Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

Or ... Wakefield Order Word? Wakeword? Field Order! etc

Holey Moley ... I really really hate to disagree with an editor of your knowledge and experience. I go back a little while too – somewhat more than it looks on this account – and I am well aware of your editing, and, if you like, your wiki-status in some way I don't quite have the brains or temerity to define. So I feel a bit cheeky turning up here without an appointment and just handing my visiting-card to your butler.

The trouble is, I am in that most tiresome situation: that of thinking I am right, or at least probably right, or kind-of right, or something close(ish) to it. Now, I am a State Registered Coward™ when it comes to a fight, argument, mild disagreement or really anything other than universal love and peace and, pace the amusing picture addition, I am pretty disinclined to pick up the sabres or cudgels or load the cannon over this. So I might just leave it, while thanking you for the polite and well-reasoned intervention. I mean ... I'd sort of quite like to engage further with this issue, but my desire to do so is running somewhere around that tricky 48/52% split level. And no-one will die if I don't, and the world will not become a much more stupid place whichever way it goes. So I might go back and have another bash, but please do not hold your breath, which would not be conducive to good health. Or I might just leave it, and thank you again, and wish you a pleasant evening or whatever works well in your time-zone. With all good wishes, DBaK (talk) 19:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but there are so many experts! Google "green great dragon".

Here is a column about a book by one Mark Forsyth where he describes it. Forsyth Rule then? (I'm not finding anything about Wakfield... of course I have not made a great long detailed complete search. Or rather, a detailed complete great long search I have not. Made. I don't suppose inflected languages have this problem?

I am going to bring this up at WP:MOS posthaste. We can't simply have this... and we also simply can't have this. Else chaos.

Thank you for the compliment, I'm not sure I have any wiki-status, but OK. Herostratus (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I started a thread at MOS Talk, God help me. Herostratus (talk) 20:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But ... but ... I don't want to fight ... I don't want to fight ... aaargh must not look ... must not loooook :) DBaK (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But it only takes one side to make a war. Anyway the MOS talk page is source of amusement rather than enlightenment for me anyway, thanks partly to the presence of User:EEng. Herostratus (talk) 21:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We each have our station in life. EEng 23:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Statue of Elvis Presley at age 13.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can i talk you in WhatsApp? R8dikal (talk) 11:46, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have WhatsApp. Can you email me? Herostratus (talk) 12:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks. Herostratus (talk) 17:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

humorist and loyal slaves

Thank you for quality articles such as Bob Burns (humorist) (2005), Of Black America, Stepan Glotov, Cobra King (tank) and Loyal slaves monument, some translated from Russian, for fighting vandalism, for WP:HURTS wisdom, for "to be written someday", - repeating (24 August 2010): you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2623 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you. Herostratus (talk) 02:47, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My characterization of your multipart question was blunt and aimed at the question, not the questioner. The issue is a fair one. I trust that in several years, I'll come back around to answering this question again, and while my personal choice is now explicit (and I will abide by it, AGF dude!), I suspect the community will have a say as well in how long and under what circumstances an admin holds the bit. Right now the system doesn't appear broken (arguably). Appreciate your boldness in raising the issue. BusterD (talk) 16:46, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:34, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Alex Jones on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—usernamekiran (talk) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. No particular reason, just wanted to say thank you for your contributions. But I think you should really really archive your talkpage —usernamekiran (talk) 18:26, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply] To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Mmmm, torte! Herostratus (talk) 18:58, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your comment at ARC, because even in the edited state your comment was well below the bar of NPA. --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 14:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right, well, User:Guerillero that's your job, and maybe you're right, so fine. I don't agree, but I could be wrong. My take is that I would think that the grand jury (sort of what this is) needs info, not people pulling their punches to be polite. If you or the arbs want to discount my material on the ground that's it's false, or at any rate too general or insufficiently documented to be worth considering, fine; but that's not what happened, it was rejected on the grounds of being rude. That's way different. Sure we should be polite generally, but this is different: we are trying to get to the bottom of something, here. If they guy didn't want to be spoken to as a Dutch uncle, well, he didn't have to create a whole problem in the first place and then drag it to ArbCom. ArbCom is not supposed to be anybody's Safe Space, I thought, and you know: Heat, kitchen.

On the other hand, yes, you have a lot more experience on that page than I, so maybe riding herd on tone issues is really important. Anyway, right or wrong, thank you for your service, sound like kind of a thankless job. Carry on! Herostratus (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:1960 New York mid-air collision on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Issues on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have gotten out a bit ahead of your skis. I find your disregard of your fellow editors to be insulting, if not simply short-sighted. People with whom you disagree edit here and they can make valid arguments. Perhaps you should have emphasized which policies you think are germane and then assert that guys like me aren't making policy-based arguments. Because when you do what you did, it rankles and I lose what respect I used to have for you. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman (talk) 19:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I hear you. Herostratus (talk) 19:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Received your email, but prefer not to respond and disclose mine. Since you indicated you were OK with talk page messages, responding here. I think your plan is a good one and will help him focus upon his return as I imagine he'd be somewhat topic banned in the problematic areas. As I mentioned on his talk, I have accepted his apology and would not stand in the way of the block being lifted. Star Mississippi 21:01, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, great, thanks. We'll see how it goes. Herostratus (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Herostratus,

Please feel free to reproduce my reply here in full on JPL's talk page, as I am away atm and unable to login on-wiki at this time. First, thank you for your note and sorry it has taken me over a day to get back to you. While this matter is a high priority for me, I am also exceptionally busy right now with a number of pressing RL tasks.

I'd like to start off by saying that I am committed to protecting JPL from harassment as much as I am protecting others from him harassing them (in equal measures). If there's a solid plan to resolve this amicably by charting a path for JPL's return (which looks to be the case), from my perspective, that would be ideal. I tried to digest Awilley's and Amakuru's thoughts and ultimately found both comments to be reasonable and wise. I realize that Awilley (ping please) may be involved, but Amakuru (ping please): if your conclusion is that the threshold for a conditional unblock has been met, you have my blessing to unblock with immediate effect.

I'm afraid I don't really have that much more of substance to add, because (and not to broken-record it), I am none too familiar with JPL's body of work on the project (again, to the best of my recollection, we've never spoken prior to this incident). Nor, I'm afraid, do I have the time to review a mountain of evidence. But I don't think any of that is really needed atm, anyway.

Thanks again, Herostratus, for reaching out, and thanks to the many of you who contributed positively and with compassion throughout this and continue to do so. And good luck and best wishes, JPL.

Yours, El_C

(Posted on request by BilCat (talk) 05:26, 4 September 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks El C, that's fine. I myself can't unblock anybody tho, rhat's up to the admin corps. Herostratus (talk) 06:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ping @Awilley and Amakuru: per request. Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:18, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Herostratus, though I already knew that — that last bit was directed at Amakuru as an uninvolved admin. Sorry if I got impatient, but after I saw that you didn't reply to my email for +12 hours, and at the same time having seen BilCat's unrelated email, I piggy-backed. Not that I'm complaining, obviously, since it took me almost 2 days to get to your original mail. Still, at the time, it did look like expediency was called for, but perhaps I misread and it isn't so much...? Doesn't matter.

