Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this user asks you to take precautions: 1. Maintain social distancing by starting new posts in new sections, to avoid contaminating other users. 2. Follow the one-way system by putting new posts at the bottom. 3. Sign your comments to facilitate contact tracing.

Archives

/Archive 2014 /Archive 2015 /Archive 2016 /Archive 2017 /Archive 2018 /Archive 2019 /Archive 2020 /Archive 2021

Looks like there was an error at Special:Diff/1059912343, do you have any memory of what steps you took so that I can track the bug down faster? — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirect creation does not seem to work at all with Capricorn since a couple months ago. I had pinged you about the menu on a nonexistent page (in view mode) no longer appearing multiple times on Discord. The option from the edit window never worked for me (from any device) since I started using Capricorn about two years ago; looks like this was one of the possible outcomes for me when trying to use that. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:22, 12 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've seen, but in all those months I haven't been able to reproduce the problem. I've just tested the page multiple times in my userspace and never had an error, so if I'm going to fix it I need more information on what's not working because I cannot fix what I can't reproduce. How have you gotten to these pages? What did you press in order to create the redirect? What browsers and versions have you tried? What skin do you use? — Wug·a·po·des​ 01:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Happy holidays
	Happy Holidays qwerty! And happy new year! DirkJandeGeer (щи) 00:29, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DirkJandeGeer Thanks, and wishing you happy holidays too! ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:33, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry; it's a bad habit to reformat lists. Someone commented to me about that before but how wiki discussions are formatted into lists is still confusing to me. Nicole Sharp (talk) 04:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have seen your speedy deletion nominations for User talk:Takamaxa/Archives/2011/January/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April/Archives/2012/April etc. Clearly you are right insofar as that the pages were created in error, but nominating them all for deletion isn't really helpful. That requires an administrator to individually load up, check, and delete each page individually, which takes an amount of time disproportionate to something so trivial. Generally speaking, if a page has existed for many years (in this case almost a decade) and is doing noo harm, it's best to just leave it, and get on with dealing with more important matters, and even more so if a number of pages are involved. JBW (talk) 20:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page watcher) I'm a bit confused by your rationale. Since you are in agreement that they were created in error, then they are speedy deleteable per the Deleting pages unambiguously created in error clause of WP:G6. It seems you disagree about how they would be deleted. Mass deletions are easily accomplished via the "d-batch" function of Twinkle. All you would need to do is load the pages to be deleted on a separate page (I use User:Tavix/deletebox for that purpose). From there, all links on that page can be deleted by following the steps in the "d-batch" tab. The confirmation page gives a list of pages to be deleted and the number of bytes. I have confirmed that all pages to be deleted have 0 bytes, which does the check without having to "individually load up, check and delete each page individually". Let me know if you have any questions or would like some assistance in mass deletion in the future! Best, -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tavix: Thanks for letting me know that there's a batch deletion process available. I may use it at some time. However, as far as these pages are concerned, I still can't see why anyone thinks it's worth spending any time at all on them, even if far less time than I thought was necessary. They have been lying around for years without doing any harm, and if we all just forget about them they still won't do any harm, and we can all spend the time we save on things which will actually make a significant difference to the encyclopaedia. JBW (talk) 08:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JBW: For one, cleaning out these bot errors makes it much easier to find genuine archive pages. For example, as someone who nominates pages for XfD frequently, as part of my BEFORE I like to try to get a sense of how frequently the author's pages have been nominated at XfD. Takamaxa has a good quantity of page creations, but the archival links on their talk page are a mess, so I would go to the prefix index to pull up and thumb through their archives that way. Before I deleted them, those bot errors would have shown up there and cluttered the results, making it harder to find the genuine archives. Those who manage WP:PERM or are deciding whether to issue/propose/!vote on a block or ban, for example, should also have easy access to the archives of the user in question. The other problem is the one that JPxG alluded to: the fact that they show up on database queries and reports. If I'm trying to get a count of archival pages (or a subset thereof for any reason), all these bot errors are going to be false positives and skew the results, not to mention that it'll take longer to run due to the the larger volume of pages being queried. I appreciate that you don't come across these pages due to the way you use Wikipedia, others have a harder time to simply ignore these issues due to what they choose to work on, and I am sorry that you do not find this work meaningful. Since you don't, you are more than welcome to ignore those that do think it's worthwhile. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:02, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tavix: Thanks for that explanation. There's obviously more to this than was obvious to me. JBW (talk) 23:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @JBW: If you are interested, I have a long list of these at User:JPxG/Slashed titles. It seems that there are a few hundred of these, mostly created by User:ClueBot III going apeshit at various points over the last decade. I am thinking of making a large MfD for them (for the aforementioned reason that CSDing them would be unimaginably onerous). Would this be a good idea? jp×g 22:04, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Perhaps Tavix might be more interested given his response. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tavix:: What do you think? jp×g 22:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How easy would it be to put together a single page of these titles that are obviously ClueBot glitches? It'd probably be best to limit it to zero byte pages that have no significant page history so we make sure I wouldn't be deleting anything of value. From there, it'd be trivial to run it through the d-batch. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:27, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whatever it gets decided to be done can it be done with the agreement that we stop tagging pages as there are another 25 CSD's in the list of this exact format and its causing unnecessary overhead that we could potentially get a bot to deal with if a AFD will get this done in one go. Amortias (T)(C) 22:28, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tavix Just as a note, the zero-byte pages were blanked by the bot owner (I think), but some were left out, so there is still quite a number of 15-byte pages consisting solely of an archive header. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:30, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, gotcha. Yeah, those also makes sense to delete as well. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note that only 14 of these were nominated by me. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Amortias: Twinkle's "d-batch" tab can also be used on members of a given category. CSD-tagged pages are easy to delete. First, go to CAT:G6 and click the "d-batch" tab. Second, fill out the deletion reason for the pages you want to delete. Since there were also some pages tagged that are not related to this project, those can be unchecked in the "pages to delete" section. Once you double-check that all pages have been deselected that you don't want to delete, click "submit query" and they will be deleted. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that we are discussing this anyway, I will not submit any further deletion requests relating to these pages given that there are more efficient ways of dealing with them. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:47, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That'd help with some of the immediate overhead so cheers. Given the size of the change and its legacy in nature - were not impacting anything by deleting it so a dsicussion seems more appropriate than a nuke it from orbit approach that CSd tends to be sued for. On a related note I'm not a fan of just batch deleting stuff I haven't reviewed first. Load of vandalism pages - sure, but these I want to be checking to make sure there's been no content/redirects etc that I'm gonna break using d-batch nor anything thats similar but has been mistagged. Amortias (T)(C) 22:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, I understand the hesitancy if you're not sure how the pages are created. That being said, once I have figured out how the bot was misconfigured for a given run, I can tell which pages are bot errors simply by reading the title for each page. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Tavix: It'd be quite easy with a properly formatted database query (which I've written one of already). I can link it in a little bit. jp×g 22:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 1234qwer1234qwer4,

