Disambiguation link notifications edit

As these are generated by a bot, and I occasionally check or patrol the status of these, I moved them to a special archive: /Disambiguation link notifications. Wbm1058 (talk) 13:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My content creator's to-do list has items so old they've grown mold edit

...so I moved them to the /Content to-do items subpage. Someday maybe I'll get to these... Wbm1058 (talk) 03:00, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia "Merge" like WP:RM or WP:AFD edit

There are a lot of tumbleweeds rolling over at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers... the last edit added a {{backlog}} template. Now that I'm an administrator, I've decided to focus on clearing the Wikipedia:WikiProject History Merge and Category:Possible cut-and-paste moves backlogs first. If Proposed mergers were busier, I'd make this a higher priority.

Proposed Mergers edit

Since you run MergeBot and RMCDBot, I was wondering, if it were possible to create an auto generated list like WP:RM has but for WP:PM, that links to the centralized discussion area, and lists the topics to be merged (from/to/with) ? As the current MergeBot already generates arrows indicated from/to/with, it would seem a modification of template:requested move/dated/multi would do to handle such an automated listing based on a standardized talk section header.

-- (talk) 04:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See § Wikipedia "Merge" like WP:RM or WP:AFD above. Still on my back-burner. Wbm1058 (talk) 16:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding permalinks to block log entries for 3RR edit

Discussions are consolidated at /Adding permalinks to block log entries. – Wbm1058 (talk) 14:44, 2 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cross-namespace redirects edit

Deep gratitude edit

A big thank you for your help to clear Category:Cross-namespace redirects into its subcats. Really can't thank you enough! Joys! – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 03:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're welcome. One final push to clear most of the rest, and then it will be time to take a break. Wbm1058 (talk) 03:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Break? Whassat?!   – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 05:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Just a note that Category:Redirects to user namespace is significantly underpopulated. I was working off the list at User:Largoplazo/WP Redirects to further populate it, and worked my way through the A's. It's on my patrol list, so I may get to it eventually. Wbm1058 (talk) 02:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I finally used AWB to populate Category:Redirects to user namespace; it now has over 900 members. My technique was to Make list from source Special page: All Redirects in namespace Wikipedia: – the category hasn't yet been fully populated for other namespaces. I think all of the cross-namespace redirect categories can and should eventually be populated by bots... AWB may be able to do that with a sufficiently sophisticated configuration. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    See HERE for the regex find & replace used for this. I manually monitored this and had to skip some that were already rcat templated; also may have missed some. wbm1058 (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Or the database query method used to generate User:Largoplazo/WP Redirects may be a more efficient method than my AWB special page walk-through. I need to figure out how to do that myself. @Paine Ellsworth: FYI. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the ping, Wbm1058! That's pretty cool stuff you're doing – and waay outside my full comprehension. Please keep up the great work!  OUR Wikipedia (not "mine")! Paine  15:26, 26 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirects from namespace 1 to namespace 0 edit

SELECT concat( "*[[Talk:", p.page_title, "]] redirects to [[:", r.rd_title, "]]" )
FROM redirect r
INNER JOIN page p ON p.page_id = r.rd_from
WHERE p.page_namespace = 1
AND   r.rd_namespace = 0
ORDER by page_title;

Generate automatic summary /* blah */ when I manually add a section heading edit

T22307: Consolidated discussions are at my subpage /Generate automatic summary /* blah */ when I manually add a section heading when editing. Hopefully solutions are on the way soon. – wbm1058 (talk) 23:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Module documentation and test cases edit

There's really no point to having test cases for data modules, since there's no code to test. Also, doc pages that contain a #invoke of the module itself exist so that TemplateSandbox can be used to preview changes of the module. It's fine to add "real" documentation, but the #invoke must not be disabled or removed when doing so. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Module:Syrian Civil War map is in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded.
I edited Module:Syrian Civil War map/doc, and created Module:Syrian Civil War map/testcases.
Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War used to transclude {{Syrian Civil War detailed map}}, until substituted.
Template:Syrian Civil War detailed map loads Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map.
Template:Syrian Civil War map (created 21 February 2015‎) . . . Wbm1058 (talk) 03:02, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Module:Syrian Civil War map/testcases edit

 Module:Syrian Civil War map/testcases has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Accuracy edit

Your comments about the state of accuracy in the world on Jimbo's talk page are very interesting. I would like to explore this topic further. I'm particularly fond of your statement, "Society as a whole perhaps doesn't value accuracy as much as it should, and indeed Wikipedia editors should strive for a higher level of accuracy." Heck, I think some kind of variation on this should be our guiding principle. You've really nailed something here, and I think it's worth pursuing. One counterargument to pursuing accuracy, however, might attempt to appeal to the blind men and an elephant analogy. How would you respond to this? Viriditas (talk) 08:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The best we can do is report the truth as best as we know it, and be open-minded to new information that can give us a better vision of the truth. As more "parts of the elephant" become known to us, the more accurate our "truth" becomes. Wbm1058 (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Timeline of DOS operating systems edit

I remember that you once intended to take your Timeline of DOS operating systems article to featured status, but did not take time to familiarize yourself with the process. Looking at that article, the only thing that is not compliant with the featured list criteria is the lead section. Basically, the only thing required to promote it to FL status would be to expand the lead section by adding an introduction to DOS operating systems. After that, you are good to go and can nominate it according to the instructions on WP:FLC. (Since this article is a list, the Good Article process does not apply.) Good luck! sst 04:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see, apparently there is no "good list" equivalent to Good Article, so I can skip that step and go straight to becoming a member of Category:Featured lists, where around a couple dozen featured timelines can be found. Thanks! As I haven't made any significant updates to that since February, I suppose I'm due to get back to it and finish it off soon. Wbm1058 (talk) 11:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Race Against the Machine edit

Hi wbm, I see you mention this book on your user page. Does the main thesis have implications for how Wikipedia works, and if so, on what time scale? - Dank (push to talk) 15:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A main thesis of the book is that accelerating technology improvements will reduce employment, and over time this will effect more higher-skilled occupations. We see this already with jobs coming back to the US from China... because they are replacing people with bots. Yes, a few more jobs for Americans who are skilled at bot development, operations and maintenance. But way fewer jobs than were displaced in China. Of course, at Wikipedia there are relatively few editors that work for money. We already have very intelligent bots such as ClueBot NG that help tremendously with tasks such as vandalism reversion. That one has over 4 million edits now! Bots also help with spelling corrections. There could be further enhancements to these tasks that could reduce the need for new page patrollers and spelling correctors. Time scale is dependent on volunteer contributions, or possible funding by the Wikimedia Foundation. wbm1058 (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. The future seems to be coming at us pretty fast. I try to stay informed-but-neutral. - Dank (push to talk) 17:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Templates for deletion for deletion edit

Implement multiple parameters to prefix: operator on fulltext searches edit

{{Search deletion discussions}} and {{Search prefixes}} and all that authors other stuff should probably be deleted after emailing him. His {{Create parameter string}} is used but not well.

For now, I'd fix wp: Deletion process § Search all deletion discussions with a search link for each of the fullpagenames in wp:Deletion process § Step-by-step instructions (all discussion types).

I would. And I'd be glad for an invite to help you with any queries or discussions on this matter. — Cpiral§Cpiral 05:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 61 § is there a way to search several sections with one search? – June 10–17, 2009
And User talk:Rainman § modification to search several Wikipedian sections at one time – June 15–17, 2009
And User talk:Stmrlbs/Archive/001 § multiple prefixes – June 15–17, 2009
June 17, 2009 Help:Searching documentation update, alas documentation of this multiple-prefixes-separated-by-pipes feature was removed on October 11, 2009 when this was rewritten, to try to improve usability
"To search multiple sections of Wikipedia with different prefixes, enter the different prefixes with a pipe delimiter."
"This should be especially useful for archive searching in concert with inputbox or searchbox."
@Cpiral: so clearly prefix did at least briefly take pipes. Unfortunately, the volunteer developer of that, Rainman, isn't active any more either, and I haven't been able to locate his code changes that implemented that feature. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the history lesson. Interesting. Maybe useful.
Anyway, for now we have wp:deletion process#Search all deletion discussions. Hope that helps. — Cpiral§Cpiral 07:59, 30 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Task to switch between new and old interface of "search for contributions" edit

Hello. For notification, the task to switch between new and old interface of user contributions page was rejected. Izno suggested personal gadget/script or something. I would prefer that the switch between old and new be proposed at WP:village pump (proposals). Thoughts? --George Ho (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