In any case, I don't know if I'll be around for the discussion about a conditional unblock (be it on JPL's talk page or ANI, or both), but if not, please feel free to reference this exchange if you (or anyone) finds it pertinent to anything. Basically, as the blocking admin, I'm good with going with the flow, and if that flow leans to the side of leniency, all the better. Thanks again. El_C 21:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refactor your accusation of bad faith in [1]. It violates WP:NPA, WP:AGF and WP:ASPERSIONS. TIA, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think a better approach would be for you to withdraw the nomination instead? Anyway, good faith can be lost. We're trying to do work here. We have to be precise about what kind of environment we're working in. Nothing personal I assure you. It's just business. Herostratus (talk) 03:30, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask you again to strike that comment per the policies cited; otherwise I believe it should be reviewed by the community. But does either of us want this? Surely you have better things to do, as do I (and ditto for people who'll be reviewing it). Please strike this sentence and we can move on. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll refactor. Herostratus (talk) 04:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's appreciated, although the word trolling, even trolling (fishing), is not particularly friendly. Let's avoid bait (fishing) and such, shall we? So pretty please, just remove the trolling reference too, preferably without trying to come up with another "cute" synonym. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:34, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh, OK, OK, fine. Herostratus (talk) 06:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, the statement was clearly out of line and totally off the subject. Even redacted, it reflects badly on its author in a formal process. In keeping with assuming good faith, an ungrudging apology is the very least we might expect from a contributor of long tenure who has admitted such a poor choice. BusterD (talk) 19:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's never off subject to defend the Wikipedia. But, yes, it was a poor choice, and I wish I hadn't done it. I'm a bit mad at myself for letting my emotions grab me and the consequent intemperate language, without good sources to back it up. OK? I didn't apologize because I redacted under threat. And fine, that is appropriate often enough. No apology is needed I think because the person's request was acceded to, and I think that ought to be sufficient?

Don't feel alone. I find sometimes my stridency gets in the way of my better judgement. To use your terminology, when I'm walking the fine line between straightforwardness and politeness, sometimes I end up over the line on both counts. You've expressed contrition, and we've no need for absolution here. I will assume you'll go back to fine work you do, and you'll take this as the tiny lesson it became. Dude! Go out and shake the rafters of heaven. Piotrus is an adult; they value your frankness and directness as much as I. BusterD (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

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

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah how about that! Thanks! Herostratus (talk) 06:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No I won't take it to talk - I clearly said that "multiple" opens up uncertainty about "does it mean two or more, or what?" - and by reverting you express disagreement. I won't take it to talk... because I don't have any more arguments. I won't waste my time trying to express my argument eleventy different ways. Either you see my point or you don't. And you clearly showed that you don't, or you wouldn't have reverted me. CapnZapp (talk) 17:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I hear you. I imagine it must be difficult to work with people who are stupider than you, so my sympathies. Herostratus (talk) 01:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Napoleon's last day of battle may be in one article in Wikipedia, but other sources look at the four days of encounter between Napoleon and Wellington's army in Belgium. So I find that change here nitpicking. None of those days was in the little village of Waterloo, which was where Wellington slept, not where they fought. If you look at another Wikipedia article, you will see it called the Waterloo Campaign, at Hundred Days#Waterloo Campaign, which describes each day from June 15 to June 18, 1815. I can change the text in Blue at the Mizzen to the "last day of the Waterloo campaign", using your reasoning and source, right? --Prairieplant (talk) 07:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right I know about Ligney and Quatre Bras and all. Sure you can if you want to, I don't mind. Herostratus (talk) 07:59, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I remember your reasoning for the removal of players at Talk:100 Greatest NHL Players. Does NBA 75th Anniversary Team (along with NBA 25th Anniversary Team, NBA 35th Anniversary Team, 50 Greatest Players in NBA History) fall into the same category? – Sabbatino (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, @Sabbatino:. This list is the outcome of a vote rather than the intellectual product of some people sitting around a table, as the NHL list was IIRC. My personal opinion is that that doesn't make enough of a difference, because putting together the voting mechanism is work, and the list has or could have material value. But you could make that case that it does. I really hate deleting these lists on somewhat technical grounds, but I would feel compelled to, so I'm not going to interfere either way. Wikipedia:Copyright problems has a place to ask. there's also an essay that provided guidance, Wikipedia:Copyright in lists. Herostratus (talk) 06:24, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (New Zealand) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt you will get a reply at Teahouse from Depisteme, who has already removed the same ramble from own Talk page. I, myself, was intrigued by the User name's closeness to Episteme, but not so much the time sink the posting and subsequent exchanges it triggered at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 11:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To be sure. I mean either he's from Mars or is trolling. Either way he needs to go, and the ((( ))) thing is anti-semetic and that alone is grounds. Herostratus (talk) 13:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First, I wanted to thank you for your thanks. I'm pretty new and haven't yet talked to anyone, so I appreciate the "human touch".
I've read some of your user page: you are a hoot! I'm pleased to see your thoughts about Her Maj mirror my own: a Down Under republic can't come soon enough, IMHO.
Also, I'm hoping you may be able to help me. My perusal of History was hampered by two impenetrable final paragraphs. It looks like a job for someone with a background in Russian translation. Are you that someone? (I realise this request should probably go on the talk page for the article but I thought this was worth a shot while I was here). EditrixOz (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi back @EditrixOz:. Dang, that is dog's breakfast of text isn't it. If it was just awkwardly written that could be fixed, but some of it can't make head nor tail. I don't know the source, because the Russian Wikipedia only has a stub on the town. So hmmn I don't know what to do exactly. Herostratus (talk) 02:28, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to hear you, too, found it bamboozling. Thanks for giving it a look. EditrixOz (talk) 08:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Well, there's a template for everything here @EditrixOz:, so I slapped a {{Copy edit section}} on the last paragraphs. This kicks the can down the road, and let George do it, I guess. I mean I don't like to do that, but I'm just not up to handling it right now, and maybe somebody will come alone who is, eventually. (Putting in that template puts the article in a category of articles needing copyedit, and there is a Copyeditor's Guild that watches that and tries to get them eventually.) Herostratus (talk) 23:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Dellwoods has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sources are Discogs (which is user submitted) and personal blogs (which are unreliable). No better sourcing found in music publications nor publications giving the history of MAD.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Dellwoods 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/The Dellwoods 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.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:27, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WCMX athletes has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:55, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The earliest edits from this user were constructive, yes. The warnings, however, are from a spree of edits they did today spamming advertising links across articles. The "dwelling" references, one of which you reverted, were being mass-added to articles with "dwelling" in the text (and the ref was simply a link to the website of a real estate agency). jp×g 03:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Non-admin closure on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned your contribution and edit summary at [2] reads like personal attack(s) and suggest you consider taking immediate steps to review it. In general I believe you have brought forward some useful points at that discussion, though I don't agree with all of them, but firmly believe the contribution I have just mentioned is inappropriate. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Djm-leighpark:. kSorry, it was a joke. I was characterizing my own edit and I think we're allowed to jocularly criticize ourselves... I was going on and on -- with reason I think, but still. I would never so characterize another editor's edit. I joke to much, and it's either a character flaw and/or a manifestion of my mania. I usually try keep a decent lid on it, with I hope some success. Mush from the wimp is an article here, a famous headline in my home town. I've used it occasionally before with no objection.