I just took care of those file talk pages you appropriately tagged as vandalism. But I'm just a little curious, how did you even come across them? I'd hazard to say that few people ever look at a file talk page and most files don't even have a talk page. It seems like it would be like finding a needle in a haystack especially since they are uncategorized.

Thanks for all of the work you do! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Liz The answer is pretty similar to the one I gave at #Query. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I noticed you have been approached by Jinnifer. This user goes across very wikis making requests. Ignore them. See User:Jinnifer and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jinnifer/Archive for more details. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• [23:01, 15 January 2022]
• [22:58, 15 January 2022]
• [22:58, 15 January 2022]

 ― Qwerfjkltalk 23:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Diff/null. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Special:Diff/1065912536. ― Qwerfjkltalk 23:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...gg ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminds me of the time I accidentally 26 kB of pictures. Good times. (No, it's not dangerous, also I see they're rolling out the Growth Team features further.... :D). firefly ( t · c ) 21:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, and now leave unnoticed before the CCI suspects us of violating copyright! They're already cominggggggfgkwwwel ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi new mentor, hopefully you don't get blocked for trolling WMFOffice before you get a chance to mentor me! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"If you're getting banned, do it with style." ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:YYYY drama films category header has been nominated for merging with Template:YYYY comedy films category header. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 02:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:YYYY horror films category header has been nominated for merging with Template:YYYY comedy films category header. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 02:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your signature "~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)" breaks 3 WP:SIGAPP guidelines:

1. Do not add line breaks (<br />), which can also negatively affect nearby text display. The use of non-breaking spaces to ensure that the signature displays on one line is recommended.
2. Be sparing with subscript and superscript. In some cases, this type of script can also affect the way that surrounding text is displayed.
3. Do not make your signature so small that it is difficult to read.