George, I wouldn't know how to write a script to change the interface, and I'm not keen on switching between two less-than-ideal interfaces. There should only need be one, fully-functional interface that's adequate for efficiently handling all use cases. What we have now is not such an interface, and we should focus on getting that one improved. I'm frustrated with the current means of interacting with the developers – there is a confusing array of different "phabricators" on this, I'm not keen on the phabricator editing interface, and I don't know whether I should add to an existing phab or start a new one, so I prefer using Village Pump where I can use Wikitext. As I need to use this interface to perform specific tasks, I may report issues I have with the current interface that make it more difficult to get the job done. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmm... How about Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab), where we can discuss the user contributions interface? --George Ho (talk) 16:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe. But, per "defines a solution rather than a problem" I don't know if solutions developed in the idea lab would be welcomed by the developers. I'm not happy with the "handcuffs" placed on us with regard to modes of interaction with developers. Maybe if I just present problems to WP:VPT, and let them either tell me how to achieve my desired result, or make changes to the interface that allow me to achieve my desired result. wbm1058 (talk) 16:15, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No offense, but IMO I don't think WP:VPT is a place for general feedback on any software or something. VPT is used for technical difficulties, bugs, glitches, and other tech issues that need immediate attention (not sure whether I phrased it correctly). One complaint describing none of these, and they'll either advise you to write a personal script/gadget or write one for you as they did before. But you're welcome to choose any appropriate venue. I still think the "idea lab" is best bet. --George Ho (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the top of WP:VPT there is a notice "Bug reports and feature requests should be made in Phabricator" but that's just redirecting us back to an interface I find less than ideal. I don't understand why they have such an aversion to Wikitext. I think that's easiest as all active editors are intimately familiar with it. Almost everything the developers in general try to pawn off as "easier" to use, I find to be more of a pain. But venue should be secondary to getting the issues raised, so if you want to start an idea lab thread, feel free. wbm1058 (talk) 16:45, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On second thought, I just realized that you can go to meta:Tech and then post your concerns there. The developers changed the interface all over the wikis. --George Ho (talk) 17:04, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see, meta:Tech#"Search for contributions" date range. So, let's let the latest bug fix settle in before we try using it again. That page seems like a good place for reporting issues with the Special:Contributions interface, as I hate to go to the trouble to submit a new bug report, only to find that one's already been submitted. wbm1058 (talk) 17:25, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The major bug is fixed. George Ho (talk) 06:52, 5 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great! I complained about the new widget date-picking interface after futzing with it and not figuring out how to efficiently make it work to actually select a specific date range. I assumed that it was working as designed, and that I was just too dense to figure out the secret for making it work. So after this bug fix, which I see involves other developers than those designing the widgets (go figure, I don't exactly understand the bug report), I'm happy to report that the widget now works for me with minimal fuss. There's more than one way to skin this cat, so while this might not be my preferred way, I'm not going to fuss about it much if it works. wbm1058 (talk) 13:42, 15 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 There is still an open task to consolidate the "date pickers".

 @George Ho: FYI. After letting this settle in for several months, I'm still not satisfied with its behavior. I've entered a new Phabricator task. wbm1058 (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Awwww.... edit

...please don't give up on us, yet. 😞 I know you're busy, and I'm not expecting you to devote a whole lot of time to this project, but your input is highly beneficial and I was hoping you would keep helping us work through some of the kinks when you can, especially regarding admin factors we know little to nothing about. What we're hoping to accomplish will focus primarily on clarification and consistency in our WP:Blocking policy with the ultimate goal being editor retention. Atsme📞📧 02:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've had some ideas about this on my back burner. Posting some relevant links here. wbm1058 (talk) 01:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ha!! I forgot all about this, Wbm1058! Atsme Talk 📧 01:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Atsme: It's still on my to-do list, as is replying to your email! Eventually... I keep a lot of burners going on my giant stove, alas some I have to keep down low for a long time. But I let other ppl cook my Thanksgiving dinner ;) wbm1058 (talk) 01:27, 6 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Somewhat related to this, i.e. the area of community health and dealing with behavioral issues, is Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log. Something I haven't really paid much attention to.
There's a helpful search box at the top of that page. "Enter a username into this box to check if they have been sanctioned." e.g. Hmm. DUE, BALANCE, NPOV, RS talk. Followup. More followup. I'll try to help resolve this if I can. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh my. wbm1058 (talk) 14:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

English Heritage lists breaking transclusion limits edit

Scheduled monuments in Mendip edit

Thanks for your fixes on Scheduled monuments in Mendip. I don't quite understand the code of what you are doing but if it is about the number of reference templates breaking the maximum size, would your fix work on Grade II* listed buildings in South Somerset where the last few references don't display - possibly for the same reason?— Rod talk 08:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Rod, yes, similar issues there, though InternetArchiveBot hasn't visited that page recently. There is a discussion about the solution to this at User talk:cyberpower678/Archive 60#English Heritage website changed the URL syntax for accessing its site database. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:52, 29 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
New problem reported at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Historic sites#Recent template changes broke a few list-type articles, recommend splitting them to fix the problemwbm1058 (talk) 17:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Your edit at Template:English Heritage listed building row edit

In regards to the edit you made at Special:Diff/974562485, the fact that the module output is transcluded by Template:English Heritage listed building row not only means that invoking the module directly matters, it actually means that it matters twice as much! Per Wikipedia:Template_limits#Nested_transclusions, any bytes produced by the module will be counted once if {{#invoke:delink|delink}} is invoked directly, they will be counted twice if {{delink}} is used to call {{#invoke:delink|delink}}, and they will be counted four times if {{English Heritage listed building row}} calls {{delink}} which calls {{#invoke:delink|delink}}. --Ahecht (TALK
) 00:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bill of rights page edit

Thank you for the changes you made to the hatnote on the Bill of rights article. I think it looks perfect! Rockstonetalk to me! 18:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  How about a Wikipedia Editors' Bill of Rights? wbm1058 (talk) 19:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
With the current situation with Fram, that sounds like a great idea.  . Rockstonetalk to me! 19:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mass removal of cleanup tags edit

Articles needing cleanup
July 201011
August 201011
September 201018
October 201027
November 201059
December 201086
January 201142
February 201193
March 201179
April 2011180
May 2011149
June 2011112
July 2011108
August 2011107
September 2011104
October 2011123
November 2011112
December 2011135
January 2012142
February 201290
March 2012120
April 201210
May 201249
June 201251
July 201253
August 201254
September 201234
October 201273
November 201285
December 201263
January 201365
February 201364
March 201334
April 201373
May 201351
June 201369
July 201359
August 201361
September 201381
October 201351
November 201329
December 2013102
January 201447
February 201446
March 201442
April 201451
May 201469
June 201465
July 201478
August 201468
September 201422
October 201441
November 2014100
December 201489
January 201560
February 201586
March 201565
April 201560
May 201568
June 201539
July 201561
August 201584
September 201561
October 2015116
November 201581
December 201572
January 201663
February 201671
March 201680
April 201658
May 201666
June 201664
July 201695
August 201677
September 201666
October 201676
November 201673
December 201685
January 201775
February 201788
March 2017107
April 201796
May 201775
June 201779
July 201792
August 201787
September 2017104
October 201791
November 201778
December 201786
January 2018155
February 201898
March 2018105
April 2018110
May 2018111
June 2018136
July 201883
August 2018114
September 2018132
October 2018110
November 201881
December 2018108
January 2019144
February 2019115
March 2019127
April 2019112
May 2019132
June 2019113
July 2019107
August 2019105
September 2019101
October 201997
November 2019113
December 2019117
January 2020134
February 2020100
March 2020120
April 2020190
May 2020142
June 2020138
July 2020136
August 2020187
September 2020119
October 2020161
November 2020103
December 2020126
January 2021108
February 2021166
March 2021169
April 2021157
May 2021150
June 2021144
July 2021160
August 2021144
September 2021111
October 2021213
November 2021129
December 2021120
January 2022173
February 2022118
March 2022142
April 2022139
May 2022146
June 2022724
July 2022187
August 202212,015
September 20226,722
October 2022196
November 2022133
December 2022239
January 2023181
February 2023154
March 2023139
April 2023241
May 2023175
June 2023162
July 2023187
August 2023213
September 2023254
October 2023225
November 2023238
December 2023305
January 2024272
February 2024242
March 202449
Undated articles0