But now see I upset another editor, and made you and me spend time worrying about it, and that sucks, and so I'm sorry for that, but I can't undo edit summaries, and also thank you for your diligence of enforcing civility. Herostratus (talk) 23:18, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I now spot their is a wikilink in the edit summary I didn't follow. I am colour defective and sometimes (depending on the monitor) I miss wikilinks (especially my own unintended red-links). Still a little concerned about some of the criticisms but I'll leave it at that. Thankyou for replying. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:33, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Bludgeoning at Hogan AfD and DRV. The discussion is about the topic Stephen Hogan. Thank you. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:28, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Herostratus (talk) 13:05, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Herostratus. I want your help. It's been 5 months now trying to upload a new picture in a page but it failed, and I want to create a page about something. I will appreciate your response and your help. I thank you. Kenzie Abraham (talk) 18:09, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Kenzie Abraham. I'll be glad to look at it as I may, but I'm super busy right now. Herostratus (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then , no problem. Kenzie Abraham (talk) 06:43, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK User:Kenzie Abraham I'm here. I'm glad to help. What trouble are you having? Why can't you upload the picture? If you like you can email it to me and I can do it. Also, as for creating a new page, have you looked at Wikipedia:Articles for creation? Herostratus (talk) 07:02, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Idea page -Emotional Response of New users

• Apologies for my very terse dense Idea -Anyone with your username is clever :-) I think in tables and tersely
• I forgot to change gears
• I have changed the name on Ideas and reformulated it. If there are issues please advise

Your thoughts would also be appreciated on how to make user page and talk safe The details are

1. User to control access on any/all of user/user talk/sandbox for view/edit/search/category access. They can specify to include/exclude specified users, or a class of users(IP, any with admin action in the last 6 months).
2. If an Admin is specified, the Admin can choose to over-ride but get a warning
3. User is responsible for their page is monitored by bot. If they ignore, the Bot sends message and autoreverts to the last safe version

• User can still be contacted

1. By another user using squiggly brackets, by subscriptions etc <BUT that means the messenger's comments are visible to their peers and bystander
2. Neutral responses are available for talk, alarms, and message. User can also add their own
3. There seems to be different views
4. Let's wait a few day
5. I am going to concentrate on another article for awhile

Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wakelamp:. Geez I don't know. You can always just delete any message on your talk page, and if becomes a problem get admin help. Unfriendly edits of your user page are very rare and are vandalism and can be easily rolled back. (It would be OK to allow only yourself and admins to edit your user page and other non-talk pages, with a request for a software change, but this is solving a problem that barely exists and would be unlikely to be approved. And of course we sometimes want other uses to be able to edit our sandbox etc without jumping thru hoops.) You can also just not read your talk page.

I don't know what squiggly brackets do. But your right to control your userspace is overridden by the right (and need) of other editors to quickly contact you, I would say. Also for my part I welcome people yelling at me on my talk page if they're right (which is sometimes), that is how I learn and grow.

I think that you can request full protection for your talk page now, which means nobody can edit it (except admins). You would surely be turned down tho. Willingness to communicate with colleagues to at least some degree is usually a requirement for editing. It's the editing floor or a large and fast-moving publication, people are going to yell sometimes. (If you have had an experience with someone being unnecessarily unkind, that sucks and I'm sorry.)

Also, shouldn't this be at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)? I personally can't do anything about it. If you're sending this message out to a lot of people, again, Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) would be better. Herostratus (talk) 03:52, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I just sent the message to you. You are the only one that reacted about the the emotions. I feel like I am talking a different language, and just wanted to know what I can do

Unfriendly edits of talk pages I think are more common than you think. (Just by trawling around user and reading social media); experienced editors may have thicker skin and are likely to have assertiveness skill. But with UI interactions, negative messages/trolling can cause people to leave. Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 23:39, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I will move this over to ideas. Thank you for your time and have a great weekend! (I live in Melbourne Australia and the weather is beautiful after torrential rain yesterday!)

with thanks PaulWakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK User:Wakelamp, and good luck. Make sure to be as clear as possible on what you are suggesting. The weather here in American has been unseasonably warm, I was outside in short sleeves today. Herostratus (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean to remove my comments at VPI? — xaosflux ^Talk 00:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xaosflux, no! I would never do that. There was an edit conflict and I messed up. Sorry. I'll restore then right off if you haven't already! Trout slap for me. Herostratus (talk) 01:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nicki Minaj on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nicki Minaj? No thanks lol. Herostratus (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Orlandus_Wilson#proposed_deletion. --Kku (talk) 10:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This would be my first time through. The first movie remains the only film I've paid to see twice consecutively. Book is an old favorite. BusterD (talk) 21:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw the first one -- not bad. Usually sequels to these things tend downword so I didn't watch the others, also the first movie ended about where the book did, so the rest is some non-Heinlein people writing. I like Heinlein, have read about six of his books, *Stranger in a Strange Land* is his masterpiece I think. Herostratus (talk) 17:13, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Off topic: "mnmh"? BusterD (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, well "mnmh" is that sort of sound you make (or I do anyway) when considering something. It's sort of like "hmmm" and sort of like "mmmm" and sort of like "mmnn" and sort of like "hnnnn" but not exactly like any of these. It's "mnmh". There's definitely a tonal component too. A rising tone pushed toward the palate might mean one thing, a dropping tone going almost slightly gutteral might mean something else, a sudden sharp rise at the end something else, a low growl appended something else. In text, it's noncommital and vague, since English doesn't have orthography for tones. In edit summaries, it just means "Talk page edit summaries don't matter, but I want to keep my edit-summary percentage up, so I have to put something, and sometimes I get tired of "my 2c". Herostratus (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

still new here but just wondering why it wouldn't be relevant to mention Victoria Sellers' support for Donald Trump. your reason for undoing was "She's not in politics. So it doesn't belong." but most people aren't "in" politics but their political views are still mentioned on wiki. don't really understand, would appreciate if you could explain the unspoken rule about it to me, ty. she is very vocal about her love for Donald and used to do at least 5 Instagram stories per day about him & was very active as a supporter. would luv to know about why a person's politics should not be mentioned for my future reference, ty ty — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterSelIers (talk • contribs) 00:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:PeterSelIers, and welcome to the Wikipedia! So, as far as living persons are, the controlling rule is WP:Biographies of Living Persons, the gist of which, is to respect the privacy of persons as much as possible without compromising our core mission. Victoria a pretty obscure person. I doubt she should even have a article. Since we do, it should mainly be about her public career. For most people, the personal information is limited to basic stuff -- where they were born, went to school, names of spouse(s), number of children, like that. Beyond that, we want to see more material on the TV shows she was in, books she wrote, whatever. There's just no need to get into her personal stuff, how many dogs she has, how much her house cost, how her living room is furnished, who her favorite actors or ballplayers or politicians are, and so on. If she was really famous it might be different. For her, it's a little too gossipy for my taste, and WP:BLP directs us to be as conservative as possible. Herostratus (talk) 01:08, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I keep thinking that we are about to see the block not done, and then someone else comes along and expresses support for it. Now people are using words like "abuser" to describe me and I guess my actions in this case. Why is it that there is no expectation of civil dialogue, assuming good faith, and treating other editors as human beings in this process?John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:10, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• It does appear that some people would block an editor for removing an extra space from what was deemed the wrong article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I guess. But I mean after all you were given special consideration. I guess every time you want to work on an article in any way shape or form, you should first check to make sure that it has no connection to religion in any way shape or form, I guess. You could possibly pick an area that doesn't include biographies and isn't likely to contain any anything about religion -- Category:Forts in Canada by province or territory, for instance; chosen at random, but there are probably scores of thousands of similar areas. Herostratus (talk) 01:38, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Michael Landon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hullabaloo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Hi, Herostratus. I'm not sure that WP:XRV close was accurate. Rollback -- bundled or unbundled -- is explicitly an XRV-reviewable action, mentioned explicitly in WP:XRVPURPOSE, which was why Jclemens and I proposed it be reviewed at that forum rather than ANI. You also don't seem to have followed the DRV conversation it was spun off from, which was explicitly discussing whether the article should be sent to AfD or not; it was imo forming a consensus in that direction, but it'd been open for all of a day. Vaticidalprophet 09:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe I messed up, but I guess I still think it was the best thing to do. There are a lot people and actions involved here and I don't think at all that's its simply a matter or "hey an admin maybe misused her tools, here". Anything that any regular editor can do and another regular editor can easily undo is a user dispute. (Not every editor can roll back, but anyone who wants can ask for that bit). It's clutter to put it at this new, important, specialized board which is still in the process of being defined via practice. I feel strongly enough about that I thought it best to make a clean break.