Quick Quokka ^[talk] 23:08, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll see what I can do. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

​ Thanks! Quick Quokka ^[talk] 08:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Like this for now. 1234 kb of .rar files (is this dangerous?) 23:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I liked the old one, but the new one is OK too ;) Rlink2 (talk) 02:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:AS19Portsmouth, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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. Streetlampguy301 (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Streetlampguy301 OK. Why am I getting notified? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:40, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@User:1234qwer1234qwer4 You made the first edit to that page, so it automatically defaulted the notice to you. I'll notify the person who mostly edited that page instead. --Streetlampguy301 (talk) 17:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can remove this notice if you want to. --Streetlampguy301 (talk) 17:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! I'm @IAmChaos:. I noticed that on the page Austrobalanidae, you added a shortdescription. While you are allowed to add these to redirect pages, I wanted to remind you that they should be placed UNDER the first line of the redirect like such:

#REDIRECT [[Target]]
((Short description|Your text here))

You can see how putting the description above breaks the redirect in this Diff.Please see Wikipedia:Short description#Short descriptions on redirect pages if you have any more questions. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:38, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@IAmChaos Wow, that was fast! Thanks for noticing it. I did not intend to add the short description onto any redirects but apparently overlooked this one. I'll make sure to update my user script accordingly. 1234 kb of .rar files (is this dangerous?) 00:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, no problem. I don't do a lot of article writing onwiki, but I've kind of adopted redirects as my area. And there is nothing prohibiting redirect ShortDescs, it just has to be placed differently. And don't worry, its a common enough thing that I bothered to make the template I gave you, so don't feel too bad. Cheers, Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Why is this important?

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. 75.108.22.67 (talk) 23:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the recommendation! It works like a charm and has already saved me a ton of keystrokes. Her Pegship (?) 00:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you ever come up with a list of infoboxes/genres that could benefit from having automatic shortdescs added to them? I'd like to move up with planning this because I just had to head off a thousands-heavy watchlist spamming from someone blitzing through every crater article we have (i.e. I updated ((infobox crater))). Let me know and I'll get to work. Primefac (talk) 17:54, 13 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Primefac Hello, just noticed ((Infobox Lunar mare)) could add "Lunar mare" as a description. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also didn't notice there was an independent ((Infobox Lunar crater)), which would even make for over 1K short descriptions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hrm... the way those are set up, there's no distinguishing between a mare and a crater. That being said, I could set the shortdesc to "feature on the moon" and it would still be reasonably accurate. Primefac (talk) 11:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Primefac I... just noticed now these are actually redirects to the same template. Since a lot of pages where these are used are titled "Mare *" or "* (crater)", I see no problem with your suggestion though. Thanks, 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:44, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done, we can always tweak it later. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi - I don't want to be a killjoy, but could I ask you to change your signature? When I was looking at that SPI case just now, I actually thought that your sig was reporting that they had uploaded a bunch of files, and you were asking whether that was dangerous in some way. I clicked on the link, and wasted time looking up and down your talk page looking for a section discussing some dangerous files, before realising it was just your sig. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:15, 19 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, same story here. Please find something less confusing. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a reference to this meme. Independently of whether one knows that or not, I would expect that a link just before the timestamp is interpreted as part of the signature. Besides, .rar files cannot even be uploaded on Wikipedia or Commons. 1234 kb of .rar files (is this dangerous?) 21:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have wasted the time of two separate SPI clerks/checkusers with this signature. Look, SPI cases are time-consuming enough to investigate without the additional burden of trying to work out what cryptic signatures mean. I don't want to be a spoilsport, and I can't unilaterally require that you change it, but I can require that you stop using it at SPI - either change it, or stop contributing there - your call. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the old signiature was perfectly acceptable, despite what the original person said:

Do not add line breaks, which can also negatively affect nearby text display. The use of non-breaking spaces to ensure that the signature displays on one line is recommended. It says recommended, but not required, to use spaces instead of line breaks. Also usage of the word "can" - has this actually happened in practice?

Be sparing with subscript and superscript. In some cases, this type of script can also affect the way that surrounding text is displayed. According to Wiktionary, sparing means "Prudent and restrained" - it does not mean you can't use them at all. Just have to be careful with them.

Do not make your signature so small that it is difficult to read It is perfectly fine for me to read, at least on the default settings in both Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera, and Pale Moon. So if one can't read it, its probably a issue with their browser. If it was something like this then I would say its too small.