Hello. I noticed that you recently removed a large number of {{cleanup}} tags dating back over 10 years. As you noted, these tags were indeed stale, and didn't have reasons listed, but I would say that in most of those cases, the need for cleanup was completely obvious from a cursory glance at the rest of the article. As the blurb for the "Articles needing cleanup" category states: "If you're sure the article has been cleaned up, addressing any obvious flaws as well as any specific problems mentioned on the talk page, feel free to remove the tag. There's not much harm in leaving it on if you aren't certain what to do; the tag will alert someone else to come by later and check up on the article." I spend most of my time on wiki working through these articles trying to sort them out, and without those tags, the article are now "on the loose" in the wikipedia with no warning for readers of their poor quality or way of editors finding them to address their problems. Please bear in mind before deleting any more that editors do actually use these tags and categories. Cheers. Jdcooper (talk) 23:33, 24 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jdcooper, OK. Here are my relevant 34 edits. I removed a total of 31 {{cleanup}} tags. I did notice that several had been proposed for deletion, and I suppose by removing the tags I'm keeping them from someone else noticing them and putting a PROD tag on the top. Not sure why anyone would want to spend much time to cleanup up a page that was proposed for deletion. I did make a few obvious fixes, but feel free to review them, and if you restore the template and add a reason to it, please also update the date to the current month, which will clear them out of the back end of the queue. I also noticed that in the talk archives the possibility of using a bot to remove these tags had been discussed. But, I'll move on for now to resume working on my more usual tasks, and maybe check back in on this later. – wbm1058 (talk) 00:19, 25 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, but the problem is articles like Dick Brooks (magician) where the creator has now removed the PROD tag and a horrible mess of an article is left untagged. I've gone through and added more specific tags to the ones with obvious problems, but I feel like dumping them in the July 2019 cohort (though that is what I've done) will just leave them unloved for even longer. The reason I poke about in this area of the encyclopaedia is specifically to find the long-term worst articles. But there are always plenty more repositories of such articles, obviously! Have a nice day. Jdcooper (talk) 22:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This backlog still seems to be growing faster than it's getting cleared. Category:Articles needing cleanup from December 2008, which is where I was working in July, was deleted in October 2019, and I just coincidentally found that Category:Articles needing cleanup from January 2009 was ready for deletion. So this has been getting cleared at a rate substantially slower than one per month. On to February 2009. wbm1058 (talk) 05:20, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of shipwrecks in April 1917 edit

Re your edits to remove the list of shipwrecks in April 1917 from the template limit exceeded category, probably the easiest way is by replacing {{flagcountry|UKGBI|civil}} with [[File:Civil Ensign of the United Kingdom.svg|22px]] [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland|United Kingdom]]. This produces the same result visually. The UK civil flag is likely to be the most used in any shipwreck list at least until the 1950s, so changing the flag removes a large number of templates and guards against the list subsequently falling into the category again. AFAIK, no other shipwreck lists fall into the template limit exceeded category, but if you do come across any others, give me a shout and I'll fix the issue. Mjroots (talk) 07:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mjroots: I don't know about that being the "easiest way". To unpack {{flagcountry}} I needed to make a series of three substitutions, which left behind a bunch of programming logic (#if and #ifeq statements) transcluded into the article (see my recent edits to List of shipwrecks in April 1917). It's not immediately clear whether making your suggested edit loses any of that embedded functionality, though it seems not. Whereas by simply bypassing a template shell that transcludes the output of a Lua module, I'm guaranteed not to lose any embedded functionality. I think the "best" solution would be to rewrite at least some of the template logic into a Lua module, and someday I'll get around to becoming more proficient with Lua so I can more readily do that.
But there's more than one way to get the job done. Feel free to revert my edits and solve the issue another way, if you feel that's better. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:19, 29 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree that there's often more than one way to get the job done. As I understand it, there is a finite number of templates that can be used in an article. Not sure of the number but being computer code it's probably a power of 2 (1,024, 2,048, 4,096 etc). Changing the flags in the way I described does remover a larg number of templates from the article. I'll not revert your changes as they had the desired effect, but I feel that the article is probably still very near the template limit. Should it fall into the category again, then we'll change the flags. Mjroots (talk) 13:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mjroots: FYI. There are several technical limits. The limit this article hit was the Post-expand include size. Currently the article includes (transcludes) 2,007,669 bytes, and the limit is 2,097,152 bytes. So yes, it is still close to the limit. You can see this in Show preview, under "Parser profiling data" (help) – you may need to click on that if it isn't showing by default. wbm1058 (talk) 14:12, 29 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now 2,044,834 of 2,097,152 bytes – wbm1058 (talk) 05:42, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The system is timing out with an error message when I try to see the diff of my edit, but I see that {{coord}} was transcluded 242 times; I believe I replaced those, e.g. {{coord|48|20|N|6|00|W}} with {{#invoke:Coordinates|coord|48|20|N|6|00|W}}. There is no difference in output: 48°20′N 6°00′W / 48.333°N 6.000°W / 48.333; -6.000 vs. 48°20′N 6°00′W / 48.333°N 6.000°W / 48.333; -6.000wbm1058 (talk) 14:46, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And now it appears that four more shipwecks have been added to the list, transcluding {{coord}} rather than directly invoking the module. wbm1058 (talk) 14:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Redirects from incorrect disambiguation edit

Note to myself. On my back burner is to followup on the purpose for Category:Redirects from incorrect disambiguation. See the edit history of Assassin (movie). Also User talk:Anomie/linkclassifier#Some suggestions. Hopefully will follow up on this a few moons from now, after working through several higher-priority tasks. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LinkClassifier edit

I saw your complaints at User talk:IJBall#Please fix these links immediately, and I wanted to let you know that this should work for you:

mw.hook( 'LinkClassifier' ).add( function ( linkClassifier ) {
    // Delete the "incorrect-title" code
    delete linkClassifier.cats['incorrect-title'];

    // Add the "linked-misspellings" and "linked-miscapitalisations" codes, with appropriate categories.
    linkClassifier.cats['linked-misspellings'] = [
        'Category:Redirects from misspellings'
    linkClassifier.cats['linked-miscapitalisations'] = [
        'Category:Redirects from miscapitalisations'
} );
importScript('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js]]

Anomie 00:14, 3 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe one day in P.R. edit

  Biked in 50 states!

Hoping one day you make it to P.R. - Jose Valiente (radio MC) and bike shop owner's son- can hook you up- just need a translator. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of GANs per nominator edit

Hi Wbm1058, I hope you are well. About this topic, did we get any further with this? I feel like it was a bit forgotten and archived, but I'd be very interested in continuing to find a full list of GANs by nominators. I'd love to help get something like this off the ground (I should be a little bit closer to the top 40 now, I've promoted another 30 or so since the discussion)! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry Lee I lost momentum on this and let it drift to my back burners. I'll keep it on my to-do list and try to get back to it. Juggling a lot of balls, as usual, and as you can see from the sections above, new requests for my time keep coming in, making it harder to stay focused on more time-intensive projects. – wbm1058 (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not an issue. I thought about it earlier, and I didn't know if anyone was actively looking at it or not. I've also been busy, so haven't had much time for much! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GANs edit

Hi Wbm1058, you did some great work in listing GAs per user a while back. I wondered if you'd consider doing it again and/or doing it periodically? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:08, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lee Vilenski and The Rambling Man: – I'm running a new report now, using the last version of my PHP program from 26 July 2020. I started one last night, and it almost completed but died because the drive-by editor Sai5839448 put Category:Lists of good articles back into Category:Good articles, after I had previously removed it. A category is neither an article nor a Good Article. I removed the category and restarted my program from the beginning, and hopefully it will generate a report several hours from now. It will still have the inaccuracies I have yet to get around to addressing, but perhaps is "good enough" for your purposes. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:32, 17 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed, thank you. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 17:39, 17 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great work - it's certainly a start, and good for rough amounts. :) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:44, 17 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This is some great work! I was wondering why this credits me with 88, but I credit myself with 96, but then I realised it isn't including articles that went through GA and later became FAs. This seems like a sensible conclusion, but worth mentioning.
For me, the next point would be how we go from here, to a full list similar to user:GA bot/Stats lists reviews done by user. This would be with the view to have a bot maintain a full list similar to how Legobot does now. At least with a full list, we can identify the GAs with issue nominators, and come to a conclusion as to whom should be credited; and get a pseudo-definative list.
Once again though, fantastic work, I'm very happy to see this. I'll try my best to move up the order a bit! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 09:09, 19 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of Wikipedians by good article nominations edit