I did follow the DRV thread. I never heard of a discussion having to undertaken and a consensus reached before sending an article to AfD before, so I did. I'll make a note of that there.

User:Cunard is just trying to get justice and went to two wrong venues -- DRV and XRV -- when they should have gone to either ANI or the edit warring board. Rather than letting this dog's breakfast develop we should have cleanly and clearly told them that they made a mistake and fixed it for them. Herostratus (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to precisely define the scope of a new board is an important, even laudable thing for the exact reasons you note. That would be why XRV has been explicitly defined from the very outset as including non-admin-specific permissions such as rollback (see specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools and explicit reference to permissions granted at WP:PERM at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Proposals, repeated at WT:XRV, plus repeated reference at WT:XRV to permissions all over the adminship scale) -- specifically to avoid misunderstandings like the one you just made. (Substantial modern-era precedent also exists for the reviewing of rollback specifically for admins specifically, e.g. the GiantSnowman arbcom case.) Vaticidalprophet 11:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's hard for everyone to keep up with everything here. So, I'm not super up on that, but let's say I have template editor permission, and I use it vto andalize, it would go to WP:ANI. But if an admin uses her template editor permission (comes with being an admin) to vandalize, she would go to a different place, WP:XRV, cos she's a admin. Right so far?

So... if act I generally bad -- cursing, misspelling every third word, making biased RfC closes, edit warring, blanking articles, what have you -- and I won't stand down, I go to to WP:ANI. But if an admin did any of these things, she would go to WP:XRV, cos she's an admin. Right? Or if not, then where is the cutoff? Is there, specifically, a list of what non-admin actions do or do not go to XRV rather than ANI?

If there is -- I haven't looked -- and it's supported by general consensus, well, consensus can change. The board is live now, so new eyes are going to see it and new voices are going to be heard about how to use it. Interesting question, and I brought it up there. Herostratus (talk) 11:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, misuse of template editor perms is covered by XRV, which is explicitly stated in the giant bold text right there in WP:XRVPURPOSE. Pretty easy to spot. First thing my eye was drawn to the first time I looked at it, even. Misuse of 'tools' broadly construed is an XRV issue. I'm a non-admin, but I'm a page mover, so I can make blacklisted titles and perform moves most editors can't; if I decided to move a high-profile page to H A G G E R on WHEELZ!!! and delete the redirect then I'd be taken to XRV just as fast as if an admin did. As one can see in the giant bold text in XRVPURPOSE, rollback is an explicitly covered tool, so rollback misuse (by admins or non-admins) is correctly reviewed at XRV. Vaticidalprophet 11:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone your close at XRV. I understand the intent but they were clearly not in the wrong venue and deserve to be heard. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody deserves to be heard, but everybody doesn't deserve to be heard everywhere. That is why people have walls and rooms in their homes. And actually you're not supposed to do that, that's why it says "don't edit this". This is gosh-darn mess, I'm not sure your action helped, and the effect is going to be "See, this new board is mess, people are taking editing disputes and edit wars and personal anger here, it's not a good board". I guess this whole thing is going to end up at WP:ANI. Oh well. Herostratus (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello How are you can you help us to review this article and put your and thank you Wikipeida From Saudi Arabia (talk) 03:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Interim 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/Interim (2nd nomination) 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.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 13:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Peng Shuai on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You rather got the worst of it, and while you didn't handle everything perfectly, RfA seems to be a place where the perfect is very much the enemy of the good. Kudos for braving the storm. — Charles Stewart (talk) 20:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Will Smith on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reminding us that poetry is just as important as science. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Draft talk:David Firth (animator) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

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

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

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 813 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 845 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

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

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

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

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thankyou for actually considering the merits. I do not think ambassador articles are really good for proposed deletion. While ambassadors are not default notable, many do get enough coverage for their role as such to be notable. It is tricky though, because a certain percentage of ambassadors are notable for unrelated things.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:51, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After someone replies, like I did, please don't change the meaning of your comment (like you did)[3]. In this case, I don't care. But if you do it again, just add a new comment in the thread explaining what needs to be corrected. Thanks. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:53, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I respect your opinion, but I cannot agree that this was anything worth worrying about in the least or would improve the readability or comprehensibility of the thread. If it was part of a pattern, maybe. Herostratus (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since I agreed with you that it wasn't a problem, we're not in dispute. On the other hand, I made contact about it in interests of preventing any potential pattern with more problematic changes down the road. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Herostratus (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'preciate the discussion thanks NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:51, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just notifying you of this ANI thread connected to a discussion on the MoS talkpage. Boynamedsue (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Paul Pelosi on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000^[a] at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.^[b]

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 14736 articles, as of 18:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Notes

1. ^ not including another ~6,000 redirects
2. ^ The number of weekly reviews reported in the NPP feed includes redirects, which are not included in the backlog we primarily track.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beezin' 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/Beezin' 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 until the discussion has finished.

QueenofBithynia (talk) 07:26, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth II on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the subject of the RSN thread. Metaphor begins:

"I can assume things don't normally fall from the sky.

I can presume, since it's early Sunday morning, nobody's going to try to harm me.

Oh my god, the Japanese are bombing Pearl Harbor! This is no drill!"

Metaphor ends. I wonder if I could do this in haiku... BusterD (talk) 19:11, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, congrats for your talk page appearing in the category Category:Forts in Canada by province or territory. Very cool but you're looking a bit defensive. BusterD (talk) 19:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF

The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject

Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers

The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kevin M. Kruse on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Herostratus,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Christine Weston Chandler on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:In the news on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Herostratus. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Newimpartial (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Herostratus, oversighted revisions are (by default) displayed struck through with two lines in revision histories, while plain revision deletion results in a single line. There was no oversighting. Additionally, the revision deletion has been undone, and the deleted comment had been visibly quoted in the opening statement all the time. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you! Herostratus (talk) 00:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Newimpartial (talk) 00:29, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI: The edit regarding that case was not oversighted, it was deleted at one point, but no longer is. See Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Isabelle_Belato#revdel_of_Athaenara's_comment for a bit more on it. It is not included in the current revision of the page. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:42, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK. Thanks! Herostratus (talk) 02:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Arlington National Cemetery on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Barbara Follett requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. JAYFAX (talk) 18:23, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Did you know on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for creating and working on the Service Awards. They are a joy to look at (except for the cardboard tube advancement....hmmmmm) and play with. Much appreciated by many hundreds of editors. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you! Herostratus (talk) 18:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m probably not doing this correctly.

I strongly disagree with your edit to the Maryville, MO page, in the section about Daisy Coleman, “the 2012 rape allegations.”

You deleted the name of one of the confessed perpetrators. Also, his two accomplices/perpetrators/friends!!

You name the victim, Daisy Coleman and her mother!! She has her own page.

You should name Matt Barnett. His crimes are noted in his politician grandfather’s page!! Rex Barnett.

