"Remarkably unremarkable."

Lazy sleeping barnstar.svgThis user is very lazy. Please feel free to do his work for him.
Screenshot of the 'Mute' option on the English Wikipedia.png


Bah Humbug. (5284392337).jpg
At FAC
To review
At FAR
Source reviews
Misc reviews
To be getting on with
Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk[1][2][3][4][5][6]
Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster

RefsEdit

References

  1. ^ Ormrod, W. Mark; Killick, Helen; Bradford, Phil (October 30, 2017). "Early Common Petitions in the English Parliament, c.1290-c.1420". Cambridge University Press – via Google Books.
  2. ^ Sherborne, James (January 1, 1994). "War, Politics and Culture in 14th Century England". A&C Black – via Google Books.
  3. ^ Wilkinson, Bertie (June 6, 2014). "The Later Middle Ages in England 1216 - 1485". Routledge – via Google Books.
  4. ^ Reuter, Timothy (April 26, 1995). "The New Cambridge Medieval History: Volume 6, C.1300-c.1415". Cambridge University Press – via Google Books.
  5. ^ Harriss, G. L.; Archer, Rowena E.; Walker, Simon (January 1, 1995). "Rulers and Ruled in Late Medieval England: Essays Presented to Gerald Harriss". A&C Black – via Google Books.
  6. ^ https://www-oxforddnb-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-19459?rskey=3QIlMo&result=4

From the absence of study comes the absence of women in history.

Sylva Federico, Federico, S. (2001). "The Imaginary Society: Women in 1381". Journal of British Studies. 40: 159. OCLC 931172994.

ThanksEdit

Thanks for your kind words at the CW ANI! PamD 17:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Special Barnstar
For literally being a special editor and a source of inspiration to me for four solid years and counting. Celestina007 (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @Celestina007: I'm only grateful for one thing—that whatever happens in the future, I've been lucky enough to have had the chance to watch you grow and develop onto one of our strongest contributors—front and back of house—while not shying away from the sensitive areas needing a nuanced touch. Keep up the (very!) good work! ——Serial 18:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
You know when your superiors at work make a remarkable comment about you and you literally can not at that moment articulate a proper response that mirrors your inner feelings, that’s me right now. I literally do not have the right words to use to appreciate this statement. Celestina007 (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Oromia RegionEdit

You are not looking my suggestion in the talk page and I cite sources for my assertion. I also gave reason repeatedly that the subject talks about a particular region, thus implying capitalization as proper name. There are also a lot of regions in Ethiopia that take capitlized name. The miniscule region is not retained to Oromia region as the subject talks the particular region name in Ethiopia. I also agreed to replace with Oromia (region) if neither Region nor region are compatible with naming convention. The Supermind (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@The Supermind: I'm afraid that's not to the point. The point is that, per procedure, there was a move request which—while you took part in it—your proposal received no traction, and a clear consensus for the page title in its present format was established by a neutral closer. As I said at MR/T, and at your talk page, you cannot "contest" an established consensus by simply reverting it: in the knowledge that things might change, another move request might establish a different result. But as I also suggested, another request of the same kind so soon after the previous one will, frankly, probably be seen as simply disruptive. ——Serial 14:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Update: Ah, you thought you'd go ahead and request a move anyway. Interesting... ——Serial 15:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

curious.Edit

Sorry to bother. Regarding the picture at the top, above, what happened to Slim Virgin? Just curious. Thanks, warshy (¥¥) 16:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Warshy: No bother. See her talk. All the best, ——Serial 16:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, ——Serial! I am glad I asked. I agree with your sentiments. Thanks again, warshy (¥¥) 17:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
It left me speechless first. Thank you for the image. I think it would be great also on her talk. I was quite moved when I found that one of the last things she did here was also missing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
ps: am I the only one thinking that these little templated candles on user and talk page are not in her style and might go? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Try clicking on parts of the image now Gerda Arendt, and let me know what you think. But if you want to place it anywhere else, or use it in any way, you know you can do that. I think you probably have better judgement than me in these matters; if I do it, I'l have an admin down here accusing me of trolling so fast it'd make our heads swim.
You know—I think you're right about those candles. They're very twee, and I don't think anyone could ever have called her that! The problem, I guess, is that we only have "one" way of doing these kind of things, when of course we haven't only got "one" sort of editor. Is that making sense? It's like a one-size-fits-all response.
Thanks for the words. Hope you're well. ——Serial 18:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
I clicked on image parts before you asked, and clicked thank you. Fine, but that's here. You decide how to show your tribute. I mention her in a "in memoriam" section. - The little candles: I told enough people that I don't want them when I die, - a category would be quite enough. I know a great user talk undisturbed by them, but better no link ... - There's a discussion about the topic on my talk, but not many felt it was even worth talking about. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
I forgot to answer "well". If you see my talk, you may notice that I decorated for a friend's birthday. I am healthy but know too many people who are not. (sig late, thank you for reformation on my talk, - DYK it's the first word one my user page, after the todo block?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Teamwork Barnstar
I would like to thank you and User:Levivich for you help on Fielding L. Wright back in 2020. Sorry for taking so long to give you a barnstar. Jon698 (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Cheers Jon698; it was Levivich who did all the "heavy lifting", actually helping you—I just did a slow burn in the corner. Mind you, did I send you a bunch of books? Anyway, the article's looking dead good. Good work! ——Serial 18:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

re ARCEdit

Hi. With the move to Liberia for IRC and the clerk mailing list taking 4 hours to process my email, it took a while for me to get approval from an arb to remove as premature. It has been done so now. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 16:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Cheers Dreamy Jazz. Hope I wasn't too blunt; it certainly wasn't the fault of any one individual. Excepting your striking mailman perhaps  :) But it's frustrating to see such a (potential) timesink be so easily started. Is placing WP:RFAR under semi- or even extended confirmed protected a "perennial discussion"? Or not, by any chance...? Thanks for your help. ——Serial 16:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I do get it and you were not too blunt, my message was mainly to let you know it had been removed.
Perhaps semi or even ec protection might stop case requests being filed, but it would also prevent those users from commenting. Although the Arbitration Committee pages in general are only edited by autoconfirmed editors, experienced editors who have preferred to use IPs would need to make edit requests to comment. Filing parties to case requests which are then accepted should be autoconfirmed at the time of filing as the previous dispute resolution should mean they have made enough edits and spent enough time to at least get autoconfirmed.
However, page protection isn't the only thing which could be used to prevent non autoconfirmed / extended confirmed editors from filing case requests. One thought I had in response to your comment was using a edit filter which catches the filing of case requests by non-autoconfirmed editors. I'm not sure if disallowing would be accepted by the community at large, but perhaps setting one which warns for the time being until consensus from the arbitrators and/or community could be gained. This would allow another banner to be shown for non-autoconfirmed users which reminds them to use the talk page, go to ANI etc. first. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks DJ. I realise, you're correct about blocking respected IPs (and obviously, there are a few of them), which would be unfair and potentially stifle productive input where it was (at that point in time) most needed. But the edit filter... that sounds a good idea, although I've no idea how that would work in practice. (Mainly due to technical non-ability!) I guess if an EF immediately alerted all arbs and clerks they could shut it down with the minimum of delay, but I don't see how other editors except those with the EF would ever know! Anyway, let me know if you ever get any traction with this, I'd be interested in discussing it further. Cheers, ——Serial 18:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
The edit filter would either let us know via a log, warn the user about filing the case request by preventing their save once while also logging the attempted / made edit, or disallow them from filing the case request while also logging this disallowed edit. The log would be publicly accessible, and would show up in per user edit filter logs (for example if I was non-autoconfirmed and tried to file a case it would show up in my abuse filter log) and a log which contains all edits which hit that filter. I'll see if I can set something up to log for now. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Said filter has been created, and I think you can view it at Special:AbuseFilter/1153 Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I've just realized that ARC is already semi-protected *facepalm*. I'll make the edit filter use extended confirmed instead. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:29, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Gavin MacLeodEdit

 On 4 June 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Gavin MacLeod, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:10, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Why do you have to be so infuriatingly diplomatic, Amakuru?! (should that've said "f*****g diplomatic"...?)[FBDB] ——Serial 11:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
As the page to which you've linked rightly says, a crack at the right moment can often break the tension. 😀  — Amakuru (talk) 12:04, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Good faith?Edit

Why should I assume people are acting in good faith when nothing about their actions indicates that they are? Suttonpubcrawl (talk) 15:26, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