And I don't think the SPI admins objected to the old sig either. Rlink2 (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe there's some background here that I'm not familiar with - if you've been given grief about a previous signature, I'm not aware of it, and I'm not looking to pile on to give you a hard time or anything. I just don't appreciate having my time wasted trying to investigate what I think is part of an SPI report, only to find that it's just someone's sig. I'll add that, while it's not as common as people who just don't sign at all, it's also occasionally the case that they accidentally type five tildes rather than four. That results in a timestamp without a signature. The current sig, in the context of an SPI report, looks for all the world like it's part of the actual report, and someone has just signed incorrectly. It's needlessly disruptive. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:49, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 1234qwer1234qwer4. You have new messages at Wikipedia:AFCRC.
Message added 06:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Happy Editing--IAmChaos 06:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, that breaks the link.  Courtesy link: WP:AFCRC § 1234qwer Happy Editing--IAmChaos 06:20, 24 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes. It does not break the link if you remove the square brackets from the section title, though. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:12, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy Editing--IAmChaos 23:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi 1234: In the future, it would be courteous to notify the appropriate wikiprojects if you're proposing to delete categories. The first WP:BIRD learned of your deletion of [[Category:Ovenbirds]] was when it showed up on our article alerts! And no, it's not identical to [[Category:Furnariidae]]! MeegsC (talk) 12:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I would guess article alerts are there to keep the project informed automatically (also, that's pretty much the reason non-article pages have assessment templates at all). 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unreferenced material is supposed to be removed. That applies to entire articles as well as sentences. Further, it makes no sense to spend precious copyeditior time (the implication of the tag I removed) on articles that are in such rough shape. The implication of my edit summary is that whoever started the article has more work to do and that if they don't bad things might be coming. Lfstevens (talk) 04:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unreferenced articles should be referenced. Criteria for inclusion and deletion are notability, not referencing. 1234qwer1234qwer4 05:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not sure we're communicating. Uncited material is to be removed. That would leave nothing... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfstevens (talk • contribs) 02:56, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do all these nearly identical things as a single mass nomination! --JBL (talk) 00:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Al Duncan (disambiguation) 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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You keep creating lots of unnecessary redirects to articles. I have looked at one in particular as an example, Meagre set. Most of the new redirects will never be used by anyone. For example, why did you create Meagre topological space redirecting to that page? This seems misguided. If someone needs to link to "meager set" from the phrase "meagre topological space" in a different article, they can create the new redirect at that time. But creating all these redirects in advance, just in case someone would find them useful in the future, makes little sense to me. It just pollutes the list of redirects with lots of unnecessary crud, making it hard to know which ones of those are actually used. And furthermore some of them may possibly be misguided concepts as well (I have not checked in detail). There does not seem to be any good rationale for doing this. (And this was just one example.) Let's keep things tidy, please. PatrickR2 (talk) 08:28, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A rationale? redirects are cheap. These search terms are plausible – believe it or not, the target of the Meagre topological space article explains when a topological space is called meagre. (I even checked each of those with a Google Scholar search – though I wouldn't disagree if somebody created other plausible variants not found there.) Yes, redirects are there in case someone would find them useful in the future. I'm also glad you frequently check the list of the ~10 million redirects on the English Wikipedia to know which ones of those are actually used and that my redirects are currently the biggest problem on there. Feel free to start a nomination at WP:RfD if you don't agree they should exist. You could also describe in your nomination what makes them ("seem"?) misguided given you have not checked in detail yet. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:08, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm, as mentioned in point 2 of WP:Redirects are cheap, "this does not mean we should pre-emptively create redirects for their own sake." If someone is interested in the meager concept, and they enter "meager"/"meagre" in the wikipedia searchbox, they will already find the article even without all the new redirects that you created.

As far as the misguided concept part, the most important notion related to meager is the notion of meager set and not of meager space. As you can see from the history of the page, up until 17 May 2020 the article did not even mention meager space. Then a certain user (who has a history of overzealous contributions in Wikipedia, and who has been repeatedly chided in the past for violation of WP:NOTTEXTBOOK) started adding a lot of information (most of it very good), but including this overemphasis on the notion of meager space (versus meager set). I am planning in maybe simplifying some of this at some point. And now you come in and start adding all these new redirects that give even more undue importance to meager spaces ... PatrickR2 (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, though I argued that the redirects are plausible and not created for their "own sake". Additionally, typing in terms in the search bar is not the only way readers find our articles; terms might as well be copied from a text they're used in, and some use the URL bar instead of the search box altogether. I cannot read anyone's thoughts and plans for an article just by looking at it, and I do not see any comments regarding any restructuring on its talk page either, so I saw nothing in the way of creating the redirects. I would have nothing against deleting any of them if the respective topics are no longer described at the target; however, so far they are (and have been for over two years, as you pointed out), making the redirects a net positive in my opinion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:17, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, fine. But just to reinforce what I was saying: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Topology/89zyCQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Meagre+topological+space%22&pg=PA117&printsec=frontcover See middle of the page: "... whereas a nowhere-dense or meagre topological space alone is meaningless." PatrickR2 (talk) 22:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I certainly see that a "nowhere-dense space" makes no sense, though it's not immediately obvious to me why a meagre one wouldn't. Either way, I might indeed have been misguided by the article. Maybe @Mgkrupa has any comments? 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:45, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Let's not discuss this here. I'll open a discussion later in the Talk page of the article itself, when I get the time to look at this in more detail. PatrickR2 (talk) 00:08, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