If you’re naming the victim and her family, you should name the accused!!

Please fix this offensive and perverse cover-up which this town facilitated for privileged rapists, and tormented and terrorized victims.

I hope you consider this, before deleting my post. 99.196.101.241 (talk) 19:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing fine, entirely correct, and don't worry if you make mistakes, we all do and did when we were new. Of course I'm not going to delete your post! I hope you haven't become cynical about your Wikipedia colleagues already! You make a reasonable point, altho I disagree. Hoping this is OK with you, I'm moving your message over to the article talk page so others can see and participate if they like. Herostratus (talk) 01:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Justin Bieber on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Claude Debussy on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games about pirates has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 11:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I happened to lurk into that post, felt like looking at the previous RfC, and thought it was under-attended and under-argued, so another was appropriate. Nothing nefarious there. Herostratus (talk)

You are following Moonraker, or following my Talk page? Why? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:19, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your page is on my watchlist, yes. I actually forget why -- might be left over from some conversation we had or something. I've got a few editors' pages on my watchlist, for assorted reasons. Pretty sure that's not terribly uncommon. Herostratus (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment, and at Talk:Czech koruna on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} [reply]

Donner60 (talk) 23:55, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Allegations of CIA drug trafficking on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working through the list of potential articles that could contain content qualifying for inclusion in this project. Most recently working on the list of films that might contain content to be included in this project. Like you I don't have a real focus on what I work on and this was one of multiple tasks I had taken up over the last few months. My question is basically have we lost this WP forever? Mainly because I can't see continuing to work on these lists if no one will benefit from their inclusion in the project. Thanks! Demt1298 (talk) 01:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhhh... coincidentally, I just rewrote the project home page to indicate that the project is defunct. It's not coming back, and probably doesn't need to, with its narrow focus. Sorry about your wasted time. Herostratus (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Herostratus I don't consider the time wasted. Falling under WP Sexuality, it was just an area of interest of mine and I don't mind the work. Guess I just got on the editing bus too late. Thanks for the follow up Demt1298 (talk) 23:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He has many such rights. Takhirgeran Umar (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have no idea who you're referring to? Herostratus (talk) 07:51, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You removed my editing. here. The participant distorts Russian -language sources. Takhirgeran Umar (talk) 08:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to remove the original study? You returned it, I was waiting for you to do it yourself. Takhirgeran Umar (talk) 14:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to not make other unwelcome when explaining disclaimers. That was not my intentions. I will think of better ways to welcome new people to Wikipedia especially when they are asking about disclaimers. Cwater1 (talk) 06:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwater1 143.89.191.68 (talk) 08:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

? Cwater1 (talk) 12:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwater1: Yes, yes, sorry not to get back to you.Yes it's fine, I understand the circumstances, it's a big project and moves fast and its hard to give proper consideration to all new people pouring in, and doing a lot of monkey business often as not. I truly appreciated your willingness and ability to reconsider things and examine yourself, that is a marker of a fine editor. Herostratus (talk) 23:46, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are always ways to for me to improve. Cwater1 (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For everyone. Herostratus (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is tue. Cwater1 (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the like on the video I uploaded of sailors chasing a pig on Clipperton Island. Just thought you might enjoy the other parts of that video! [4]https://catalog.archives.gov/id/76703 Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 05:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Herostratus (talk) 05:08, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Cover of The Amboy Dukes, novel, c. 1947, lurid.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Cover of The Amboy Dukes, novel, c. 1948, lurid.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...I guess? :) For the Barnstar. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)ut[reply]

Oh, but that wasn't me actually, it was Notary Sojac, a cat skinner from Novosibersk. (He's kind of a jack of all trades, actually -- vegetable kidnapper, wig-wag critic, scrod manipulator, Secretary of Tourism for Costa Rica, and lots more.) He's just one of many people who use this account -- I can't stop them. I've even got a shape-shifting lizard man from Alpha Draconis, God knows how he got in. My therapist says they're all in my head, but I'm pretty sure my therapist is just a half-empty book of matches on the filthy linoleum floor of a drab, failing dive bar in Altoona, in 1953. So I dunno. Herostratus (talk) 02:56, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You sir, are a goofball, but an entertaining one at that, hewn from the crooked timber of mankind. That said, I see what you did there. My distractions often severely retard my cluefullness when assaulted with nuance... cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 06:15, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Timothée Chalamet on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:33, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wanted to be bold and move your Finland does not exist draft to the mainspace, but since it is currently one of your user subpages and not in the draft space, I figured I'd ask if you maybe wanted to move it yourself. I personally think it's pretty ready for mainspace inclusion right now. Soulbust (talk) 05:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Soulbust, I'm gonna say no... for one thing, somebody's going to nominate it for deletion... it was deleted, five years ago, after a WP:AFD discussion, here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finland does not exist. Yeah five years is probably long enough to try again, but some people won't think so. Unless there's significant changes to the article from the deleted version, which you're welcome to edit the article in my userspace if you like. But I'm not seeing any new material on it to add, which also highlights that it really was a flash in the pan I guess. Which is a fair point tbh. So overall it's very likely to just be deleted again, and that'd be a waste of time. But thanks for asking! Herostratus (talk) 15:05, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Fifth Industrial Revolution on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page File:Logo of the Improved Order of Red Men.gif has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image was an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links were updated.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:WikiProject Telecommunications/Area codes RfC on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In a few weeks' time I am going to be overhauling this article in response to comments in the recent peer review. But feel free to hop in with changes or suggestions. Consider dropping by Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/British logistics in the Western Allied invasion of Germany/archive1 at FAC or Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/History of military logistics at A class. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:51, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK--Herostratus (talk) 04:56, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Barbara Blackburn (typist) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks? But what happened two years ago? I mean besides the The Tigray Defense Force seizing the Tigrayan capital Mekelle of course. But I had nothing to do with that, I swear Herostratus (talk) 16:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Isla Bryson case on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Statue of Elvis Presley at age 13.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 23:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Sia on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hentai Example.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 10:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Storm Daniel on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Leesburg Stockade.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 12:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, User:Iruka13, User:Iruka13, User:Iruka13. Dang. And I would have gotten away with it too, if not for you kids and your darn dog. You are correct, I fell into error. The photo is replaceable. I don't think I've ever uploaded a replaceable photo before, but I really wanted a photo, cos I like to illustrate Confederate crimes, and after all there is a photo on Commons that I could have used, but that is clearly not free -- the uploader lied, and I tagged it for deletion, altho I could have just averted my eyes and whistled as I put in the article and no one would ever have been the wiser, probably -- and after all I did have enough commentary that benefited from the illustration so as justify fair use, and... well, when it came to it, it was as if some occult hand reached down and moved my finger to the "Publish" button. But I should have remembered... St Peter knows every little secret sin we commit, and so, apparently, do you.

So, thank you for saving me from the temptation of error, and for helping me to be a better editor, and I apologize for the extra work I caused. Herostratus (talk) 18:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1800 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Valery Androsov 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/Valery Androsov 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 until the discussion has finished.

Boleyn (talk) 20:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Aubri Ibrag on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you decided to write "Southern" in lowercase throughout the page Southern Italy. What do we do with the page Northern Italy, where the initial is always capitalized (the word "Northern"), and the page Central Italy? JackkBrown (talk) 00:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno. Change them, or leave them alone, either is fine by me. We don't have to be consistent between articles, only in articles, is the usual rubric here I think, partly because we can't be consistent, as people are writing it both ways every day I suppose.