(a) because it's expected of you here; and (b) because you can catch more flies with honey, etc. Thank you for your work on that article, but it was still in need of a lot of work (as Black Kite said kind of unkindly at that unnameable site)—which I and others have now mucked in and done a bit of; if you assume bad faith of everybody and don't even give a coherent "Keep" rationale based on the notability criteria, you're less likely to get such help for the article you want to save, let alone persuading others in the discussion (for the vast majority of articles taken to AfD, only those who've already worked on the article will have heard of the topic. Persuasion, not outrage for others' not sharing your particular background and interests.) Serial Number 54129 is actually one of the good'uns, a very useful friend in a pinch. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:29, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I see what you're saying, it's just incredibly frustrating when there are two editors who are friends and obviously working in concert to get a page deleted, giving spurious reasons to do so. Even the most cursory look over the page and its references reveals that it clearly meets notability criteria. Then adding in stuff about me being a single purpose account? Please. This sort of thing is what really puts ordinary people (and I'd probably class myself in that category) off editing Wikipedia, because users who know all the technical and administrative tricks can and do act in bad faith, then hide behind spurious references to policies that they themselves surely must know they aren't really complying with. It leaves you feeling like you're dealing with a Kafkaesque bureaucracy, with players who know the game able to behave in ways you aren't simply because you don't know how to cheat. Anyway, I've calmed down now and added a concise response to the deletion discussion Suttonpubcrawl (talk) 07:34, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

June thanksEdit

 

Thank you for missing and reformation, with some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! and that's a cool link...old page! ——Serial 18:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Removing newsletters from retired users' talkpagesEdit

Hi, it seems we have a bit of disagreement over this. I tend to remove such newsletters - and unsubscribe the users - as since they are retired, the talkpage is presumably not going to be read by them. Instead, it exists to serve the general editing community - and following that, newsletters are irrelevant to most people (and those who wish to receive them should subscribe themselves). TPO isn't really relevant as these aren't comments left by an actual person. It's a bot message, if people really care, it's available in the page history. Elli (talk | contribs) 12:41, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

That 'presumably' is doing one heluva lot of heavy lifting there; I don't think you should assume any such thing. I also think you should respect other editors' user pages, at least until it is clear that they have actually retired (and not simply placed {{Retired}} in a fit of emotion, which, due to the circumstances, could very well be the case). In a minority of cases–where a user has long since ceased editing–I agree that stripping pages of bot-notices, newsletters etc., is a good thing, but our default position be that the talk page remains under the stewardship of its editor. It's certainly not forus to randomly judge what they may/may not want.
I suggest you cease tend[ing] to remove such newsletters in line with WP:NOBAN. This certainly includes creating archive pages which you then redirect ([1], [2]) to your own user space—what in Sam Hill?! ——Serial 13:02, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
you then redirect ([1], [2]) to your own user space—what in Sam Hill?! you don't need to diff me here lol, I thought I explained that. I assumed that an archive existed and would prefer to archive instead of blank. Upon seeing there wasn't an archive that already existed, I decided not to keep the one I had just created. I could've just as easily tagged for G7 instead of moving to my userspace with the exact same effect (except confusing you, apparently).
I tend to assume that people who claim to have retired have actually retired and treat them accordingly, unless they have a previous pattern of acting otherwise. I only do this on talkpages I come across, though, I'm not seeking out pages to do this on - it's usually because the messages got in my way. I don't see a good reason for why keeping the messages there improves the encyclopedia, vs removing them. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
You make an awful lot of assumptions, very few of them based on anything more concrete than your personal preferences, it seems. Among things that improve the encyclopedia, I would count editor retention and an maintaining a collegial atmosphere towards those who may have left or be taking a break. In other words, keep their pages how they left them and assume nothing but good faith. It's literally none of our business, and if they do come back, we are hardly encouraging them by making them trawl through their own history.
By the way, the diffs above were not for your benefit, but for the handful of experienced editors who watch this page. HTH. ——Serial 13:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
keep their pages how they left them and assume nothing but good faith their talkpage didn't have the message on it when they retired, did it? And I did assume good faith - that they were honest and genuine about their retirement. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:28, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
...keep[ing] their pages how they left them clearly implies "receiving such newsletters, etc., as they personally signed up for". And that you're removing things from another user's page because because they get in your way is bizarre and inappropriate. In any case, I think we're done here: you've provided no policy or guideline that allows you to edit other user's talk pages, so if you wish to contest my edits, I suggest you file at the appropriate notice board. Best, ——Serial 13:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Since (talk page watcher) is/are mentioned: Elli STOP! Do not do these things again. Serial Num is correct here, and you can consider this a formal warning. Do NOT go mucking about other people's talk pages such as is described above. Do NOT remove other editors posts on pages which are not in your name space, bot or not. Do NOT move their talk archives. Retired does NOT give anyone the right to act in their stead. If you continue to do these things, there's a very real chance you will be blocked. I hope this is now clear to you. — Ched (talk) 13:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ched: fair. I wasn't planning on continuing to revert or do this on other recently-retired editors' pages.
I did not move anyone's talk archives, of course, that would be completely inappropriate, nor was I attempting to act in their stead. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:39, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Once upon a timeEdit

... you told me you may be able to find more sources on Nepal for me. I was wondering if the offer still stood. And, of course, posting this here, in case your TPWs have something.

In general, any sources on Nepal-related topics would do. We've only got History of Nepal (not in an ideal shape) and I'm planning to build sub-articles we ought to have. Specifically, right now, I wish I had a more or less current source on Name of Nepal. I have a tertiary source from 1983 which gives me an idea of what the situation was back then, and what's due and what's not. I have a hunch that no progress has been made toward identifying the etymology of Nepal since then, but if I had a recent source on the topic that said no new thing, I could be sure that the article is complete, and rewrite it with that in mind, and publish it. Best wishes, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Usedtobecool, hope you're well. Now then. I can't remember saying that at all! <g> But I took a module on Nepalese history a while back, so yes, I was probably thinking on the strength of that. I could send you what I can still find. Not sure I ever looked into the etymological aspect of the name, unfortunately, but it certainly sounds like an interesting area of research. Let me have a dig around; if I can find the folder, I'll ping you an email. Thanks for popping in! ——Serial 14:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
I should say that you've already sent me DR Regmi's books (I think they include 5,7,9,10,11 from Dilli Raman Regmi#Historian) (he guesses that prehistoric Nepalese probably cultivated maize, among other things, which I thought was interesting  ), they are an excellent source. Thanks! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Righto Usedtobecool, I've put together a folder: unfortunately it probably duplicates the Regmi pieces, as I kind of lost track of what I had/hadn't already got. However, there's lots more besides—over 30 things @ 900MB  :) on its way! ——Serial 17:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
And   Sent ——Serial 17:32, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Yes, thank you very much! There's a lot indeed. Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:55, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Bah!Edit

Thort I waz, forsooth :-)

(Trusting this will be accepted in the spirit it was intended – goats are, as the kids* say, awesome.)

*Not the goat kids. They say "bah".

bonadea contributions talk 17:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

Many thanks for seconding the nomination as editor of the week. It was a very pleasant surprise when I got on my computer after getting up here in Melbourne. --Bduke (talk) 00:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 November newsletterEdit

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is   The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:

  1.   The Rambling Man (submissions) with 5072 points
  2.   Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 3276 points
  3.   Amakuru (submissions) with 3197 points
  4.   Epicgenius (submissions) with 1611 points
  5.   Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1571 points
  6.   BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 1420 points
  7.   Hog Farm (submissions) with 1043 points
  8.   Bloom6132 (submissions) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

HeyEdit

I was just thinking last week that I hadn't seen you around in ages. It's good to see you back! Cabayi (talk) 10:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Cabayi! Don't think anyone noticed though :) hope this finds you well! ——Serial 11:08, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

About AfDEdit

None of the stuff I added was biased. The party is widely considered to be a National Conservative party that openly opposes mass-immigration and radical Islam. If I was being biased, I would've added "Fascism" and "Neo-Nazism" to the infobox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWorldThatNeverExisted (talkcontribs) 11:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
235   SeaWorld San Antonio (talk) Add sources
207   Urinal (talk) Add sources
109   Lopez Holdings Corporation (talk) Add sources
46   Socage (talk) Add sources
696   Urination (talk) Add sources
14   Hoy Gising! (talk) Add sources
33   Richard Scrope (bishop) (talk) Cleanup
15   Niskayuna High School (talk) Cleanup
1,467   War on terror (talk) Cleanup
12   Sa Linggo nAPO Sila (talk) Expand
118   Female urination device (talk) Expand
16   Burayu massacre (talk) Expand
118   Oromo Democratic Party (talk) Unencyclopaedic
134   Tawag ng Tanghalan (talk) Unencyclopaedic
502   Artificial gravity (talk) Unencyclopaedic
441   Hostile architecture (talk) Merge
340   Thameslink (talk) Merge
3,457   Al-Qaeda (talk) Merge
10   Theo Dorgan (talk) Wikify
139   Examples of feudalism (talk) Wikify
23   Timeline for September following the September 11 attacks (talk) Wikify
14   Piper O'Neill (talk) Orphan
3   Humphrey Neville of Brancepeth (talk) Orphan
8   Syed Ainul Hasan (talk) Orphan
51   Subinfeudation (talk) Stub
5   Jean Moorcroft Wilson (talk) Stub
15   Ogo Mountains (talk) Stub
6   The Dead-Beat (talk) Stub
3   John Scarle (talk) Stub
135   Fore (golf) (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Signature change?Edit

