Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4

Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.

Hello SportingFlyer:

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 1100 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I resubmitted the Draft:Canadian Lacrosse League adding eight (8) additional reliable sources including two (2) national Canadian publications... other pages have far less. At a loss of what to do. Faaksee (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Faaksee: I don't see it yet unfortunately. A lot of it is just press releases, I don't even really understand what the CLL is reading the article - is it a major junior league? An organisation? An arm of Canadian lacrosse? Something which deals with broadcast rights? If you could get secondary sources which talk specifically about the org that would clear things up a lot I think. SportingFlyer T·C 23:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[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[reply]

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello SportingFlyer: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use ((subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas1)) to send this message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello SportingFlyer: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use ((subst:Happy New Year elves)) to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

Thanks for your help and advice with the draft article for the English non-league football club AFC Welwyn. I have added some further links to other media articles and interesting information.

I based the format of the wiki page on the other football clubs in the same league, who all have their own pages. (example: Codicote FC).

Because AFC Welwyn has only been playing for one season, it is difficult to find many media stories. I also have a logo to upload, but wiki will only let me do this once the page is moved from "draft".

I have resubmitted, but any further advice gratefully received.

Thank you Sparkytoes (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sparkytoes: I've looked at it again but haven't declined it again. Unfortunately as you say it's a new club, so they haven't really been mentioned much in secondary sources, which is a requirement for Wikipedia - I'm not trying to be difficult but I don't want to see your work deleted. My best advice is to hold on to the draft and see if they generate any more coverage - 11th tier can be difficult though, and it's possible some of the other clubs in the league wouldn't survive a deletion discussion. SportingFlyer T·C 04:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Very helpful. I will continue to add to the page as more reports are published. Maybe a resubmission at the end of the season might work, especially if there is news of a promotion. Sparkytoes (talk) 08:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the ((Ctopics/aware)) template.

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 the Russo-Ukrainian War. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think it matters much who challenges the close because the question isn't "is my interpretation/argument about the RFC correct", it's "is the close reasonable." You can provide your reasoning as to why the closure wasn't a reasonable reading of the discussion, but it doesn't matter much of that's the opening statement or in a statement later. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish: I'm just frustrated because the people responding so far are reviewing in the context of the opening statement, which is completely different to the reason why I think the close was wrong. In any case it's potentially created a much larger problem for the project than anyone has anticipated considering we're here after only one table was removed. SportingFlyer T·C 01:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your comment here might need some clarification. Paired with oppose, it seems to mean "There's no evidence that MOS:CAPS is met in this case at all", but is worded as if to mean "There's no evidence the MOS:CAPS guideline covers this subject at all".  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sigh, my comment signified pretty much exactly the amount of time I wanted to spend on the situation.

SportingFlyer T·C 17:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]