Hi! Remember our conversation at Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations/Archive_24#List of Wikipedians by number of Good articles, as of 17 November 2020? I was wondering if any follow-up has happened after that? I see Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by good article nominations is still a red link. I recently wrote some code (using the Wikimedia Eventstreams API) to easily keep such lists up-to-date (by listening to additions/removals of {{good article}} from articles, so that there is no need to regenerate the whole thing on every run). So if you don't mind should I file a bot request to turn that link blue? Just wanted to make sure I haven't missed any further developments on this. – SD0001 (talk) 15:44, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SD0001: no, I haven't done any more work on this since November. Go ahead and file your bot request. Maybe some time I'll try to improve my code to make the look-ups more efficient as you suggested so I can double-check your results. But I still have more tasks on my to-do list than time to do them all. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:SDZeroBot, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SDZeroBot 11. Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by good article nominations looks nice! wbm1058 (talk) 15:50, 11 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template talk:Football squad player edit

Hi, in your opinion what's missing for the merge to go on? Is there anything that should be dealt with? Nehme1499 23:59, 23 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I took some time off from this task to wait for any possible response to my work so far, and to catch up on my usual work queues. I'm back on this now. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry to revert you on the template, but I've started a discussion on the talk page on what form of country name to use. Thanks for all the work you've been doing on this though. Cheers, Number 57 22:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template Parameters : Football squad player edit

I noticed your edit to User:Bamyers99/TemplateParametersTool. Wanted to let you know that the March parameter report is ready. There is a new link for the pos parameter called errors which takes you to the error list. --Bamyers99 (talk) 01:32, 3 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Bamyers99, your tool is really nice. I have a question: why isn't Cheng Fung on that list? |pos=DF,MF isn't one of the four valid valures for {{{pos}}}. wbm1058 (talk) 23:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That page plus others were not displayed because of a bug. The bug has been fixed. --Bamyers99 (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! What a speedy fix it was too! You're the best! wbm1058 (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flagicon edit

@Johnuniq: re: "the ultimate problem appears to be flagicon" – there have been multiple attempts to address this issue:

  • Template talk:Flagicon/Archive 1#Template:FlagiconLua started (5 June 2013) – now named Template:Flags
    • "This template provides a clickable icon flag with options to define the size, the link and the label. Its usage is especially recommended in articles with many icon flags. This project is under development." – Development seems to have stalled soon after it started.
  • Flagg – Is there a list of pages that are approaching the WP:PEIS limit that haven't converted over to the new module-based {{flagg}} system?

My work on this is on hold pending teaching myself more Lua and maybe JavaScript as well. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How can I help with - Should the template display the table in one or two columns? edit

Python, Flask, CSS developer here. Unemployed and would love to get my hands dirty and gain some more experience. Would like to improve on the above, and learn more about JS and SQL. I also have an art background, so maybe illustration too. Tamccullough (talk) 14:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tamccullough: I see you were referred to me from the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Regarding the SPLIT table used in the SQUAD sections of the Club manual of style. Our expertise doesn't overlap too much. I don't know any of Python, Flask, CSS, JS and SQL particularly well. I know Wikipedia template coding and PHP. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See #Template talk:Football squad player above. wbm1058 (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
wbm1058 I'll look into this then - Wikipedia template coding - and see if I can be of any use at some point. Cheers! Tamccullough (talk) 16:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Log for Articles for creation? edit

...on potential improvements for WikiProject Articles for creation: What is missed? That's probably better answered by more-experienced AfCers, but one thing as an outsider admin I'd very much like is improved data on how drafts flow around the system. A log of all AfC submissions & reviews (accepts & declines); a log of individual reviewers' records (similar to the CSD log of NPPers); more clarity on the project's stats. ETA: I've just found Template:AFC statistics but it needs a proper historical log. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

As another "outsider admin", I'm interested in this too, and have the skills needed to create such a log. Adding this to my potential to-do list. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomination of Wikimedia movement for deletion edit


A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wikimedia movement, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikimedia movement until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:05, 21 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merchandise giveaway nomination edit

A token of thanks

Hi Wbm1058! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How we will see unregistered users edit


You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Cambridge Christian School edit

thanks on this note. I wasn't sure if it was the script or my error. Let me know if I should revert my manual tag of the new page. Happy to, I just wasn't sure how to best record the AfD where future editors would look. Star Mississippi 15:20, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Star Mississippi: Your manual placement of the template on the new page is what the script should have automatically done for you. Evad37 opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:XFDcloser#Old afd templates placed on talk pages of redirects. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, and thanks for the pointer to the discussion. Will follow it as I seem to be more active in closing AfDs and wasn't aware of that page. Star Mississippi 16:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Status update. Special:Contributions/Evad37. Most recent edit 22 January 2022. Just ten days after opening RFC: Priorities for XFDcloser development in 2022. Any interface editors willing to help maintain this gadget? Sigh. I'd need to get around to taking a crash course in JavaScript, something I've had on my back-back-back-burner for a long time. Doing that would mean dropping other balls I carry, at least for a while. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GA Reassessment edit

Staffordshire Bull Terrier has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:01, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Merge bot edit

Hi Wbm1058, have you completed task 2 and no longer require +sysop to be set on this bot? — xaosflux Talk 09:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My progress is documented at User talk:Merge bot/Task 2. While my most recent run was on 9 April 2021, this task is still on my to-do list and I expect to eventually get back to it. – wbm1058 (talk) 10:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New pages patrol and the Curation Toolbar edit

Looking at NPP edit

I'm leaving two links here so that when you get time, you can look at possibly developing a BOT or a program that can provide the tools we need. WMF's development team created our curation tool but it took a long time. We are justifiably concerned about the backlog of unreviewed articles, and will probably never catch-up without some form of automation: NPP Feed, and ability to filter reviewed/unreviewed totals by category, date, etc. Atsme 💬 📧 13:31, 22 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Naming languages edit

Hi. Thanks for your comment on Mammad Huseyn - it's an interesting quirk of the Page Curation Toolbar that it has a 'translate from other language tag' option but doesn't have a drop-down to specify the language. I'll go back and add it to pages in future. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:04, 24 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for explaining how that happened. See Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements#Expand language. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
JJMC89 bot added me to the Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter list @ 00:14, 2 September 2023.
Apparently this 16:14, 1 September 2023 edit of mine triggered that bot? – wbm1058 (talk) 21:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And now I'm off that list, at least until the next time I edit one of the project's pages. – wbm1058 (talk) 21:44, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've moved the messages received during my brief subscription to /New pages patrol newsletter. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Monitored issues edit

Cursor edit

This linked to the redirect. It should happen less often because of some changes ~two years ago, but my experience is that there is a chance of it linking to whatever the cursor is pointing at when I hit Return, rather than the first item in the list, which is usually what I want. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Typo backlog edit

I'm using WP:JCW/TYPO to find those. I don't usually bother flagging the correct forms since the typo forms are so seldom used. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here's a list of WP AJ-tagged typos/incorrect names/mispellings. Some may be incorrectly tagged, like needing a {{R from database entry}} or {{R from miscaps}} instead. Many/most are from missing/stray dots, or wrong plurals, or missing/stray commas. Others from bad abbreviations. Some are ambiguous too, like J. Phys could be for either J Phys and J. Phys.