Hello Serial! On an IP's talk page and on Teahouse, your signature showed User:Serial Number 54129, however all of the sudden you have a proper signature. Did you change it or did something get messed up? ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:47, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Also I hope you don't mind but I"m stealing your lazy userbox from the top of your talk page because I too am lazy.Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:48, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf: I think I can guess which IP talk page you mean  ;) no signature change for me recently, it's been
[[Special:contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#960303">'''——'''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:blue">'''S'''erial</span>]]
for some months now. But you've got me interested—any chance of linking to where you mean? (I can't even remember the last time I posted at the Teahouse for example!). Thanks for the message, Blaze, I'll certainly look into it if you can show me where  :) ——Serial 18:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
By the way—I think that's absolutely the spirit behind the lazyness userbox! Heh  :) ——Serial 18:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
I might be thinking of the Help Desk since I get Teahouse and Help Desk confused because of their similarity. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:02, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

November thanksEdit

November songs
 

... for Bach background an a good analysis on AN. Today 3 DYK, Brahms depicted + sadly Aga Mikolaj (listen!). May the roads that we travel make us meet again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Today we received the annual arbcom message, which made me think. SlimVirgin pictured again, and musing about her wisdom. Will use the Bach more, after updating Volker Lechtenbrink. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The memory of SlimVirgin is pictured again, in the context about my dangerous thoughts about arbcom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Ben ComeauEdit

Might as well tell you where I am with this - the only good sources I can find are this and this and a trivial passing mention in this - that's about it. A shame, because I have wanted to put "DYK ... that Ben Comeau thinks Donald Trump is a wanker and Boris Johnson is a lying shit?" on the main page for .... quite some time. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:59, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

[3], [4], [5] --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Cheers, Gerda - I recall doing GA reviews for your Bach articles that www.bach-cantatas.com is a reliable source, right? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:29, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
That was when Francis Schonken was around, the only one who thought so. Of course, the bio there is taken from somewhere else (given at the bottom, and often no longer available.) I like their links, and their images, and for recordings, immense detail. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Hope you are wellEdit

Hello! I saw this Wikipedia:Help_desk#Submission_Violation, and thought I could always tell you, perhaps you'll be inspired to go Eric Easton again. There's an amount of copypasting. [6] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021Edit

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021Edit

 
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) 11:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
399   Orinoco Flow (talk) Add sources
294   Vandwelling (talk) Add sources
480   Trump family (talk) Add sources
13   Bellevue War (talk) Add sources
217   World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories (talk) Add sources
10   Timberline Trail (talk) Add sources
51   Zachlumia (talk) Cleanup
738   Police brutality (talk) Cleanup
1,096   Steele dossier (talk) Cleanup
101   Intersnack (talk) Expand
46   Speculation about Donald Trump's Cabinet (talk) Expand
132   History of the Jews in Japan (talk) Expand
59   The Holocaust in Bulgaria (talk) Unencyclopaedic
154   Evidence and documentation for the Holocaust (talk) Unencyclopaedic
29   Elizabeth Fitzalan, Duchess of Norfolk (talk) Unencyclopaedic
223   Business career of Donald Trump (talk) Merge
467   Assassination of Qasem Soleimani (talk) Merge
11   George Floyd protests in Pennsylvania (talk) Merge
32   Pablo Morillo (talk) Wikify
8   William Hankford (talk) Wikify
9   Malaysian Indian United Party (talk) Wikify
4   Albert Reuss (talk) Orphan
3   Zainon Ismail C.N. Afghani (talk) Orphan
1   Lewis Petit des Etans (talk) Orphan
12   United States – Russia mutual detargeting (talk) Stub
24   Hugh le Despenser (sheriff) (talk) Stub
8   Niles Essanay Silent Film Museum (talk) Stub
5   A Beast at Bay (talk) Stub
11   Parti Hizbul Muslimin Malaysia (talk) Stub
4   Malaysian Nationalist Party (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Io, Saturnalia!Edit

  Io, Saturnalia!
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:08, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Good to see you around againEdit

I considered commenting on the FAC, but I'm still a bit terrified of the place. Hope you're well. Vaticidalprophet 02:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Vaticidalprophet: And I thank you. As someone recently pointed out, my activity over the last year does rather look as though my parole keeps getting pulled. But thanks for waving that bone in my face and then taking it away again :p I'm surprised you'd be worried about reviewing at FAC; reviewers, I find, tend to find themselves the ones in the positions of power, usually, unless they make completely unreasonable demands (which in itself can be left to the co-ords to give due weight to...and ignore). FWIW, I'm surprised not to have seen any of your stuff listed there yet (yes, Prehistoric religion, I'm looking at you)—many of your articles are only a spit and polish away from potential FA status, and they're particularly original and eclectic topics. Think on it, perhaps.
Thanks for the hello, in any case  :) ——Serial 15:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
I did have an article listed there at one point; "it went well for the first two months and then didn't", might be the best way to put it. I suspect I'll come back with a smaller topic next time (medical articles have their own lore). I hope your parole doesn't get pulled again :) Vaticidalprophet 21:42, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Your e-mailEdit

I've blocked Check-wikifi-here. I would have done it earlier, but I had to get some technical information on how the Thanks button works once a user is blocked. I must say your report is one of the more unusual ones I've received. BTW, I have Thanks turned off in my Preferences. Personally, I think the idea is a bit silly.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Good result Bbb23, thanks. Yeah, the height of childishness...although one to which I've climbed occasionally if someone says something particularly sardonic and/or crushing. ——Serial 15:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Excuse me, that was not very civil.Edit

Why did you remove that tag, and give that warning? The talk page was moved elsewhere, and will be returned once this is deleted. I am trying to get a content dispute off my talk page, as I can't be bothered arbitrating over it any longer. if you have the technical ability to delete this page, please do so. Then the talk page will be restored. it is currently hanging out at User Talk:The Alternate Mako/Moved Mako001 (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@The Alternate Mako: That is completely bizarre, and out of process. Redirecting your talk page to the main page, really. If you don't want editors posting at your talk, just tell them per WP:NOBAN and if they do not honour your request except for required notices, file them at WP:ANI. And, like it or not, all you've now done is archive your talk page to a subpage which makes the new page you've created your talk page which as I have already said, are not usually deleted (WP:DELTALK) in order to keep the history.
All of this pallava could have been avoided if you had only asked someone (WP:TEAHOUSE, WP:HELPDESK are at Least two places where you will get a more polite reply than here) as to your next move. ——Serial 16:08, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
OK, it was a bit stupid. I admit that. The History is at the Moved subpage, not at the original page anyway though? Mako001 (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Goodbye. I won't bother you any longer, I'm just nonsense anyway. Mako001 (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Retainers and fee'd men of Richard Neville, 5th Earl of SalisburyEdit

Hmm. Late medieval and Tudor. Did you see that job opening in Groningen? The deadline was sometime last week. Are you on the market? Drmies (talk) 17:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

User:JTommyZ deleting my talk pageEdit

Hi, can you help me to check my talk page, User:JTommyZ is repeatedly deleting my own message on my own talk page. Thank you.--Jellylovers (talk) 17:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Holiday greetings (2021)Edit

SN 54129,
I sincerely hope your holiday season goes well this year especially with what we went through last year. I'm optimistic that 2022 will be a better year for all of us: both in real life and on Wikipedia. Wishing you the best from, Interstellarity (talk) 19:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

ApologyEdit

I would like to apologise for my behaviour earlier. I make no excuses for it. My reversion of your removal of the user talk CSD as vandalism was definitely against WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I also apologise for my rather rude and terse comments here following your warning, which was definitely justified. Mako001 (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!Edit

Hello, Serial Number 54129! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Merry ChristmasEdit

  Merry Christmas Serial Number 54129

Hi Serial Number 54129, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very happy and healthy New Year,
Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,
   –Davey2010Talk 17:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Share similar holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Davey2010/MerryChristmas}} to your friends' talk pages.

