editnotices/Page/Boston has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 14:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:GoToRandomEdit

 Template:GoToRandom has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:27, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Infobox universityEdit


I thought I was finally done fixing all uses of |athletics= and |sports= because I emptied Category:Pages using infobox university with the sports parameter. But then I saw Friends University is using athletics, so it appears the check for this is not working. Can you look into that? Thanks. MB 21:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

@MB, hmm, good find! I noticed that Friends University's infobox had a blank instance of |sports=, and when I removed that, it's now showing up in the category. I changed the way the check is done in the template; let's see if that fixes things. Thanks so much for your excellent work helping clean up the usages! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:09, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
That seems to have added about 150 more! MB 02:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy noticeEdit

I mentioned you at WP:ANI#Disruptive template edits by Dawn PScLim. Schazjmd (talk) 23:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, and best wishes helping that newcomer chart a more productive path. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Inna DerusovaEdit

 On 22 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Inna Derusova, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Inna Derusova (pictured) was the first woman to be posthumously awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Inna Derusova. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Inna Derusova), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Kusma (talk) 00:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

May songs

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:27, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

  Hook update
Your hook reached 18,386 views (1,532.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2022—nice work!

theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 04:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022Edit

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Sdkb,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 718 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 1041 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

TikTok lead sentanceEdit

Hi Sdkb. Despite the hidden comment you added last July, an editor recently changed the position of the word "Chinese" in the lead sentence of the TikTok article, against prior RfC consensus. Would you mind reverting?

Also, if this happens again in the future, would it be appropriate for me (as a COI editor) to revert directly, considering this is fairly uncontroversial, or is my continued caution here correct? Thanks, Bkenny44 (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bkenny44,   Done here; thanks for flagging. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 03:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)