Extended content
  2. ADVANCE for NPs & PAs
  3. AMBIO
  4. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment
  5. Academia analitica
  6. Academie des Sciences Paris Comptes Rendus
  7. Accounting perspectives
  8. Accounting, Organisations and Society
  9. Acta Neerlandica morphologiae normalis et pathologicae
  10. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars).
  11. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica (AOGS)
  12. Acta neurobiologiae experimentalis
  13. Adv. Difference Equ
  14. Advance Drug Delivery Reviews
  15. Advanced difference equations
  16. Advances in Difference Equations.
  17. Advances in difference equations
  18. Africa bibliography
  19. African Journal of International and Comparative law
  20. African Safety Promotion : a Journal of Injury and Violence Prevention
  21. African and Black Diaspora: an International Journal
  22. African journal of international and comparative law
  23. African-American archaeology newsletter
  24. Aging and mental health (journal)
  25. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research
  26. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics
  27. Am J Med Genet.
  28. American Journal of Medical Sciences
  29. American astron soc 215th meeting
  30. American journal of audiology
  31. American journal of business
  32. American journal of the medical sciences
  33. Analytical sciences digital library
  34. Animal production science
  35. Animal reproduction science
  36. Animation studies
  37. Ann Surg Oncol.
  38. Ann Surg.
  39. Ann. Surg. Onc.
  40. Annali dell'Istituto Superiore Di Sanità
  41. Annali dell'Istituto superiore di sanita
  42. Annals of tourism research
  43. Annals of tropical medicine and parasitology
  44. Annual Bulletin (CLB)
  45. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineeering
  46. Annual Reviews of Fluid Mechanics
  47. Antennas and Wireless Propagation Lett.
  48. Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, IEEE
  49. Anthropology In Action
  50. Anthropology In Action (journal)
  51. Análisis filosófico
  52. AoB PLANTS
  53. Applied science and technology full text
  54. Aquaculture research
  55. Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts
  56. Archiv for mathematik og naturvidenskab
  57. Archiv für pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für klinische Medizin
  58. Archives Neerlandaises du Zoologie
  59. Archives of natural history
  60. Archives of sexual behavior
  61. Arkiv för zoologi
  62. Arqueología mexicana
  63. Artibus asiae
  64. Asia pacific journal of chemical engineering
  65. Asia-Pacific Journal Of Public Health
  66. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences (AJAS)
  67. Association of psychological and social studies
  68. Astron. Astroph.
  69. Astronomy & Geophysics: the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society
  70. Astronomy And Astrophysics
  71. Astronomy and Astrophysics Supp. Ser.
  72. Astronomy and astrophysics
  73. Astronomy, astrophysics
  74. Australian journal of experimental agriculture
  75. Australian journal of experimental agriculture and animal husbandry
  76. Ayandeh: a Persian Journal of Iranian studies
  77. Ayandeh: a Persian journal of Iranian studies
  78. Bangladesh Journals OnLine (BanglaJOL)
  79. Bangladesh journal of pharmacology
  80. Behavior Brain Research
  81. Behavior genetics association
  82. Behavioural and Brain Sciences
  83. Bell System Technical Journals
  84. Biochemical and biophysical research communications
  85. Biochemistry.
  86. Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta
  87. Bioethical Inquiry
  88. Biofpr
  89. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefin
  90. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefin.
  91. Bioimpacts
  92. Biol Chem Hoppe Seyler
  93. Biol Chem Hoppe Seyler.
  94. Biol Chem.
  95. Biol. Chem. Hoppe. Seyler.
  96. Biological Research For Nursing
  97. Biological chemistry Hoppe-Seyler
  98. Biology letters
  99. Bioscience horizons
  100. Biosis Previews
  101. Br J Pharmacol.
  102. Br Med J.
  103. Brain Struct Func
  104. Brain Struct. Func.
  105. British Journal of Development Psychology
  106. British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology
  107. British journal of urology
  108. British medical Journal
  109. British medical journal
  110. Bulletin de la Société Belge D'Études Coloniales
  111. Bulletin of The Museum of Comparative Zoology
  112. Business & Information Systems Engineering (BISE)
  113. Business and society review
  114. C. R. Acad. Sc. Paris
  115. CSA Sociological Abstracts.
  116. Canadian Journal of Neurological Science
  117. Canadian journal of administrative sciences
  118. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention
  119. Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology
  120. Cardiology in Review.
  121. Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology
  122. Cell Motility & Cytoskeleton
  123. Cell Motility and Cytoskeleton
  124. Cell motility and cytoskeleton
  125. Cell: Stem Cell
  126. Chemical Engineering And Biotechnology Abstracts
  127. Chemico-biological Interactions
  128. Chemmedchem
  129. Chemometrics and intelligent laboratory systems
  130. Chest journal
  131. Chinese journal of cancer
  132. Chinese medical journal
  133. Chinese physics b
  134. Cinahl
  135. Circ Res.
  136. Circulation Research.
  137. Circulation research
  138. Clin Genet.
  139. Clinical Pharmacokinectics (journal)
  140. College of Family Physicians Canada
  141. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  142. Communications in information literacy
  143. Computer information & Technology Abstracts
  144. Contemporary Sociology-A Journal Of Reviews
  145. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal Of Reviews
  146. Contemporary accounting research
  147. Contemporary economic policy
  148. Contemporary psychoanalysis
  149. Cooperation and Conflict: Nordic journal of international relations
  150. Crime Media Culture
  151. Criminal Justice And Behavior
  152. Critical Reviews in Physical Rehabilitation Medicine
  153. Crystal Growth & Design.
  154. Crystal Growth and Design.
  155. Current Alzheimer Research Journal
  156. Current eye research
  157. Current opinion in Microbiology
  158. Current opinion in neurology and neurosurgery
  159. Cytojournal
  160. Database (Journal)
  161. Decisions sciences (journal)
  162. Diabetic hypoglycemia journal
  163. Dialogue: a Journal of Mormon Thought
  164. Differences: A Journal of Cultural Feminist Studies
  165. Differences: a journal of feminist cultural studies
  166. Disability and rehabilitation
  167. Disability and rehabilitation assistive technology
  169. EMBO journal & reports
  170. Earth Sci. Planet. Lett.
  171. Earth surface processes and landforms
  172. Economic Letters
  173. Educational Evaluation And Policy Analysis
  174. Emerging themes in epidemiology
  175. Environmental Law (Law Review)
  176. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
  177. Environmental and Resource Economics (ERE)
  178. Environmental monitoring and Assessment
  179. Environmental monitoring and Assessment.
  180. Environmental monitoring and assessment
  181. Environmental monitoring and assessment.
  182. Estuar. Coast Shelf Sci.
  183. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science
  184. Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science
  185. Ethics & International Affairs Journal
  186. Eur J Pharmacol.
  187. Eurointervention
  188. European Physical Journal Conferences
  189. European archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
  190. European journal of pharmacology
  191. European review
  192. Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  193. Evol Anthr
  194. Evol. Anthr.
  195. Expert Opinion On Environmental Biology
  196. Expert review of anticancer therapy
  197. FEBS letters
  198. Families, Systems and Health Journal
  199. Fashion Theory The Journal of Dress, Body & Culture
  200. Feminist Theory (Journal)
  201. Film international
  202. Food Structure Journal 1982-1993
  203. Food and chemical toxicology
  204. Francis (database)
  205. Front Neuroendocrinol.
  206. Frontiers in neuroendocrinology
  207. Frontiers of information technology and electronics engineering
  208. Frontiers: A Journal of Women's Studies
  209. Fund. Appl. Toxicol.
  210. Fungal genetics and biology
  211. Genes Brain and Behavior
  212. Genes Brain and Behaviour
  213. Genes brain behav
  214. Genes, Brain, and Behavior
  215. Genes, brain, and behavior
  216. Genetic epidemiology (journal)
  217. Geobase
  218. Geografski zbornik
  219. Geologica acta
  220. German Journal for Evidence and Quality in Healthcare ZEFQ
  221. Guide to Receptors and Channels (GRAC)
  222. Guide to receptors and channels
  223. Harvard law and policy review
  224. Hastings Constitut Law Q
  225. Hastings Constitut. Law Q.
  226. Health Risk & Society Journal
  227. Health Services Research journal
  228. Health and Human Rights Journal
  229. High technology law journal
  230. Hoppe-Seylers Zeitschriftfür Pysiologische Chemie
  231. Hoppe. Seylers. Z. Physiol. Chem.
  232. Human reproduction update
  233. Human rights review
  234. IEEE Antenn Wireless Propag Lett
  235. IEEE Antenn. Wireless Propag. Lett.
  236. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Lett.
  237. IEEE Microwave Theory and Wireless Component Letters
  238. IEEE Style
  239. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems and Technologies
  240. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
  241. IEEE microwave and guided wave letters.
  243. IRAN (journal)
  244. Ieee microwave and guided wave letters
  245. Ijslp
  246. Imaging in medicine
  247. Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology
  248. Indiana university mathematics journal
  249. Information Research: An international electronic journal
  250. Information Services Corporation (ISC)
  251. Institute of Scientific Information
  252. Integrative medicine research
  253. International Association of Engineering Geology and the Environment
  254. International Bibliography of Periodical Literature on the Humanities and Social Science
  255. International Bibliography of Social Sciences
  256. International Federation for Documentation and Information
  257. International Journal for Applied Philosophy
  258. International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science (AMCS)
  259. International Journal of Computer Processing Of Languages
  260. International Journal of Ecology & Development (IJED)
  261. International Journal of Pediatric Obesity (JPO)
  262. International Journal of Private Law (IJPL)
  263. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology (TASL)