Merry ChristmasEdit

Disambiguation link notification for December 24Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Retainers and fee'd men of Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chancery.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 22Edit

The Signpost: 28 December 2021Edit

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, December 2021Edit

 
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) 13:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Notification of template substitutionEdit

  Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title:
  • Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow.
  • To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Retainers and fee'd men of Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Stapleton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
957   John of Gaunt (talk) Add sources
187   Satyaki (talk) Add sources
3,092   Wars of the Roses (talk) Add sources
33   Alceste De Ambris (talk) Add sources
1,083   Kurukshetra War (talk) Add sources
97   National Radical Camp (talk) Add sources
200   Shūmei Ōkawa (talk) Cleanup
36   Antisemitism in Spain (talk) Cleanup
987   Richard B. Spencer (talk) Cleanup
379   Hindu mythology (talk) Expand
32   Mocidade Portuguesa (talk) Expand
159   Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda (talk) Expand
24   Close order formation (talk) Unencyclopaedic
336   Criticism of democracy (talk) Unencyclopaedic
304   Hindu mythological wars (talk) Unencyclopaedic
250   Breechloader (talk) Merge
18   Lex loci rei sitae (talk) Merge
1,018   Vaporwave (talk) Merge
174   Vishvarupa (talk) Wikify
58   John Neville, 1st Marquess of Montagu (talk) Wikify
45   Antisemitism in Sweden (talk) Wikify
60   Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (talk) Orphan
7   The Verdict of Perugia (talk) Orphan
18   Balakrishna Guruji (talk) Orphan
30   Guddu Engineer (talk) Stub
17   Liechtenstein Homeland Service (talk) Stub
17   Bargain and sale deed (talk) Stub
18   Grant deed (talk) Stub
11   Cécil von Renthe-Fink (talk) Stub
13   Cloud on title (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

ANI queryEdit

Hi SN - hope you are well and a happy new year. Per your propsal at ANI, which was enforced, you stated in your opening line "perhaps 500 words? —which is the minimum accepted at WP:DYK so has a precedent". I've had a quick look at WP:DYK, and it doesn't mention 500 words anywhere, but 1,500 characters (WP:DYKCRIT, point 2). Do you have any objections on my restriction being changed to match the DYK standard that you initially suggested? I doubt some of my better articles(!) would pass the 500 word limit, such as this, this and this, but they'd pass the DYK requirements (on length). Happy to discuss.

Also @Spartaz: as the closer of that thread.

Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Hi Lugnuts, and I hope I'm not a complete hypocrite for wishing you and yours a happy new year too. Yes, please do get the change in restriction effected if you can—it was that DYK criterion I was intending, and I apologise for misleading you (and ANI for that matter!). Please let me know if I need to reaffirm this anywhere, any time. All the best! SN54129Review here please :) 18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Ahh, that's good to see. Easy to flip 500/1500! I've let Spartaz know about my post here, so hopefully they can update this to reflect this. No hypocrisy either - all is good. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
The term word was used twice in the proposal and rereading the discussion and noting the number of users advocating for a total ban on article creation, there was clearly no consensus that less than a total ban would fly unless substantial articles were produced. Regardless of the original meaning, the concept that gripped was a substantial article and multiple users endorsed 500 words. I don’t feel comfortable arbitrarily changing it to characters as that wasn’t the consensus of the discussion. If you want to shorten it, I think you need a fresh consensus and should open a thread at AN. Spartaz Humbug! 18:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!Edit

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Notification of administrators without toolsEdit

  Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title:
  • Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow.
  • To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Liverpool Women's Hospital bombingEdit

 On 13 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the taxi driver in the Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing was later commended for "incredible presence of mind and bravery"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing), 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) 00:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Hey, cool. But I basically just wrote the original article; many moons ago I realised that any article put forward for ITN would be taken over, not so much by gatekeepers, but by trivialistas and this hasn't proved me wrong. Still, collectivism is the name of the day!  :) SN54129 06:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Re: 2401:E180:8861:6F45:8188:7AE:398E:8D01Edit

Thanks. I've blocked the /64 range. Bishonen | tålk 08:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC).

No, thank you Bishonen. But you denied me my return to AIV—would have been my 51st in over eight years  :) SN54129 09:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Btw, the emphasis there was meant to be on "No, thank you Bishonen", while I've just noticed that it might read more like "No, thank you Bishonen" or even "No, thank you Bishonen". The vagaries of old mother tongue eh!  :) SN54129 19:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I couldn't say. It's not my mother tongue. See how I use italics to make sure of communicating — you've made me nervous now! Howsomever, I did read your reply the way you meant it. Bishonen | tålk 20:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC).

Llywelyn the ElderEdit

Hi, thanks for the alteration, you were right about a common name, I was a bit confused doing research into the naming of Llywelyn and suppose I left a flaw to catch up on. I would like to bring it to your attention that Elder Llywelyn is actually Llywelyn Fawr, and this name has been taken by Llywelyn the Great, who is not actually 'Fawr', and someone has potentially made a mistake in naming these articles. This assumption can be verified through references : Llywelyn Fawr - Pierce, Thomas Jones. "LLYWELYN FAWR and LLYWELYN FYCHAN (fl. early 13th century). lords of Merioneth". Dictionary of Welsh Biography. National Library of Wales. Llywelyn the Great - Stephen, Leslie, ed. (1888). "Llewelyn" . Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 16. London: Smith, Elder & Co. p. 831. , Lee, Sidney, ed. (1893). "Llywelyn ab Iorwerth" . Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 34. London: Smith, Elder & Co. pp. 7–13. , Pierce, Thomas Jones (1959). "LLYWELYN ap IORWERTH". Dictionary of Welsh Biography. National Library of Wales. Officially at no stage in these references or any others found online is Llywelyn the Great name Fawr, however in the very few sources avaialble for Llywlyn the Elder he is named Fawr, eg. Myth of Llywelyn Fawr. There's some resarch into the topic, I've also opened discussions on relevant talk pages to try and get a general consensus. Cltjames (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, my Welsh is insufficient to the task. But good luck with it! An Bhreatain Bheag abú!  :) SN54129 17:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

SPIEdit

Don't often see you down at SPI. Your spidey senses were right - there were more. Girth Summit (blether) 19:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks GS; 'tis a souless pit of the damned... must be why I keep going back  :) hope you're well! SN54129 17:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Probably what keeps me there too. Girth Summit (blether) 18:22, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

You've got mailEdit

 
Hello, Serial Number 54129. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Doug Weller talk 17:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: Indeed, I replied 15 minutes ago   SN54129 17:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, missed that until, of course, I posted the above. Doug Weller talk 21:13, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Wonderful!Edit

Could you run an eye over Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 18, 2022 for me? 985 characters used against a hard limit of 1,025. Ta. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Joseph ListerEdit

Hi Serial Number 54129, for some reason I can't email to you. I changed my email back to the oldest one I have some time ago, and it's not sending the confirmation email. Anyway, can you please forward the Joseph Lister article to scope_creep dot hotmail dot com. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 16:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Sounds bizarre! But   Sent as directed  :) SN54129 16:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
That was quick. If only sources research was like that. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 16:09, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I did not...Edit

...miss the reference to my oppose in your own rationale. Thanks for noticing the point I was raising. You took an extended break last year, and I've been editing sporadically for many months. It would be remiss of me not to drop by and say hello. Hope you're well, Mr rnddude (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, long time no virtual interaction. Glad you've come through all *that* crap, I hope not too scathed. Also yeah, there's no fury like a support scorned eh?! SN54129 18:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022Edit

 
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) 09:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022Edit

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
254   Livery (talk) Add sources
7,357   MrBeast (talk) Add sources
9   Anne Hastings, Countess of Pembroke (talk) Add sources
26   Yamaguchi Motomi (talk) Add sources
6   E. F. Jacob (talk) Add sources
344   Mathcore (talk) Add sources
50   Wales in the Middle Ages (talk) Cleanup
58   Saint Joseph University (talk) Cleanup
23   History of the English fiscal system (talk) Cleanup
282   Insulin (medication) (talk) Expand
12   Coke Studio (Pakistani season 4) (talk) Expand
31   First Fleet Re-enactment Voyage (talk) Expand
547   Manorialism (talk) Unencyclopaedic
173   T-X (talk) Unencyclopaedic
6,548   Triple J Hottest 100 (talk) Unencyclopaedic
434   Investiture Controversy (talk) Merge
23   Dapeng Jinchi Mingwang (talk) Merge
17   Heroic verse (talk) Merge
28   Susan Elan Jones (talk) Wikify
19   Llywelyn ap Dafydd (talk) Wikify
79   Catherine Walker (fashion designer) (talk) Wikify
9   William J. Rothwell (talk) Orphan
2   Walter Lougher (talk) Orphan
3   Alastair Minnis (talk) Orphan
7   Saint Gordianus (talk) Stub
6   Oiketerion (talk) Stub
8   Anthony Tuck (talk) Stub
9   Simon Walker (historian) (talk) Stub
8   Calchfynydd (talk) Stub
3   Listening for the Weather (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Le Livre de Seyntz MedicinesEdit