I edited Southern Italy to be internally consistent because it was brought up in this thread at the Help Desk, and I changes S to s rather than vice versa because one editor wrote

"Southern X" and "southern X" often have different connotations: the former implies that the term is conventionally recognised in some particular context (which could be in government administration, a weather-forecast region, some scientific discipline, a commercial company's sales-force organisation, etc., etc.) while the latter is more vague and may be a current writer's momentary description with no intended precision.

This is spot on, and so I changed my thinking that it didn't matter. And looking, I see that the first sentence of WP:MOSCAPS is "Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. In English, capitalization is primarily needed for proper names, acronyms, and for the first letter of a sentence".

I didn't see the question on the article's talk page, I was aware only of the Help Page thread. You are entirely welcome to roll my edit back per WP:BRD and we can look into it some more. But I didn't think of the WP:MOSCAPS talk page, where it would be a good place to get knowledgeable people to engage.

I mean, if you look at the talk page for Peshtigo Fire, we practically had a knife fight over whether that term is a proper name or just a description. Researching, we found that capitalization for other fire articles was inconsistent. I expect that's the case here, with "Northern This" and "southern That" all over the Wikipedia. If we wanted to change our articles to all be consistent, its not just a matter of Italy, but of very many thousands of articles that would have to be changed, which would not be a good idea to do for various reasons. But you're welcome to edit Central Italy and Northern Italy to be internally consistent, by all means. Herostratus (talk) 06:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Herostratus

You may have noticed that you have not received any messages from the Wikipedia:Feedback request service for over a month. Yapperbot appears to have stopped delivering messages. Until that can be resolved, please watch pages that interest you, such as Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

This notification has been sent to you as you are subscribed to the Feedback Request Service. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am really tired of how some editors are allowed to go around Wikipedia and threaten people, bad mouth them and attack them. I just had someone claim I am leaving behind lots of non-existent categories. This is just plain not true, and even if it was, the first response to it being a threat to take a person to ANI and seek even more editing restrictions against them was down-right rude. I have of late, for several months, not only been trying to ensure that every new category I added to an article existed, but that if I created a new category it had at least 5 articles in it. I am really frustrated with how rude some people are, and I am very frustrated with editors basically being allowed to go around bullying people. I know it is not worth actually brining it up at ANI, and I do not want anyone else to either, because even if your are not the party bringing it up at ANI, if you are the victim of bullying it is assumed that punishing you for being bullied is fair practice. Wikipedia has a toxic environment. Until people stop treating honest mistakes as if they are "disruptive" it will remain toxic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I am tired of no matter how many things I do right, people seem to find ways to just harp on things they disagree with. I am very discouraged and frustrated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ugh User:Johnpacklambert that sucks. Can you give me some diffs? Where people were rude? Maybe I can help smooth this out a little. It's not OK to make people feel unwelcome here. People are always going to disagree with each other here tho. Do these people have a point, or are they basically making a mountain out of a molehill? Again: some diffs please. Herostratus (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tim Hunt on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Herostratus, could you take a look at the notability (per WP:GNG) of Dmytro Kushneruk and help resolve the banner that is questioning notability? In a different discussion you mentioned that you thought GNG was met by references in that article. Thank you Trzb (talk) 21:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:LiveJasmin on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Herostratus,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Francis Scott Key Bridge (Baltimore) on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Alexfotios (talk) 21:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2024 United States presidential election on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shipwrecks of North Asia has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Reminder of civility norms at RfA on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It might be worth it to include the fact that his son, Samuel Loring Morison, was convicted of espionage and later pardoned by President Clinton. See the Wikipedia article on his son. 63.248.190.240 (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But his article says he Samuel Loring was his grandson. So... not sure if that belongs. Samuel Eliot may have had many grandsons... Loring is dead, so WP:BLP does not apply. Since it's two generations away, it's kind of trivia, but trivia is often fine. I'll taka a look at it, thanks for heads-up. Herostratus (talk) 23:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any article without an infobox has the coords placed at the end, though the "display=title" parameter means that they are shown at the top. Please don't make undiscussed changes to the MOS as you did in your edit to WP:LAYOUT Thanks. PamD 05:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, my bad sorry. I was working on incorrect info. Herostratus (talk) 05:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Bunkers Hill, Jamaica to end your "never seen". PamD 05:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, my bad sorry. I was working on incorrect info. Herostratus (talk) 05:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Max von Sydow on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you. Herostratus (talk) 06:19, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your WP:PA against me at the MfD page. DeCausa (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Herostratus. You might want to ask about File:Baron George Wrangell (Hathaway eypatch guy).jpg at c:COM:VPC because there's a good chance that it's either {{PD-US-not renewed}} or {{PD-US-no notice}}. Advertisements in printed publications at that time were required to have individual copyright notices separate from the copyright notice for the publication as a whole, and those that weren't published with such a entered into the public domain on January 1, 1978. Even if there was a notice, those published prior to January 1, 1963, were required to have their copyright registration renewed to avoid entering the public domain. This is why you often find many older print advertisements on Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Marchjuly, Ah, thank you. I was thinking it was probably free but I figured since it was fair use regardless I'd just go with that. But thank you for the info. This stuff is a minefield lol. Herostratus (talk) 16:19, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Herostratus I have made a RS vetting request at WT:RSVETTING. Since I am looking for primary feedback preferably from you, if possible, you being lead author of the essay and I am particularly looking for primary vetting/ feedback vis a vis the checklist essay.

I shall prefer your feedback at WT:RSVETTING. If any issues in providing feed back there then feed back at this talk page or transferring at WP:RSN too is okay. Bookku (talk) 12:55, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Notability (species) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia for the happiness of many people around the world who are influenced by the United States, Regarding the photo of President Trump, when the US presidential election topic was first opened, I hope that by keeping the WP:STATUSQUO, the original official photo of President Trump can be registered to help users who access Wikipedia.[1] Examples: Replace the temporary random photo with the original photo to keep the WP:STATUSQUO or provide comments related to the talk page for other users. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 01:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Montreux Declaration 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/Montreux Declaration 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 until the discussion has finished.

Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you! That's very thoughtful of you! Herostratus (talk) 20:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Edward Heath on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For 15 years, whenever I have seen contributions from your account, I have thought "good editor". But now I see that you wrote on Heath's talk page D is straight out as it makes the bastard look almost handsome, which is misleading the reader. What the hell was going through your mind when you wrote that inane comment? What on earth does the appearance of a person's face have to do with their character or their performance of their job? Does his working class ancestry justify you calling him a "bastard" in your mind? Is your judgment clouded by your obvious hatred of Heath? I find your comment quite shocking but perhaps there is some context that I do not understand. If so, please enlighten me. Cullen328 (talk) 05:58, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thanks for the compliment. As to the rest: Dude. It was a joke. Calm down, sheesh. Herostratus (talk) 06:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Worst . . . Joke . . . Ever. Restrain yourself. Wikipedia is not a comedy website. If I mocked Trump for his appearance that way, which I have never done on Wikipedia, I would would both expect to be chastised and would deserve it. Cullen328 (talk) 06:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump's alive. Heath's dead. I also think Atilla the Hun was ugly, sue me. If you don't like or get a joke just roll your eyes and move on, don't make a federal case of it jeez. Herostratus (talk) 06:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so you think that BLP policy protects you from criticism for saying inane and idiotic and utterly unencylopedic ad hominen things about a dead person that you clearly despised? I am astonished at your flippant attitude about your inappropriate conduct which I will keep in my memory. Cullen328 (talk) 06:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I grew up as a dedicated opponent of Richard Nixon who largely dominated my political thoughts for many years. If I mocked his ski slope nose on Wikipedia, I would fully expect somebody to say "knock it off". Cullen328 (talk) 06:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Herostratus (talk) 02:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. While notifying the baseball project about a related AfD is fine, such posts, like your recent one, are expected to be neutral per the WP:CANVASS guideline.—Bagumba (talk) 06:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Herostratus (talk) 11:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Frank Habicht, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reefer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Brocade River Poems (She/They) 01:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