  264. International Society for General Relativity and Gravitation
  265. International journal of Energy and Combustion Science
  266. International journal of language and communication disorders
  267. International journal of speech language pathology
  268. International journal of speech-language pathology
  269. International journal of sports marketing & sponsorship
  270. IrMedJ
  271. Iranian Journal of Fuzzy System
  272. Iranian Studies (Journal)
  273. Island Arc (Journal)
  274. Issues in science and technology librarianship
  275. Italian review of economics demography and statistics
  276. J Agric Food Chem.
  277. J Behav Med.
  278. J Cell Biol.
  279. J Child Psychol Psychiat
  280. J Geol Ed
  281. J Geophys Res.
  282. J Geoscience Education
  283. J Neurotrauma.
  284. J Pharmacol Exp Ther.
  285. J of Neurotrauma
  286. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat.
  287. J. Lightwave Tech
  288. J. Natl Cancer Inst
  289. J. Neurotrauma.
  290. J. Orthop. Trauma.
  291. JAMA & Archives For The Media
  292. JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association
  293. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association
  295. Jge
  296. Jmps
  297. John Hopkins University Press
  298. John Wiley & Sons, INC
  299. Journal Citation Report
  300. Journal Henoch
  301. Journal Of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology
  302. Journal of African cultural studies
  303. Journal of African economies
  304. Journal of African law
  305. Journal of Behavioural Medicine
  306. Journal of Clinical Endocrionology Research
  307. Journal of East Asian Economic Integration (JEAI)
  308. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization
  309. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability (JIDD)
  310. Journal of Intelligent and Robotics System
  311. Journal of Intelligent and Robotics Systems
  312. Journal of Mining and Metallurgy / B
  313. Journal of Orthopedic Research
  314. Journal of Pharmacy and bioallied Sciences
  315. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
  316. Journal of Physics D-applied physics
  317. Journal of Sexuality Research and Social Policy
  318. Journal of Welsh ecclesiastical history
  319. Journal of affective disorders
  320. Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy
  321. Journal of biochemistry
  322. Journal of business logistics
  323. Journal of chemical ecology
  324. Journal of clinical gastroenterology.
  325. Journal of collective negotiations
  326. Journal of consumer affairs
  327. Journal of contemporary African studies
  328. Journal of cosmetic and laser therapy
  329. Journal of economic behavior and organization
  330. Journal of experimental and theoretical artificial intelligence
  331. Journal of formalized reasoning
  332. Journal of general physiology
  333. Journal of information science
  334. Journal of modern African studies
  335. Journal of pan african studies
  336. Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynecology
  337. Journal of sexual and marital therapy
  338. Journal of soft computing in civil engineering
  339. Journal of stem cell and regenerative medicine
  340. Journal of stem cells & regenerative medicine
  341. Journal of stem cells and regenerative medicine
  342. Journal of structural biology
  343. Journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants (JAAPA)
  344. Journal of the Transaction of The Victoria Institute
  345. Journalseek
  346. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys
  347. Kairos: a journal of rhetoric, technology, and pedagogy
  348. Kidney International Supplement
  349. Konsultativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya
  350. Konsultativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya (Russian journal)
  351. Lab Invest.
  352. Lab. Chip
  353. Le Practicien en Anesthésie Réanimation
  354. Leonardo Journal
  355. Liber annuus
  356. List of Pharmacy Journals
  357. List of Probability journals
  358. Macromolecules Journal
  359. Materials evaluation (journal)
  360. Materials science and engineering R
  361. Mathematical social sciences
  362. Med Anthropol Q.
  363. Media Culture & Society
  364. Media Culture Society
  365. Media, Culture, & Society
  366. Mediations Journal
  367. Medical journal of Zambia
  368. Memórias Do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
  369. Memórios do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
  370. Messenger of mathematics
  371. MetaPress
  372. Mich J Environ Admin Law
  373. Mich. J. Environ. Admin. Law
  374. Microbiol.
  375. Micron (Journal)
  376. Microwave Theory and Techniques, IEEE Transactions on
  377. Microwave and Guided Wave Letters, IEEE
  378. Montgomeryshire collections
  379. Myrmecological news
  380. N Biotechnol
  381. N Eng J Med
  382. N Eng J Med.
  383. N. Biotechnol.
  384. NANO (Journal)
  385. Nanoscale Journal
  386. Nasen
  387. Nat Med.
  388. Nat Meth
  389. Nat. Cancer.
  390. Nat. Med
  391. Nat. Medicine
  392. National Cancer Institute monograph
  393. Natural science journal
  394. Nature genetics
  395. Nature.
  396. Neurobehavioral toxicology and teratology
  397. Neurobiol Dis.
  398. Neurobiology of disease
  399. Neurochemistry international
  400. Neurorehabil Neural Repair.
  401. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair
  402. Neurosci Biobehav Rev.
  403. Neurosci. Lett
  404. Neuroscience Biobehavioral Review
  405. Neuroscience Biobehavioral Reviews
  406. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews
  407. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews
  408. Neuroscience and biobehavioural reviews
  409. Neurotoxicol Teratol.
  410. Nordic Journal of English Studies (NJES)
  411. North american society of adlerian psychology
  412. Notes and Records: the Royal Society journal of the history of science
  413. Nucl. Inst. And Meth. B
  414. Nucl. Inst. and Meth. B
  415. Omics Publishing Group
  416. Optical materials (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
  417. Oral Tradition Journal
  418. Organic Research Database.
  419. Organic research database
  420. Organic research database.
  421. Organization (Journal)
  422. P L o S One
  423. Palaios
  424. Paleontol
  425. Paleontologicheskii zhurnal
  426. Paleontology (journal)
  427. Pascal database
  428. Peace & Change: a Journal of Peace Research
  429. Physical Review A : atomic, molecular and optical physics
  430. Physical Review E statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics
  431. Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics
  432. Physics Abstracts.
  433. Physics abstracts series A
  434. Physics today
  435. Physiotherapy:theory & practise
  436. Physmath Central
  437. Phytomedicine (Journal)
  438. Pic'ma v Astronomicheskii Zhurnal
  439. Pjbr
  440. Pjss
  441. Plastic and reconstructive surgery
  442. Plos one
  443. Political Psychology journal
  444. Portuguese journal of social science
  445. Proceedings of The Natural Institute of Science
  446. Prog Neurobiol.
  447. Prog Neurobiology
  448. Prog Theo Phys
  449. Progress In Electromagnetic Research
  450. Progress In Electromagnetic Research.
  451. Progress In Electromagnetics Research
  452. Progress In Electromagnetics Research.
  453. Progress in neurobiology
  454. Project Muse
  455. PsycInfo
  456. PsychINFO
  457. PsychInfo
  458. Psychiatr Q.
  459. Psychosom Med.
  460. Public Library of Science ONE
  461. Quest: an African journal of philosophy
  462. Red Alyc
  463. Reproduction Fertility and Development
  464. Research society on alcoholism
  465. Respiratory research (journal)
  466. Review of African political economy
  467. Reviews of Geophysics and Space physics
  468. Reviews of geophysics
  469. Revista de la Asociación Geológica de Argentina
  470. Rivista italiana di economia demografia e statistica (RIEDS)
  471. Sage Open
  472. Scanning the journal of scanning microscopies
  473. Sci.
  474. Scientia marina
  475. Scottish affairs
  476. Slovene Studies Journal
  477. Social Psychology and Personality Science
  478. Social science history
  479. Society for social neuroscience
  480. Sociology Abstracts.
  481. Solar Energy Journal
  482. Solicitors journal
  483. Sonus: a journal of investigations into global music possibilities
  484. South African Medical Journal = Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif Vir Geneeskunde
  485. Springer publishing
  486. Stan. Envtl. L. J.
  487. Strategic Organization (Journal)
  488. Stress journal
  489. Structure and Dynamics eJournal of the Anthropological and Related Sciences
  490. Studia etymologica cracoviensia
  491. Studia neoaristotelica
  492. Supply Chain Management: an International Journal
  493. Surg. Edosc.
  494. Svenska historiska foreningen
  495. Svenska historiska föreningen
  496. Syst. Bot
  497. TORTURE journal
  498. Technical communication quarterly
  499. Textual practice
  500. The American journal of the medical sciences
  501. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
  502. The College of Family Physicians Canada
  503. The Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
  504. The Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology.
  505. The New England journal of medicine
  506. The american journal of the medical sciences
  507. The journal of Commonwealth Literature
  508. The quarterly journal of pure and applied mathematics
  509. Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems
  510. Toxicological sciences
  511. Toxicology letters
  512. Trade, Law and Development (TL&D)
  513. Transactions of The Microscopical Society & Journal
  514. Treatment Guidelines from The Medical Letter
  515. Trends in Cognitive Science
  516. Trends in Plant Sciences
  517. Ultrasound in medicine and biology
  518. University Pittsburgh Law Rev
  519. University Pittsburgh Law Rev.
  520. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesselschaft
  521. Victorian Periodical Newsletter
  522. Virol J.
  523. Virol. J
  524. VirolJ
  525. Vision research
  526. Volume ! The French journal of popular music studies
  527. Volume! The French journal of popular music studies
  528. Welsh journals online
  529. Western Journal Of Medicine
  530. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.,
  531. World development (journal)
  532. Wylie Blackwell
  533. Wylie-Blackwell
  534. X-Ray Spectrometry journal
  535. Yale L. J.
  536. Yale journal of criticism
  537. Z. Naturforsch
  538. Z. Naturforsch A
  539. Z. Naturforsch B
  540. Z. Naturforsch Teil A
  541. Z. Naturforsch Teil B
  542. Z. Naturforsch. A.
  543. Z. anorg allgem Chemie
  544. Zeitschrift for Physics
  545. Zion (Journal)
  546. Ztschr f Philos u philos Kritik

Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

Oops edit

Didn't realize the talk page didn't move. The complexity of that one was a little higher than normal thanks to the user making preemptive moves that were not advisable. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 01:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sammi Brie: I also just moved Talk:California's 14th State Assembly district. You should assume that rm Closer will only handle the easy moves gracefully, and perform more complex moves manually. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 02:04, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I actually did these manually... Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 03:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, sorry, Sammi, I saw that you posted your close of the discussion using rmCloser and assumed that tool was used to move the page as well (I haven't actually used that tool myself). So now I will assume that you were caught by the issue described at T12814. Does this sound right to you? (1) you filled out the page-move form and "Move associated talk page" was checked when you clicked the "Move page" button. (2) You then saw the warning message: The destination page already exists. Do you want to delete it to make way for the move? (Check the edit history.) (3) You check the "Yes, delete the page" box while keeping the "Move associated talk page" checked as well, then you clicked the "Move page" button a second time. This time the software reports back that the page was successfully moved. (4) The software does not report that the talk page was not deleted and moved, despite your having checked both boxes to "delete the page" and "Move associated talk page" (the software did not show you a "delete the associated talk page" box to check). You need to move the talk page separately now (or you could have WP:G6 deleted the talk page before the move if you were an administrator). You didn't do that because you had assumed that the software would move both pages in a single move operation, as it implied that it would.
If that's what happened, that's OK. I see that you're just a young page mover. I'm kind of an "administrator's administrator" in that I patrol for articles with talk page redirects and I found those pages populating the category. I frequently find pages moved by experienced administrators also populating that category, and having to constantly clean these moves up is wearing. So I just dug up that old low-priority "feature request" for this "enhancement" dating from 2007, reminding me that if you want anything done around here, 90% of the time ya gotta do it yourself! Feel proud that you're the "straw that broke my back" and motivate me to finally become a MediaWiki developer. I've been spending hours and hours over the past several months finishing up these incomplete page moves, and have come to realize that the only way I can relieve the project of that task is to spend hours and hours (more likely several months) figuring out how to fix that bug. And yes, it's a bug not a feature! Regards, wbm1058 (talk) 20:53, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that's correct. I would have had no idea that this behavior was the issue. Most of the reason I have pagemover is to handle complex US radio station call sign moves (WP:NCBC is unlike nearly every other naming convention guideline on enwiki). Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 20:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another developer tried to fix this several years ago. I've installed MediaWiki 1.40 and Visual Studio Code on my desktop PC and will work on fixing this in the coming month(s). – wbm1058 (talk) 20:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk page syncing edit

On Special:Diff/1197910664, I realised early on that Talk pages doesn't automatically get deleted. Although I do check for talk pages, I missed this somehow. One well-deserved trout slap for myself. – robertsky (talk) 12:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Robertsky: right, see #Oops above. I should get back to working on that project. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:35, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Should I change the section title to "Opps I did it again"? 🤔😁
Wow, I was actually thinking that a userscript might be sufficient. Something detects if the talk page isn't moved (as that information is given on the move page after the move), and then pulls out the edit history and current content (truncated, or nested iframe/noscroll small div, if need be) of the talk page for admins to evaluate to see if the target talk page can be deleted for or a pageswap is required instead. But hey, if there are already codes pending in gerrit, why not. – robertsky (talk) 12:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Updating r cats edit

I like to leave the occasional redirect with an out-of-date r cat so that you aren't left without maintenace categories to sift through. Thanks for the ping, and for limiting your reproach because I am only #29 in content contributed to WP:RMCI. SilverLocust 💬 23:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion edit

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  23:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations edit

It sounds like you haven't appreciated, or perhaps not noticed, the huge amount of work I've been taking on from this report for the last year or so. When I had JWB rights, I handled entries with hundreds of incoming links, probably fixing more than a million over-capped places, and a fair number of under-capped ones as well. And I identified, reported, and asked for a fix to the Visual editor UI problem that causes so many of the pipings through under-capitalized redirects. Of course, seeing how useful this report is for tracking things that ought to be addressed, I also added a whole lot of R from miscapitalion label to redirects that came from consensus moves to lowercase, so sometimes the list grew more than it shrunk. Since losing JWB, I've concentrated on the entries with more than 1 but fewer than a dozen incoming links, which is why you see a bit of an odd distribution in that neighborhood, and an ever-growing list of ones with just 1 incoming link. There's just a bit of overhead on each line I take on, so it's not efficient to work on the singles. And the big multiples will be more efficiently worked with JWB, if/when I get that back or someone else wants to help. Sometimes it becomes clear that the best resolution is to change the tag back to R from other capitalization. Anyway, glad to hear you're not anti-me or anti-lowercase. Back to it... Dicklyon (talk) 00:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed another raft of these today. Dicklyon (talk) 03:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By the way, if you see some where you think the R from miscapitalization tag is not quite right, feel free to change them. And if you let me know, I might work on trying to sort out which links really are wrongly capped and which are OK. Dicklyon (talk) 04:01, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, note that I had gotten the report down from 26 kB (or a peak of 34 kB in July) to about 6 kB in September, in the leadup to my Sept. 15 JWB restriction. Since then, it's been pretty flat, as I work more on lots of little items. I did about 134,000 edits in 2023, mostly working on items on this report. Dicklyon (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

wmb1058 and Dicklyon, Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations is either broken or the coding is incomplete. The past several months I've been uppercasing linked proper names of wars and revolutions, thousands of edits, and none were listed in this database. A few have some left (I visually scan and don't use a tool for finding the links or words on pages), such as French revolution which has about a dozen left to do, but some still have many hundreds. The next two incorrect casings I'm going to work on are Scientific revolution and Industrial revolution, neither of which is included in that database, and things such as the Age of enlightenment which only has a few dozen to uppercase. If you want to jump in please do so. Bottom line (literally), do either of you know how the database decides what to list or not to list? Randy Kryn (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for helping, Randy Kryn. The trick is to edit the redirect change the {{R from other capitalisation}} to {{R from miscapitalisation}}. Maybe you can bring some balance to the area, if you and Dick can avoid fighting over what's Very Important and what's merely important. Wars and Revolutions in first-world countries tend to be Important, so they are capitalized, and we have many reliable sources backing that up. Whereas wars and revolutions in third–world hellholes, these unfortunately tend to be under-reported by the first-world press and are not considered to be as important. This can be a problem for Wikipedia, which endeavors for worldwide neutral coverage. I'd guess that the people living in those hellholes think their wars are Damn Important, the hell with what the first-world "mainstream press" thinks. – wbm1058 (talk) 13:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've only been uppercasing what's already Wikipedia-uppercased in the wars, revolution, ages, etc. (been chipping away at what's left of Age of Enlightenment lowercasings since leaving the above message). Dick and I fight (Corn Pop was a bad dude)? Never, we politely disagree. If we fought we'd have more than one mutual ban. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We fight politely, thank you, Randy. Most of the items marked R from miscapitalization are because someone decided, e.g. me after a move discussion, to mark them. I don't know why there are so many inappropriately lowercase redirects, but there are a ton, and mostly not marked. The trouble with their existence is that the visual editor provokes people to use them when linking, due to its stupid UI. So they show up in the report at a steady clip as that interface keeps tempting editors to pipe through them. There ought to be a way to automatically, via bot, fix all those that are just inappropriate lowercasings of proper names; that's a lot simpler than the other direction, deciding what needs to be capped more generally (e.g. the first letter of a descriptive-name link depending on whether it starts a sentence, heading, or list item vs. otherwise). Maybe we should put in a bot request; or you could easily learn to do them with JWB (with probably no chance of errors). We could maintain of whitelist of miscapitalized redirects to fix automatically, and/or define a class of things for a bot to figure out for itself. Let me know if you encounter complications that would make that harder. Dicklyon (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomination for merger of Template:OTRS topicon edit