 On 1 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1354, the Duke of Lancaster compared his heart to the sea, a fox's hole, and a market-place? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Concordat of Worms, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Anselm and Colin Morris.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Epic Barnstar
I'm giving you this barnstar in recognition of your impressive expansion of Concordat of Worms. I'm glad to see someone share my interest in this very deserving topic. Thank you! Modussiccandi (talk) 21:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for this Modussiccandi, and also for kickstarting it in the first place. What I noticed was that the original merge (so-called) discussion comprised one editor's proposal—in which the topic's notability was actually admitted!—a "go ahead" from a <300 edit account, and no notifications to any relevant project pages whatsoever. Slam-dunk merge!
I don't want to tread on your toes, but there's a bit more I'd like to add (not much—just a few unused sources). I don't know about you, but I reckon there's an FA in there, eventually; thoughts? SN54129 12:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
PS: Congratulations on your upgrade, of course. SN54129 12:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Please feel free to add as much content as you want! And yes, I agree the topic has lots of potential. It might be at GA level already. Is there there such a thing as a joint GA nomination? I know it exists for FAC, but I'm not sure I've seen it for GA. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure...but I know a man who might. RX3, know ye of such a beast? SN54129 13:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Not Ritchie, but yes -- co-noms at GAN level are very common. I don't believe the bot can handle them well, though (the bot in general is rather on its last legs, although someone I've promised to ping every time it comes up until he's finished >:) is working on a replacement), so they tend to be informally done by adding a "[name] is co-nominator" to the |note= section of the GAN template. The unofficial status also means they don't get registered properly on WP:WBGAN, but that can be manually done if it's any sort of concern. Vaticidalprophet 13:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
@Vaticidalprophet: thanks for that. Sounds like you need a nightstick in your line of work  :) SN54129 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Ealdgyth is your go-to expert editor on mediaeval history. In terms of GA reviews, one person has to start it, and one person has to take responsibility for closing it. Beyond that, in theory, anything goes. For example, Talk:Elham Valley Railway/GA1 was largely undertaken by other people than the reviewer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Ritchie333; obvs, I'll do the Pepsi challenge with anyone on (late) medieval history—although not denying it might be a bit of a stretch call Worms late med—but it sounds like an "anything goes" GAN could be a goer! Cheers mate  :) SN54129 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Yeeees I really really need to get that bot going. As I have said before, the initial 80% of the work is done, it's now the latter 80%.... :) firefly ( t · c ) 14:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
As I mentioned them in a recent DYK, go to Queen's first album, track 5 - or side 2 track 1 if you're old school, about 3:20 in. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Modussiccandi: Hi again! Re. the joint GA nom, would you like to look over the article and see if you think its about ready? I wanted to leave it a few weeks back then, so that it becomes fresh again. What do you think? Hope all's well. SN54129 19:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me! I have to say that I don't feel a joint GA nomination can be justified at this point: you have contributed much more to this article than I have; all I did really is start it with the most important information. You should do the nomination on your own. Regarding the quality of the article, I think it's in good shape for the GA review: it's comprehensive, well sourced, stable, well illustrated etc. I'm glad you took this article to where it is now. Thanks and best,Modussiccandi (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Review for Sjafruddin PrawiranegaraEdit

Hi Serial, do you intend to continue your review on this FAC? I really hope so but please let me know either way. (t · c) buidhe 23:24, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Buidhe, I'll look in later. SN54129 12:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
It looks like Juxlos has responded to all your comments, do you feel that they were adequately addressed? (t · c) buidhe 08:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion: FAC 4 nomination of nonmetalEdit

Please accept this note as an invitation to participate in the discussion of this latest FAC nomination for the nonmetal article.

The context is that you were involved in the FAC 3 discussion for the article (which was not prompted) or you are an editor who made a recent edit to the nonmetal article.

Thank you. Sandbh (talk) 07:13, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of Wonderful ParliamentEdit

 Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Wonderful Parliament, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hog Farm (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
February songs
 
in friendship

thank you today for the article, introduced: "A return to FAC after a year away. Where does it go, etc. But here's a thing that was brought to GA by the thorough review of T. Riley, of this parish, and should be ready for the next stage. Another—if slightly later—medieval parliament—the King wanted money, both lords and commons refused until he got rid of a few scroungers, he refused, and all hell burst out. Hey, parliament was nearly invited for dinner and poisoned by the King, how's that for a healthy political relationship?"! - Sorry, I missed the FAC, meant to go ... -- Happy 2022! (I was on vacation.) The image was taken in memory, and I remember your tribute for SlimVirgin. "the land is bright and wide." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Lovely message, thanks Gerda! SN54129 11:37, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
thank you! - stand and sing Prayer for Ukraine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

RFC on splitting "Airlines and Destinations" out from articlesEdit

I believe it would have been beneficial to allow the discussion to run for the full 30 days; even if no additional editors comment, there is no harm in it. As such, I would ask that you revert your close. BilledMammal (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

  • Thanks for looking in, BilledMammal. What full 30 days is that, though? SN54129 15:21, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Standard length for an RFC; WP:ANRFC. There are exceptions, but I don't believe they can be applied to a no consensus close. BilledMammal (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
      • Well, per WP:RFC, 30 days is purely the time given by the bot to avoid a buildup of stale discussions cluttering the lists and wasting commentators' time; but indeed, editors are actively encouraged to not wait for that if, for instance, a discussion is stale. Or in this case, one which has not been replied to in nearly a fortnight could well be assumed to be so. Cheers, SN54129 15:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
        • Discussions "waste commenters time" when there is a clear consensus that is unlikely to change. In this case, additional commenters could result in a consensus being determined, meaning that the time already invested would not have been wasted. As such, I believe it is more appropriate to leave it open for the full thirty days. BilledMammal (talk) 15:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
          • That is not per RfC: An RfC should last until enough comment has been received that consensus is reached, or until it is apparent that it won't be.my emph Anyway, thanks for looking in again. Cheers, SN54129 15:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
            • Thank you for providing your position. In that case, I would like to ask how you weighted the various arguments when making your close. BilledMammal (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper NewsEdit

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

  • AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
  • The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

I only reviewed two, I'm afraid, but one of them is a slam-dunk paid editing job. SN54129 16:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Lakeview Academy - review of sourceEdit

Thank you for reviewing and removing the master's thesis source from Lakeview Academy's article as it did not meet Wikipedia's standards. I would also like to thank you for focusing on the question at hand (source review) and not get off track as others had done. You have restored my faith in the editing process.--Smileykaye (talk) 16:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewedEdit

Hello, Serial Number 54129

Thank you for creating Ahmad Al Mallawani.

User:Curb Safe Charmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hi. As is being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers#AFC_and_NPP_-_is_there_a_"rights_conflict"? at the moment, when an autopatrolled AfC reviewer accepts an article it is automatically market as patrolled. This article is a good example of one that should be marked as unreviewed - it needed quite a bit of cleanup, was uncategorised etc.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Curb Safe Charmer}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, they're distinct processes, and I'm not sure one project can dictate the duties of another. It's certainly an interesting discussion (although, in its current state, seems likely to tail off into oblivion before any kind of firm proposal is made, let alone consensus come to). SN54129 16:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Not a lot...Edit

...I can really do about that draft. It looks sus, for sure, but I don't know who it is. Girth Summit (blether) 12:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Me neither. Just for your notes, really. SN54129 13:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

TwinkleEdit

Did you create SPI/Arizeuo... manually? You know Twinkle can do that for you? I tried to raise one manually, years ago. Once bitten, twice shy... Girth Summit (blether) 18:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: Nooo—! Tried that myself once, and as you say, thus is the path to madness. The twinkle form froze and the only way of getting out of it was to refresh, which of course lost the info (a shame that editing windows save one's work but dialogue-style boxes (not of the tech term?) do not...). But it's probably my machine; I generally have a mortal number of windows and/or tabs open at any one time, so something often has to give  :) thanks for dealing with it so quickly though, especially before the AfD finishes. (By the way, I edit conflicted with there, also doing the sock strike; if you don't mind I kept the little template in, and debolded the !vote, so as not to mislead (?) the script.)SN54129 18:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
No worries about the AfD, you probably did a better job of it than me. Tabs - makes sense. Looking up right now, I count 46 tabs currently open. What am I doing to my poor processor... Girth Summit (blether) 18:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of Robert de UmfravilleEdit

 Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Robert de Umfraville, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!Edit

Not sure what was going on with my user and talkpage, but thanks for fixing it. How odd! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of History of Oxford for deletionEdit

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Banks Irk (talk) 18:34, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Queen angelfishEdit

Hello. I made all the changes. Could you make your final decision? LittleJerry (talk) 15:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Mild ReprimandEdit

  You've been mildly reprimanded by your passive aggressive aunt
ArbCom noticeboards are no place for humor, young man! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:53, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Good one, ScottishFinnishRadish. Kinda glad there are no fair use pics of Tattaglia though  ;) SN54129 14:13, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