story · music · places

... for missing Elen as I do -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, I hope she is OK. Herostratus (talk) 07:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. - Happy whatever you celebrate today, - more who died, more to come, and they made the world richer. Greetings from Madrid where I took the pic of assorted Cucurbita in 2016. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You made an honorable example in 2010 for submitting to the last voluntary RRfA that led to desysopping. Last month it finally happened, and your original 62% would have survived the new RRfA. What are your thoughts as the father of RRfA? I note that your work was praised by Jimbo Wales, four months after your desysopping. Sir Kenneth Kho (talk) 21:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh someone remembered, yay. And I'm glad to see this happening! Beebs must be clawing the draperies, heh. I haven't followed the recent discussions much... hold on... oh OK you need 25 requestors and then just 60%? That seems pretty weak to me. Probably the strongest that could be gotten thru, politically.

The corollary of course is to loosen up the process for getting to be an admin (since, after all, now we can fire them if it doesn't work out). They must be twinned. If say three administrators are recalled, we'd have to have at least three getting in who otherwise would not have. Whether because they are find it less scary to apply, or the standards are lower, or both. I believe some reform is being tried out on that end. Good.

My aim for the whole process is:

1) Get rid of a few -- few -- really unsuited admins. The main point, tho, is that...

2) ...it does focus a person's attention when they see the first head on a stake. Incentive for marginal admins to maybe think twice before acting hastily.

3) Twin it with methods to get more editors to apply, as I said. Net editor increase an important goal.

For my part, yeah, it is frustrating that I got kicked out, and that I would have passed now. That was a real blow to me personally and still is, and uncalled for (but then I would think that wouldn't I). But because of various reasons, I doubt I could get elected now. Oh well. And I'm disappointed that there was no further movement after my example, I mean, it worked!

I've never like the word "recall", I prefer "reconfirmation", we are all hoping for a positive outcome. Beyond that I don't have any pearls of wisdom. But again, thanks for remembering! Herostratus (talk) 01:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you will be able to run again if it becomes easier to pass an RfA, you were an early example that adminship is no big deal! There was an easy out to declare 62% as passing at the time, but you chose to stand with your principles.

I actually think the current recall criteria is balanced, but I do hope that the standards for becoming an admin will be lower in exchange for some standards for remaining an admin, and "Admin reconfirmation" is very fitting, but for years it was known as voluntary "recall", do you think it is better to switch name? Sir Kenneth Kho (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sad for you that your being sacked from Wikipedia has affected you so adversely. It's hard to imagine somebody having 'being an admin on Wikipedia' as a life-goal, but it's easy to imagine how meaningless it must make someone feel to then be expelled from such a role. Kenneth asks if it would be better to 'switch name'. I think in your case it definitely would. The name Herostratus goes before you like flatulence from a retroperambulating bovine. Perhaps if you create a new identity and change your internet provider, you might in time be able to finagle your way back into a position where you regain some kind of status? Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 22:04, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re "It's hard to imagine somebody having 'being an admin on Wikipedia' as a life-goal", well, [Redacted, but to the effect "Maybe you have a lot of other stuff going for you, but maybe I don't. It's in the history.] But maybe stretch your imagination a bit, mnmh? Chance to learn and grow.

See, now I've insulted you now. But then, I don't appreciate the insult re my bad name, even if it is true. Jeez, there are nicer ways to make a point. But no, I am not going to change it, and I'm not going to fool people, why would you suggest such a thing.

Anyway I went off cos, I mean one of the problems here is, not so much that the editors are way overpresented by one demographic so much as... you can't get a fish to understand that's it wet, and you can't get a bourgeois white American college boy to understand that that his world isn't just the world, not on a visceral level. It's OK, it's just people being people.

Anyway, thanks for the convo. Herostratus (talk) 01:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to have my last word on this conversation - but of course I expect you to have the last word. I only became aware of you at the end of last week when you posted a reply to a comment, which the editor objected to on the article's talk page, and has also raised here in the last topic titled "Hostility".

I read your comment on the Brian Thompson page several times, and could only conclude that it was terribly expressed and very hard to comprehend - in the way that's reminiscent of someone writing hurriedly, not proof-reading, and trying to be 'smart'. Or 'wise cracking', which I note you admit you've been doing since first grade. I'm all for good-humoured wise-cracking when it makes people smile. But, and I assume it's okay for me to have my own interpretation, I think you take your wise-cracking to a forced level of expressing superiority, which in turn comes across as someone with an inferiority complex who is bitter at many things and people.

I can support my interpretation by your reply to me here. You seem, if I try to cut through the laboured obfuscation, to be implying I am a 'white American college boy' whose imaginary over-privileged status and super-duper family & job has afforded him a nicer laptop and work-desk than you have. You've only your own imagined rationale for asserting any of that. You don't know me from Adam. And in any event, what difference does my imaginary lifestyle and model of laptop make to our exchange of views?

I've read through much of the myriad content about your loss of admin status. I struggle sometimes to understand your commentary - not because it's beyond my comprehension but because it's beyond comprehension per se. A common theme seems to be that you defend your own style and 'humour' by attacking others. If people misconstrue you that's their fault - nothing to do with how you present or express yourself.

Your defence of your 'joke' about your two year absence is as bizarre as the original 'joke'. I see that you say that some people misconstrued your 'joke' and formed their own ideas about the underlying meaning. I formed my own ideas about where you might have been for those two years and since it's a personal matter I am not going to give voice to my suspicions. For the avoidance of any doubt, I don't think it was penal detention.

I don't feel bad about my original remarks, which might be perceived as cutting. I do want to say that although you are a stranger (who in my opinion brings a lot of negativity upon themselves) I do feel a level of concern for you. People in general face all kinds of struggles in life - and I can imagine that being de-admin'd (or whatever the phrase is) is hard to take for someone who has thrown themselves head-first into editing Wikipedia. If losing admin status comes about at the same time as, and/or due to, other personal life events, that's doubly hard. However, it might be cathartic once in a while to ponder whether one is consistently making faux-pas or whether it's really everyone else?