 Template:OTRS topicon has been nominated for merging with Template:Volunteer Response Team topicon. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Isla🏳️‍⚧ 19:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just an FYI edit

I pinged you to the discussion at Primefac's page, re: the VRT topicon. Atsme 💬 📧 00:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Was Eric Harris a neo-Nazi? edit

If you look at Harris's journal entries, they mention him idolizing and praising Hitler and the Nazis. Also in the audiobook series The War on Everyone (a documentary on the history of American fascism), it lays clear that in addition to Harris idolizing Hitler and the Nazis, he also shared a number of ideological similarities to them, such as hatred of free speech & the press and the desire to have less-than-able people executed. Razzamatazz Buckshank (talk) 10:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I reverted your edit to Template:Neo-Nazism because, as I said in my edit summary, Eric Harris is not independently notable – he is the subject of a joint biography. Per the target article "Some people, such as Robyn Anderson, who knew the perpetrators, stated that the pair were not obsessed with Nazism nor did they worship or admire Hitler in any way." Template:Neo-Nazism is not a place for dumping the name of every person you believe is or has been a neo-Nazi. It should be reserved for people who are primarily known as neo-Nazis. Harris is primarily known as an infamous school shooter, not as a neo-Nazi. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Single A edit

Sorry, forgot to do that - never have before, hopefully won't again. BilledMammal (talk) 11:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

V2 rocket edit edit

Hi wbm1058, refer this discussion at wp:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Undue weight given to Fritz von Opel in various space related articles for an explanation of my edit on the V-2 rocket article Ilenart626 (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Anglican Church" listed at Redirects for discussion edit

  The redirect Anglican Church has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16 § Anglican Church until a consensus is reached.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  06:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feedback welcome edit

Was reading elsewhere and saw that you dislike my efforts at RfA improvement. I welcome any feedback you have about my efforts about how you could see to improve RfA as considering all points of view and thoughts is important to me. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Barkeep49: – Glad you asked. So I think the goal is to tone down the drama around RfA and to encourage more qualified editors to run. Towards that end:
  • Take the ability to block extended-confirmed users out of the standard toolset. Kick that upstairs to a new committee – the English Wikipedia chapter of Universal Code of Conduct enforcement. This committee will either be appointed by the Arbitration Committee in similar fashion as check-users, or elected – by either an RfA-style vote or an Arbcom-style secure-poll vote. Voila. You've just moved most of the RfA drama out of that process to this new process for staffing the UCoC enforcement committee. Oh, and no more Wikipedia:Contentious topics enforcement by ordinary administrators. Only members of the new conduct-enforcement committee will be allowed to impose "discretionary sanctions".
  • Make page-moving part of the toolset again. WP:Page mover rights have been a disaster for WP:Requested moves. I want to see more administrators closing requested moves, who have the tools to make technically optimal moves rather than swapping pages (the page-mover kludge). WP:Page mover rights should only be extended on a temporary basis, and expire after six months or a year, with no option for immediate renewal. Page movers should be considered to be on a track to becoming administrators. After working their page-mover "trial", their performance is evaluated to see whether they should be promoted to administrator. I'll be looking for editors who thoroughly clean up after their page moves, and who don't make bad moves that trigger errors which I then need to clean up.
  • Add a new "vandal blocker" temporary right, which, similar to page-mover, functions as an administrator training ground. Vandal-blockers will, for six months or a year, have the ability to block IP and non-auto confirmed editors. At the end of their trial, their blocking activity may then be evaluated, with an eye towards promoting the good ones to administrator.
  • Editors may serve either as a page-mover or a vandal-blocker, but not both at the same time. After an editor's page-mover term expires, they may opt to ask to be made a vandal-blocker, and vice-versa. Those who can't make the leap to administrator, for whatever reason, may perpetually flip between page-mover and vandal-blocker roles, for as long as they like, and are allowed to based on good performance.

wbm1058 (talk) 13:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What an interesting concept. Other than the somewhat out of scope idea idea of only having a "committee" that can enforce CT, I think this model is one that could change the tenor of conversation at RfA. I'm in general skeptical of devolving things further from the admin toolset - for the reasons you mention in Page Mover (though Page Mover is still granted to all admin) - but the prods you have put in place address them. Since some have decided we need major RfA reform, I hope you will find a way to put your proposals forward. It's some really fresh thinking. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Right, I suppose it is up to the Arbitration Committee, not the community, to decide who is allowed to help the Committee with arbitration enforcement. I suppose that was just an afterthought, and, perhaps a hint. – wbm1058 (talk) 00:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suno Chanda 2 edit

You are correct about this. Seems to have been part of a larger SOCK history revert and must have assumed it was a newer creation. Thanks for moving back to mainspace. CNMall41 (talk) 20:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirect edit

Regarding your question here, it was almost certainly a mistake on my part. Thanks for fixing. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re-close of pakeha settlers RM... edit

Hi, can you please explain how your reclose is not a blatant supervote? Rather than summarizing arguments made in the RM, you are explicitly applying your own opinion and analysis. Your close literally dismisses the opposers' TIES claims, which was the sole rationale offered by almost all the oppose !votes, so from where in that discussion are you drawing the conclusion that the majority of P&G-based arguments were against moving to "European settlers..."? You also ignore major points made by supporters, such as the guidance on TITLES being especially against unfamiliar terminology, the clear analogy made by @LokiTheLiar and others to "crore" explicitly being discouraged even in article prose in favor of universally-understood terms, the numerous examples of CONSISTENCY reported by @Roman Spinner, the overwhelming evidence that NZ academics and news sources in the last five years prefer "European settlers" in the context of NZ colonization, etc., and instead opine on numerous points no one made in the discussion and perform your own research! JoelleJay (talk) 01:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have to agree with JoelleJay; as the closer, you are supposed to summarize and verify the arguments and evidence presented. In your close, you instead make novel arguments and present new evidence, but by virtue of it being a close prevent editors responding to and rebutting your arguments.
Further, I am discomforted by the process; going to the previous closer and effectively telling them "If you overturn your close, I'll make the same close" while a move review is proceeding and, in my opinion, was trending towards overturning to move, seems to be at odds with our standard procedures and our consensus model.
Given the issues with it, will you please convert your close into a !vote? BilledMammal (talk) 02:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with the above two. This was the WP:SUPERVOTE-y-ist close I've seen in a while: it went on for paragraphs and paragraphs about your opinion on the arguments and barely mentioned the discussion at all. Loki (talk) 02:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear wbm1058, I ask you to reconsider. The consensus of an RM discussion is determined by the arguments made in the discussion, not by arguments newly introduced by the closer. Your approach to determining consensus was thoroughly improper. If I ever found myself feeling the need to preemptively write off "cries of 'supervote'", I would be seriously questioning my own judgment. Please undo your action. Adumbrativus (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Respectfully, WP:DTS. You have here an opportunity to informally discuss the title issue on the article's talk page. I suggest ya'll carpe diem! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 14:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS. Just a gentle reminder that "relisting should not be a substitute for a no consensus closure." P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

abbreviation and your revert edit

Why did you revert my edit? I just put an abbreviation and didn't claim that it's an improvement. There are many problematic edits here hope you also spend your time to correct or revert those edits which are "really" problematic. Egeymi (talk) 16:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]