"Over all civilisations hovers the shadow of admonishment"¹Edit

(admonished and restricted by arbcom, and never understood why) thank you for taking up the GA review of Prayer for Ukraine, the work of many. The German translation will go to the German Main page tomorrow (with the image taken by me in better times), so if you find things that need change fast a large audience will profit. DYK that we began expanding it, without knowing of the exposure on U.S. television? I have no access to the NYT report about that, - do you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Have you got a link to that report, Gerda? I'll have a look, if so. SN54129 10:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes, it's in the article, found on de, of all places. There are 2 refs for the same fact that all can see, just that NYT has a higher reputation. A friend uploaded the video for me which is not available in Germany (Europe?), so I can confirm that what the 2 refs describe is fact, especially the detail that until after the last announcement, you do not see that the candles spell Kyiv. - Suppressed by whom one wonders. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
ps: ... and I now I can see the article, which has a less good description, but refers to the two other occasions when the show began without a sketch: 9-11 and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Do you have any idea why the bot didn't add it to the list of GAs? - It's on the German MP today (pictured, by me) and tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
¹ With acknowledgements, possibly Unamuno, and almost certainly wrongly remembered. Right, on it now. SN54129 14:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
March songs
 
Not sure on what. Prayer for Ukraine is still not among the Music GA (where I'd expect it). - Listening to the charity concert mentioned here. I created the articles of the composer and the soprano. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Now, you can also listen on YouTube, and more music, the piece by Anna Korsun begins after about one hour, and the voices call "Freiheit!" (freedom, instead of "Freude", joy). Music every day, pictured in songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes Gerda, sorry I didn't reply then. I put it under WP:GA > Music > Songs > Pre-1900 songs, which seemed about right... did you have somewhere else in mind? Feel free to move it, if it should be e.g. under Classical compositions. Nice music, very emotive at this time. SN54129 17:47, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. It's not the typical song, which made me look in the wrong direction, sorry. Next wish: some notice on my talk, - I'm not eager for bot messages but this one is special. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Bach's No. 1 today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Sunday flowers and sounds, don't miss the extraordinary marriage of the beginnings of the theme of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1, and Prayer for Ukraine - here! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Robert de Umfraville scheduled for TFAEdit

This is to let you know that the Robert de Umfraville article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 10, 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 10, 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? 13:32, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

In appreciationEdit

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your tireless efforts to ensure that Battle of Poitiers is adequately referenced. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

QuestionEdit

When you said I and another were socks? Or was that a joke? I was confused because me and that user are unrelated at any just confused on why this user said that someone was drunk in General comments in that RFA. SoyokoAnis - talk 13:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I believe that Admin Deepfriedokra was suggesting that Admin Floquenbeam was drunk, on that occasion. SN54129 13:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
I’m assuming/hoping that DFO was jokingly suggesting I was drunk. — Floquenbeam (talk) 14:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
@Floquenbeam I sincerely hope you weren't drunk. Happy editing! SoyokoAnis - talk 16:21, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
I sincerely hope you are not drunk too. Stay sober, and happy editing! --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
---and/or disorderly 😜. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:23, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
We at Wikipedia do not have a sense of humor we're aware of. --MiB --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

JBchrch's mediation requestEdit

Hi Serial Number, how are you doing? Perhaps you I've seen the ping on my talk page; would you be interested in taking up JBchrch's mediation initiative? Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Modussiccandi, and hoping this finds you well also. If anything, I'd be more interested in taking them to AN/I for whatever form of WP:HARRASment failure to respect WP:NOBAN is. Do not be deceived into thinking there is a dispute that needs to be resolved; only one editor thinks so, and it's neither me, the editor my original comment referenced nor the other 57 editors who posted to that RfA. No-one cares. The RfA is over. Dead and buried (non obstante the candidate is wished all the best for their next, hopefully, more successful run). The crux of the matter is that, having raised it here—by way of telling me I should be "corrected" (!!!) for a "blunder" and then wondering, innocently, if they sense hostility (!!!)—I eventually inform them they need not stick around (actually more politely than that...), to which they insist on responding to. Obviously, this is removed, and I am placed in the invidious position of having to remind them to whom the last word—with a few exceptions—belongs on a user talk page. Then they come back again with another comment, at which point I invoke NOBAN. And, of course, they just have to ping me again from your talk. I don't know whether using other WP:ECHO facility to carry on talking about people who have made it clear they do not wish to respond is against the letter of the harassment policy; it is certainly against the spirit of it.
TL;DR: My suggestion would be, in this case, not to mistake politeness for civility, and not to allow yourself to be distracted by what is already becoming a timesink. Gently steer them towards your favourite noticeboard, where, no doubt "Let justice roll down like waters, etc.," will be the watchword. Have a good week, SN54129 23:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

BoldEdit

but nice. I was leaving if it for the clerk, thou I think the whole lot are heading for DS bloccks. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:25, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree. Was very naughty! Instead of clerks-l, I bring you seria-l. I'll get bollocked for it, but really, what a waste of time in the making. There aren't enough peanuts to go around 🤪 SN54129 01:45, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Is "Don't do that again" a bollocking? Cause that's my message, seriously delivered. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:58, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Indeed, Barkeep49, it's not something I have made or intend make a habit of; if I wanted to clerk arbcom or anyone else I would give up my soul for eternity apply through the usual channels (although, on a serious note, it is ironic that only a few days have passed since I reversed a non-clerk action and was critized for it; yes I know it's an arb sub-page, but it's rather a distinction without a difference). For the record, my reasons for that edit were serious, if IAR, and were based on the principle of retaining editors, if possible. See: take a look at the guy's page. He's on the ropes. Probably rightfully. Multiple admins pointing out his faults. Definitely rightfully. And then he goes and posts that. Now, I know that boomerangs aren't commonly despatched or delivered by arbs in official capacity, but that was asking for it. If he was lucky, yeah, it would have been removed; but as you p[pointed out yourself, there are editors who by necessity comment on every case. I felt it was as well to not allow it to get to the stage where anyone noticed. Apologies for the infraction of course, and message received. But if yon guy gets blocked, it should be because of what he's posting, not where; which is what I wanted to avoid, ASAP.
On a lighter note, re. bollockings, here's a cryptic crossword clue which seems pertinent  :) SN54129 23:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Very sorry.Edit

Hi, SN 54129, I'm very sorry about making such a mess out of your talk page and sub-pages, while trying to undo pagemove vandalism. Not sure how exactly the "move all subpages" box got checked--I definitely unchecked it at first, but there was an intermediate confirmation page where I guess the box became checked again--but I think I've gotten everything back to the way it was. Please feel free to pelt me with eggs and rotten tomatoes for every bad page move, and if you find anything out of place, let me know, so that I can fix it and then submit myself to further egg-and-tomato-based penance. Writ Keeper  20:08, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

partially in my defense, I've realized it was a bug in the software that misled me here, so I'm not totally crazy: T304008 Writ Keeper  20:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
@Writ Keeper: I appreciate you sorting it out in the end though. My apologies are probably due for having so many blooming sub-pages: I had no idea there were so many. Until I saw it take you a 100 edits to move them all anyway! Hopefully your phab ticket will iron out the anomaly though. Thanks for dealing with the original vandalism too, by the way. SN54129 12:46, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Notification of administrators without toolsEdit

  Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title:
  • Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow.
  • To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Three Separate Posts CommentEdit

What did you mean in thanking me for not making three separate posts about Draft:Vivek Verma? Were you referring to the fact that the article has been deleted three times? Or is there some other humor that I completely missed?

As to CheckUser and the editor who submitted the draft, as you know, anyone can submit a Sockpuppet investigation, and you also probably know that CheckUser data is only kept for three months. Anyway, I don't know if the submitter is VV, that is, a sockpuppet, or if the submitter is someone being paid by VV, and paid editing isn't dealt with by CU. I don't really care if the submitter is a duck or some other species of waterbird. (Either way, waterbirds can be plucked.) Robert McClenon (talk) 04:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

  • @Robert McClenon: ah, you noticed! The "three comments" comment was slantendicular reference to this of yours, a three-for-one! 🤪😉
    Obvs, I'm fully aware of CU policy, but in a case like this, the purpose is to shite up either VV or some PAID ring although to what degree of efficacy I don't know. Hope you're well, and have a good weekend! When it starts. SN54129 12:41, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Greg and RfAEdit

Greg has been consistently opposing RfA candidates with less than 1 FA or 2 GAs for years and years; see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bradv and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rosguill for relatively recent examples. There's no point debating his view as it's a waste of time and a drama sink. The simple answer is anyone who writes two or more GAs won't get opposed. I've never tested whether there's a difference between the GAs being Texas Recreational Road 8 and Texas Recreational Road 11, or Dracula and The Rolling Stones, though. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, from past experience he will usually a) say he is being badgered or harassed and b) demand that you explain your support rationale to his satisfaction before he will explain his oppose (which never happens). The fact that historically, there has not been the same obligation on supporters to explain their reasons for supporting (assumed to be "per nom" or a confirmation that the candidate is regarded as fully qualified)as there has been on opposers is not something he accepts. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Glad you liked it!Edit