อย่าส่งโปรแกมไปทีาอื่นดิ 2001:44C8:484D:4440:0:0:0:1 (talk) 17:40, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not sure what this is about. Machine translation returns a pretty contextless phrase. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:42, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I presume you didn't intend User:1234qwer1234qwer4/shortdescs-in-category.js to have a short description? — Qwerfjkltalk 12:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed, though not sure it mattered much. 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:06, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is request for moved into mainspace. Originally Santals were hunter-gatherers and known for clearing forests for agriculture. Presently they are mostly farmers. For centuries, Santals have been living as neighbours of other communities maintaining a cultural and social distance. The Santals are regarded as one of the economically poor communities of India. They are known to be simple, honest, peace-loving, jovial in character, fond of their rice-beer and ready to crack a joke. They are also regarded as slow and lethargic people, reluctant to accept new ideas and changes. They are said to suffer from an inferiority complex. These are some of the broad ethnographic impressions that are prevalent about the Santals Golmala (talk) 12:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Golmala has been advised at Teahouse that the proper path is to submit the draft to AfC. David notMD (talk) 11:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you do something like

so that you can change the SD? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwerfjkl (talk • contribs) 17:55, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, done. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year!

1234qwer1234qwer4,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's too late now but you almost certainly would have been able to deal with the latest trapezohedra via a WP:PROD (or, failing that, via WP:MULTIAFD) -- this requires less work and input from other editors. --JBL (talk) 18:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

but more work for me because I can't just use Twinkle :p  – thanks anyway. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

??? PRODs can be done by twinkle. JBL (talk) 17:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, that was just for the multiple nominations part. I'm not really familiar with any of WP:PROD so I was just using what I was familiar with, will have that in mind though. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also honestly for articles like these you can just boldly do the redirect yourself and see if anyone complains. --JBL (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on William Henry Redmond requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

make way for article on William Henry Redmond

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 12:07, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey 1234qwer1234qwer4, may you please move the page Mwai Kumwenda into Mwawi Kumwenda, but with a redirect. This is the correct spelling.

Currently, the name is in Tumbuka language as the persona but is written in Chichewa language which is misleading and inappropriate. This is similar to writing a Русский name in Deutsch (but not as a translation). Thank you.--- Tumbuka Arch^★_★^★ 07:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tumbuka Arch Hello, I think creating an WP:RM is probably more appropriate. I don't speak these languages so I don't think I'm sufficiently knowledgeable to do this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:05, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The redirect Disannexation has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 24 § Disannexation until a consensus is reached. Fram (talk) 15:29, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Shrek (franchise) character redirects to lists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 1234qwer1234qwer4. Thank you for your work on Yellow Yugur language. User:AngusWOOF, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

redirected to the disambiguation for Yugur language which gives the reader a choice of either Eastern or Western

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|AngusWOOF)). Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Goku vs. Superman 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/Goku vs. Superman 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:43, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not quite sure why Twinkle decided to notify me, but thanks anyway 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:45, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I noticed you were a global sysop so I decided to ask you about this. Can you please semi protect my meta user talk page if possible? A bunch of LTA's keep on vandalizing it. -- Prodraxis^talk_contribs 00:19, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 1234qwer1234qwer4. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikispecies email from user "Notrealname1234".
Message added 23:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

Its a REVDEL request. Notrealname1234 (talk) 23:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

already handled before you posted here :') 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 1234qwer1234qwer4. The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help. I believe that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines. Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions. If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here. Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around! Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:49, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited UTC+14:00, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chukotka.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Letters with ogonek indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Letters with circumflex indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Letters with comma indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The redirect Template:R from native name has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 4 § Template:R from native name until a consensus is reached. Place Clichy (talk) 16:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]