There's just one little bit I wanted to add to what I wrote earlier - and please of course feel absolutely free to delete all of this as this is your talk page. For my part, I never hesitate to admit when I am wrong or to back down in a two-way discussion/argument, and I actually like to do so when I acknowledge I'm wrong. Here's my reasoning. If one assumes that all human beings are equal, which is a decent starting point I think, then it follows that each of us, in a two-way disagreement, are right around 50 percent of the time and wrong the other 50 percent of the time. So if one accepts that one is neither inferior nor superior to anyone else in this world, we should all be used to backing-down at least half of the time. If one doesn't find oneself doing so, then there's a problem. Either one really is superior to everyone else, or one has a problem admitting one's mistakes. The former is unlikely, and the latter is not desirable. And that's me, I'm finished. Best wishes for the future, and I extend my sincere apologies for any offence caused by my original comments. Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 16:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nah I practically never delete talk page material. What's said is said, why hide things. Anyway, you're not reading this, or at any rate are not going to engage, so I guess I'll have to leave a message on your talk page. Unfortunately. Herostratus (talk) 00:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have read your comment and if you want to post a meaningful reply here I will read that also. I merely said that I had concluded my input, not that I would ignore your response. Be in no doubt however that I will blank anything you post on my talk page - which I realise is a shockingly unfair double-standard on my part, but I will have no qualms about doing so with alarming alacrity. Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, I will engage with any meaningful reply you want to make if you wish me to do so. All I really meant to say is that I am content to let you, and expect you to want to, have the last word. I will read your reply with genuine interest and will engage further if you would like me to. I was sincere when I said I felt a concern for you, and aside from my possibly cutting original remarks I intended my additional input to be well-meaning and, hopefully, positive. Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 00:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. You can delete any messages I put on your talk page if you wish. I actually can't usefully reply to some of things that you said, such a me being a bitter person with an inferiority complex etc. You can't unsay those things, so I don't know if "sorry" would help at this point. Maybe. But I'd be interested in what you meant by "I formed my own ideas about where you might have been for those two years and since it's a personal matter I am not going to give voice to my suspicions." How could you form an idea about that, and why would you have suspicions. You have a smooth way with words indeed, but it is still not OK to throw that kind of shade. Out with it, what are your suspicions? Herostratus (talk) 01:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's extraordinary for me to say that I read all that you wrote about your two year absence and formed my own private conclusions based on what I read. I'm not suggesting I was correct - just that I formed my own idea. I think people do that constantly - they form impressions based on what they see, hear, read etc. For me it's more significant that other people at the time formed very pejorative conclusions about your jokey remarks, which I like you found offensive. I don't like the phrase 'throw shade' - for me it's very tik-tokey or instagrammatical, and I abhor social media like nature abhors vacuum cleaners. The last thing a bear taking a dump in the woods needs is someone hoovering round their paws while they're pinching one off. And it's wrong to conclude that whatever ideas I arrived at were negative. Perhaps I concluded you spent those two years in a Tibetan Monastery being at one with the Universe. That actually sounds lovely - that's going on my bucket list for sure. I think from your latest reply I see more of the same - you've taken my comments, put them under your personal microscope, and you're ignoring the details and seeing artefacts instead. You could interpret my mention of an inferiority complex as a compliment. I didn't say you were inferior. There's a world of difference. People with inferiority complexes aren't inferior (at at least are not necessarily inferior) - they often only believe or worry they are inferior and over-compensate for their own introspection. Like Imposter Syndrome. I think I'm perceived by people who know me in real life as a funny, entertaining, perceptive, caring, kind, helpful and happy go lucky person - which is a cover for the fact I'm really rather deeply depressed and looking forward to the peace and tax-free status of the grave.

You've written a lot about the goings on before and after those two years - and based on that I formed my own ideas. The same way I sometimes look at a book in a book-store and form conclusions about whether I want to read it or not. I now I'm not right or wrong - I just form ideas based on what I see. That's why on average 30 percent of the investment in launching a novel goes on paying for the development of the cover artwork [citation needed]. Don't dwell on the word 'suspicions'. Suspicions are not necessarily negative. I suspect for example that Elon Musk might be more intelligent than he seems - he'd be thrilled by that I'm sure. Suspicions are just ideas based on the information available that an individual's neurons form into a picture. I'm not going to say what I thought - because they're my private thoughts and I know they're more likely wrong than right. I know people in passing in my daily life who say and do weird things, and it would be easy and lazy to arrive at all kinds of negative conclusions - but I've adjusted to the fact that everyone has their struggles in life and these manifest themselves in different ways.

I'd be happy for you to tell me if you wanted to if those two years were significant, happy, traumatic, inconsequential or indeed spent with the Dalai Lama. That of course is totally up to you.

I'm merely going through a WP:PHASE and if I ever entertained any thoughts of investing any meaningful energy in this project I'd dispatch myself haste post haste (I recall you using that phrase - I know it from reading Othello 40 odd years ago in school. My reasons for saying I'd be terminally disappointed in myself for ever taking WP more seriously than I do are rooted in similar reasons I think as yours for hastening your departure as an admin. I take WP for what it is - it has its uses, but I find the enthusiasm with which some editors fixate on minutiae utterly depressing. I had some depressing interaction with one editor, and from memory they had averaged one edit every 13 minutes for almost two decades - and that's before allowing any time for sleep. I'm never going to feel any respect or affection for someone like that, which I think is something you feel too. I think a key difference however is that you care about how people with that level of WP:OCD perceive you, whereas I just find them and their unwavering arrogance utterly laughable. If they want their per-minute-edit-average to be included in their eulogy, then god help them.

You're spikey, but interesting. I reckon you care way too much about this place. You'd maybe be happier and more fulfilled to set fire to your Eisenhower era laptop, cancel your broadband subscription, and spend your time doing real stuff in the real world - I am sure there are real people in the real world who would feel the benefit of your time, knowledge, experience and passion much more than anyone around here ever will. Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 02:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I hear you. I've had enough, thanks. See you in the funny papers. Herostratus (talk) 03:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And if I'm ever visiting someone at the Funny Farm I'll look out for you there. Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 03:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Qaboos bin Said on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Individual heroes and heroines has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RL0919 (talk) 06:57, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's up with the hostility here, and why did you bend my question so out of context? The entire comment was unnecessary, the reason I added WP:NOTCENSORED isn't because I think others are "cossacks" (you put racist words in my mouth with that), I included it because some are bound to say "That's graphic, we can't have that!", where NOTCENSORED overlaps. E_F⁵ 17:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But what if is is graphic and we can't have that? If I say that, am I expressing my editorial judgement, or am I censoring the Wikipedia or trying to? "Censored" is a pretty loaded and inflammatory term. Censors are government agents who, like, come into your newspaper and destroy the presses and so forth. If I disagree with you about the matter, I am being lumped in with those sort of people? Sounds like it to me. Unnecessarily combative in my view. Herostratus (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you're twisting my words; others agree that your message was too harsh. "Or am I censoring the Wikipedia or trying to" That is not the reason I left this message on your talk page, you compared me mentioning WP:CENSORED to me being racist, which is absurd. If you think that I'm being Unnecessarily combative in my view, then your messages are unnecessarily harsh in my view. This has nothing to do with whether you care or not, the video is in the article anyway so any conversation is practically moot, I left this because your message was very harsh for no reason whatsoever. Others agree as well, so it isn't just me. E_F⁵ 01:04, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"the video is in the article anyway so any conversation is practically moot"... that's not how the Wikipedia works. Cossacks are not a race (they are Russians) and the reference was to their employment as muscle for the Tsar. I expect people to know these things. I could have used Okhrana or whatever. Third Section. Mothers for Decency.

OK so, let us suppose I made a post "I did such-and-so. You all think that's OK? Remember, WP:COMPETENCE is required to engage on issues." You OK with that? I wouldn't be. Well same thing here. Got my back up, and that's not a good start. A little sensitivity with terms you are using, please. Including "racist", sheesh. Herostratus (talk) 23:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like me to use, then? You compared me reminding people of a cement policy to hating cossacks (and don't deny that isn't racism, I'd have half of a mind to take you to ANI right now if you hadn't clarified), Remember, WP:COMPETENCE is required to engage on issues Of course I'll link WP:COMP, to channel a policy-based and friendly discussion! At least two others also condemn your comment, but I'll leave that there. Saying "A little sensitivity with terms you are using" is highly hypocritical when you basically just interjected your "constructive comment" by saying "Should this be included in the article? Please remember that if you say 'no' you're a cossack, besides which your personal editorial opinion is no interest here here". E_F⁵ 15:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]