I don't care how much people say, "Oh, that's just GregJack". Needs pointing out. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Attack on Kennedy RoadEdit

Hiya you took on Attack on Kennedy Road for a GA review on 8 March, I was wondering when you will get a chance to make comments? I'm not in a particular rush, just planning out next week. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 13:12, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mujinga: I apologise for my tardiness with your GAR, Mujinga. We're playing host to 'Rona here, at the moment, so my time hasn't always been my own. But I'm intending to start on Kennedy Road tomorrow. Don't worry if that doesn't suit you—I've kept you waiting long enough, so you should take as long as you want! All the best, SN54129 18:51, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
I hope everyone returns to good health soon! Please take your time with the review as well, whatever suits. Mujinga (talk) 09:22, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! By the way, how detailed would you like the review? Obviously, the CA criteria need to be fulfilled, but were you thinking of subsequently taking it further? SN54129 14:32, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

75.169.140.50 activityEdit

Thanks for reverting User:75.169.140.50's strange activity. I was laboriously reverting by hand; what mechanism did you use to implement such a swift resolution to the series and is it available to the likes of me? If not, as the activity by User:75.169.162.15 is evidently the same individual, could you please implement a similar mass rv please? Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:54, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Matt Lunker: Happy to help! This is the script, another fine thing from User:Writ Keeper. Be careful though: I use it extremely;y rarely, as if you had much more than, say, at a guess, a 5% error rate, it could rebound upon its user. "Misuse of rollback" is a thing; misuse of mass rollback, an even greater thing! SN54129 16:01, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for that and I should have said, I'm fully aware it wouldn't be the kind of thing to wield often or lightly, though I have come across similar editing patterns before that were extremely laborious to revert manually. I'm afraid I wouldn't know how to utilise the script and would be wary of doing so at the risk of causing mayhem. Is there an easy explanation of what to do with it? Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Well, I've asked  :) SN54129 19:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of Dispute between Darnhall and Vale Royal AbbeyEdit

 Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Dispute between Darnhall and Vale Royal Abbey, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hog Farm (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

BullyEdit

Informal threats sent to me saying “your gettin blocked” without rationale evidence or reasoning. Please explain! Phil.Mcrackin123 (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Just so. Luckily for you, no administrators watch this page, otherwise, they would realise your account has been blocked by Cullen328. As I suggested, you may wish to read WP:EVADE and WP:SOCK as to what happens next. SN54129 13:42, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

This account has just been created ? I’ve not been blocked, you just came out the blue and said “you gettin blocked” ! When in doubt don’t block ! Phil.Mcrackin123 (talk) 13:50, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Is true. Accounts belong to people, one at a time. Note I used the future participle. Infinitive, To Block. You have been blocked. You are blocked. You will be blocked. SN54129 13:58, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Except I have not been blocked, I am not blocked and with reason, because there is no reason as to why I should be blocked hence why I am not blocked 😂 Phil.Mcrackin123 (talk) 14:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!Edit

 
Hello, Serial Number 54129. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 14:18, 26 March 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Received and replied :) --Blablubbs (talk) 14:18, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 March 2022Edit

Four AwardEdit

  Four Award
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on 1937 tour of Germany by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. — Bilorv (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Congrats on your first Four Award! — Bilorv (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Very kind, Bilorv, thanks very much! Now, about the fifteen Triple Crowns I'm about to log...  :) SN54129 16:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
Ha, always happy to check and give out these awards—it pales in comparison to the amount of effort people put into earning them. — Bilorv (talk) 21:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
20   John de Vere, 7th Earl of Oxford (talk) Add sources
28   Thomas Walsingham (talk) Add sources
52   Istithmar World (talk) Add sources
26   Dubai Maritime City (talk) Add sources
4,037   Hundred Years' War (talk) Add sources
22   St. Peter Line (talk) Add sources
312   P&O Stena Line (talk) Cleanup
6   Allostock (talk) Cleanup
73   Economy of Somaliland (talk) Cleanup
94   Cheshire West and Chester (talk) Expand
14   MS A. Nepita (talk) Expand
84   Jebel Ali Free Zone (talk) Expand
1,152   Historical materialism (talk) Unencyclopaedic
18   Bruges Garter Book (talk) Unencyclopaedic
229   Richard de Clare, 2nd Earl of Pembroke (talk) Unencyclopaedic
1,316   2020 Belarusian presidential election (talk) Merge
225   Lockout (industry) (talk) Merge
6,934   Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk) Merge
34   Dunollie Castle (talk) Wikify
97   Hubert Gough (talk) Wikify
2,340   Maersk (talk) Wikify
36   Emirates Transport (talk) Orphan
2   Radio Free Europe/Free Europe Committee - Encrypted Telexes (talk) Orphan
9   Megh Singh (talk) Orphan
18   Kiss Network (talk) Stub
21   The Wizard and I (talk) Stub
62   Dubai Drydocks (talk) Stub
1   John of Hoo, Abbot of Vale Royal (talk) Stub
2   Richard of Evesham, Abbot of Vale Royal (talk) Stub
1   John Chaumpeneys, Abbot of Vale Royal (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
 
Five years!

- look and listen today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, March 2022Edit

 
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) 09:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Tropical Storms 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/WikiProject Tropical Storms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 13, 2022, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 08:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Canvassed template at Will Smith/Chris Rock AfDEdit

I'm curious as to why you added the {{canvassed}} template at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will Smith assault of Chris Rock at the Oscars. It seems more likely to me that the influx of new users commenting there is due to many people reading the page about an event that has been dominating the news for the past few days, seeing the giant red banner at the top of the article, and giving their two cents at the AfD. Is there evidence that the AfD was posted to some external website? Mlb96 (talk) 01:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid WP:OUTING would probably apply; so an abundance of caution, and all that! Hopefully it is as you say though. SN54129 10:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

PainEdit

 
@Ceoil: Yes, I like dinosaurs too :) but on our right, we see the results, ~20 years ago, of the increasing availability of CD blanks and cheap(ish) burning equipment and a folder full of bootlegs and bizarrities off soulseek. They say damp records the past...if that's so I've got the biggest library yet (actually did at the time; damp, that, is...)

I know I'm giving you shit on the FAC nom page, but here is an angry tune to take away the pain[7] n (as you are a Fall fan, there are a lot of similarities especially with he bass lines). Ceoil (talk) 04:52, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Bring on that shit!  :) Man I listened to that before even properly waking up. It certainly cleared the head! SN54129 12:11, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Its pretty heavy, which is what I like. Now you owe me one link. Ceoil (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
There is also this [8] Ceoil (talk) 05:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Speaking of the Fall (and well done at spotting ref)...buried here is talk of a collab. If interested, what period? For me it would be early....Slags, Slates and Tapes, or This Nation's Saving Grace. I only really go as far as Curious Orange, which is Steve Hanley's high point. Ps I have a fuck ton of books. Ceoil (talk) 22:30, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Pps, your more recent FA recalls[9] Yeah I like queen, shoot me. Ceoil (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Huh?Edit

Why are you editing other people's comments including this and this? Is this account compromised? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:41, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Please desist from making patronising commments, particularly when hatting sections. Remember, you should strive to model appropriate standards of courtesy and civility to other editors, per the community's expectations of your conduct.
I assume your question is a joke. SN54129 11:49, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
No, I was just worried. If you'd said, "hey did you really mean to yell 'play nice' at those two, couldn't you just hat it with no comment" on my talk page, I wouldn't have batted an eyelid. But to edit somebody else's comment with "ce" (which gives no indication of that actual issue) eight days after it was made (from which we could assume nobody is particularly bothered) seems so far out of whack that I can't believe it's something you'd do in good faith. FWIW I have hatted discussions using this phrase or similar (eg: "not now chaps") because I feel it calms the mood down. In the past, admins have dished out civility blocks instead, and (quite rightfully in my view) caught merry hell for it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:53, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Cobblers. Which demonstrates bad faith on my part. Even more bad faith would be to suggest that you included that first diff to try to indicate a pattern, although it's clear to everyone that it was an accidental rollback that was itself rolled back the next minute. And it was over 12 hours ago. In which time this supposedly compromised account carried out a ~2K-byte featured article review. "I'm a compromised account, please bring me massive articles to tie me up all morning!" :p SN54129 12:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Clearly, I've got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. I'll start again .... hello, SN54129, how are you? I was reading Murder of Deborah Linsley again recently, and it's made me think of how safer train travel appears to be these days. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:13, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

AprilEdit

 
April songs

memories: two people on DYK, both connected to Oper Frankfurt, and don't miss yesterday's video of Pink Floyd given to me! - I'm happy that the only infobox discussions are humourous, - could you perhaps tell our missed ones? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for Robert de Umfraville, introduced: "Apologies in advance to our Caledonian colleagues! This is a fellow—a 15th-century "hero" no less—who wanted "good rest and peace" in England while sending fire ships into Scotland—who may have plotted against Henry V but probably fought at Agincourt as well, who contemporaries saw as "an ideal knight" yet whose biggest claim to fame was that he raided Peebles on market day, burnt the place and nicked all their gear. A piece of work, one way or another."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

dance and singing, peace doves and icecream --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clarendon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Dispute between Darnhall and Vale Royal Abbey scheduled for TFAEdit

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 12 May 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 12, 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:35, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

You pretty much got my numberEdit

I did not resent your comment at our discussion in AN, truly. I was trying to say something visceral about how deep feeling for a way of thinking comes from experience, not necessarily from advocacy or refusal of progress. The words erupted from my heart, not my head; I did not intend to make a scene. It was considerate to rethink your comment many hours later. My friends are people who feel they can be candid and direct with me; I'd like to count you as one of my friends as of that datestamp (before that, I'm certain). BusterD (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of John MinsterworthEdit

 Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, John Minsterworth, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2022Edit

User talk:BritmaxEdit

Thanks for putting my talk page back in order, I was just working out how to do it myself. And "arse"? Yup, there it is in a very small nutshell. Britmax (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey Britmax, very sorry about that—I didn't know you were around! I thought you'd only edited once today and wouldn't want, you know, arseholery hanging about your page like a smell. You certainly seem to have picked up a...bizarre follower there! SN54129 19:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
The thanks for doing that were genuine, you saved me a job. You're right about the smell, and the bizarre followers. Still, all part of life's rich pageant, don'tcher know? Britmax (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Life-upturning timesEdit

Yes, and mostly for the better. Sometimes you've just gotta go see about a girl, and other things take the back seat for a while. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 20:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
664   2022 Pittsburgh shooting (talk) Add sources
3,483   Henry IV of England (talk) Add sources
7,398   Holodomor (talk) Add sources
1,557   Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick (talk) Add sources
612   Alex Rider (talk) Add sources
69   Henry Stafford (died 1471) (talk) Add sources
98   Silcoates School (talk) Cleanup
30   Richard Scrope (bishop) (talk) Cleanup
32   Wolmer's Schools (talk) Cleanup
656   Face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic (talk) Expand
168   Pete Sessions (talk) Expand
90   Southend West (UK Parliament constituency) (talk) Expand
27   Elizabeth Fitzalan, Duchess of Norfolk (talk) Unencyclopaedic
663   Henry FitzRoy, Duke of Richmond and Somerset (talk) Unencyclopaedic
27   Ransom of King John II of France (talk) Unencyclopaedic
55   Kohti Vapautta! (talk) Merge
9   The Quest for the Historical Muhammad (Ibn Warraq) (talk) Merge
165   Beheading in Islam (talk) Merge
271   Beer bottle (talk) Wikify
12   ANGEL Learning (talk) Wikify
10   Supplementary school (talk) Wikify
6   Subhash Shinde (talk) Orphan
3   Harald Kleinschmidt (talk) Orphan
2   Dawn-Marie Layne (talk) Orphan
3   The Good, the Bad, the Average and Unique (talk) Stub
120   Anna Firth (talk) Stub
95   Nigel Sweeney (talk) Stub
15   Michael de la Pole, 3rd Earl of Suffolk (talk) Stub
5   Liz Obi (talk) Stub
454   2022 Kunduz mosque bombing (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:50, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Pink Floyd has an RFCEdit

 

Pink Floyd has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. TSP (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Notification of administrators without toolsEdit

  Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title:
  • Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow.
  • To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)Hey, Tol - is your bot going to post this at SN's talk page every month until he runs for sysop? I mean, I'd definitely support if he did, but if he doesn't want to, I can imagine these notifications getting old after a while... Girth Summit (blether) 20:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Oh, shit - self-trout, I should have actually read the message properly. I thought you were hassling SN to run for admin, not suggesting people he might want to speak to. If he's signed up for this, then fair enough - apologies for the unnecessary snark. Girth Summit (blether) 20:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Girth Summit: No problem; glad you figured it out! I'm happy to see the system's getting some use. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
  Atsme 💬 📧 20:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

He's already run you know. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, April 2022Edit

 
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) 22:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Green Children of WoolpitEdit

Happy to see you're still keeping an eye on this article after all your hard work on it earlier. But can you explain your objection to my |ps=none amendments? Sorry, I don't understand Wiki jargon like WP:CITEVAR. Currently in the short References list, MOST of the entries DON'T have a full stop/period after them. In fact I see SandyGeorgia inserted a lot of |ps=none on 4 March with the summary 'citation consistency' to remove a couple of dozen occurrences of full stops. Nobody objected at the time, so I assumed it was the agreed format for this article. I've looked back at earlier versions eg 23 December 2021, and even then all the short refs have |ps=none. I had begun working through the entries using |ps=none to get rid of the remaining full stops - for consistency! I think many of the short refs that DON'T have the |ps=none tag were ones that came in with your own major update - some of these may be ones that SandyGeorgia later added the |ps=none tag to. John O'London (talk) 20:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi John O'London, just to clarify, all your edits to that page can be undone per policy, tragically! BTW, are you out o' London? Kilburn here :) SN54129 20:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Must admit I'd never dared edit a Featured Article before. But I've long had my eye on Green Children, worried about the content (out-of-date, unbalanced, inaccurate), and when I saw it was to be reviewed - and then saw your own very bold (and worthwhile) additions - I thought I'd try some of my own. Sorry, I've never understood Wiki's Featured Article policy, which doesn't actually seem to require an article to be 'accurate'. What I've been doing is largely checking back on the references and making sure they are accurate, and actually say what the original contributor says - and tidying up typos and inconsistencies. Perhaps we can regard that as part of the review process? I don't think the article has been moved to FARC yet? In the past when I've tried to raise a discussion on an article's talk page it's usually been met with no response! PS perhaps someone needs to consult the latest academic paper on the subject, just out:
James Plumtree, 'Placing the Green Children of Woolpit', in Strangers at the Gate! Multidisciplinary Explorations of Communities, Borders, and Othering in Medieval Western Europe, ed, Simon C. Thomson, Explorations in Medieval Culture 21 (Leiden: Brill, 2022), pp. 202-224
John O'London (talk) 20:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 May newsletterEdit

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

  1.   Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
  2.   AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
  3.   Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
  4.   Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
  5.   Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
  6.   Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
  7.   Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

dispute between darnhall and vale royal abbeyEdit

hello, Serial Number 54129! i had two questions regarding this article and the associated blurb.

  • was the judge that the villagers appealed to actually called either "chief justice" or "justiciar"? i had added to the blurb a link to the "justiciar" article to conform with the article body. however, that article states that the office (in england) was replaced under edward i and considers hugh despenser (d. 1265) to be the last justiciar. also, in the legacy section of the featured article, the "justice of Chester" (and not "Cheshire") was mentioned, so i am wondering if any of the sources may have conflated the two offices. (also, apparently, the senior justice of chester was called the "Chief Justice of Chester".) if the judge appealed to was actually the justice of chester, i was thinking of replacing "chief justice in Cheshire" in the blurb with "justice of Chester".
  • do you have a preference regarding the oxford comma? the blurb's third sentence omits it, but its fifth sentence uses it.

dying (talk) 23:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

  • @Dying: a) Excellent points re. justiciarships, clearly the RS occasionally confuse themselves; b) I generally avoid it but don't always spot it, so all things being equal am opposed to it but not religiously so.
    Thanks for asking! SN54129 13:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
    • sounds good. i have made a further edit to the blurb to conform with your comments. (i ended up removing "King's" so that i could capitalize "Justice" to conform with the rest of the sentence.) please feel free to revert anything you disagree with. thanks! dying (talk) 00:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
May songs
 
Thank you today for the article, introduced: "Pity the poor folk of 14th- and 15th-century Cheshire, with their Rachmanesque landlord in the figure of the villainous Abbot of Vale Royal condemning them to perpetual slavery for fifty years... and the rest! They protest their rights to the Abbot. He finds against them and imprisons and fines them. They protest their rights to the King. He finds against them and returns them to the Abbot. They are imprisoned and fined by the Abbot. They protest their rights to the justiciar. He finds against them and returns them to the Abbot. They are imprisoned and fined by the Abbot. They protest their rights to the King and Queen. The Queen supports them. The King finds against them and returns them to the Abbot. They are imprisoned and fined by the Abbot. You get the picture. Needless to say, there were increasing fatalities among the good brothers, culminating in the eventual murder of—you guessed it—the Abbot of Vale Royal." - I have an imaginary DYK set at the bottom of my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
today more pics, and should this woman have an article? - or only her sons? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:45, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

New message from BilCatEdit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cessna 310 § Cockpit image. BilCat (talk) 00:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

OengusEdit

There is a recognition process, I just haven't set up the paperwork yet ... Hog Farm Talk 17:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Dennis WatermanEdit

 On 9 May 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dennis Waterman, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ktin (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2022 (UTC)