Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time. This user has been editing Wikipedia for more than twenty years.

Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.

Hello, The Anome. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

So, I ended up here: User:The Anome/NHRP detaggables because of this redirect, Skeleton Cave Massacre Site. I recently created Skeleton Cave (Arizona), and when I was linking other pages to the article, I found the detaggables page. In scanning your list, I came across Work, John, House and Mill Site which I then linked to John Work House and Mill Site which has existed since 2006.

It occurred to me that there may be a number of pages already in existence, but since they are not formatted the same as what's on this page, they aren't being identified as being done. I'm trying to think on how to solve this problem. --evrik ^(talk)

MediaWiki message delivery 01:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Fictional railways 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. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Administrator changes

• Red-tailed hawk
• Robertsky

• Ameliorate!
• Ancheta Wis
• Anthony Bradbury (deceased)
• Cobi
• Ev
• Moondyne
• Worm That Turned

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

• Enterprisey
• Izno

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with ((Unreferenced)). You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Category:Ukrainian territories claimed by Russia 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. Yorkporter (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there. Regarding this edit, the coordinates are available on Wikidata. It might be better for the bot to add the appropriate template so that these coordinates can be used, rather than tagging them as missing. We could just add ((coord|display=title)) and the coordinates will display automatically. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Organ transplantation in fiction has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Bilorv (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 05:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 15:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Violates WP:BLPCRIME, person is not convicted and apparently only known for this case.

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. Fram (talk) 09:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I fully respect your 20+ years knowledge of, and experience in, the use of Wikipedia, but I suspect your experience of hot-air baths, of which Hammams and Victorian Turkish baths are prime examples, is considerably less.

The definition given in the article is one which has been discussed by bathers and writers for many years in order to try to provide a specific definition of the bath such that it cannot be confused with the mish-mash of baths which it is commonly used for. It is already a minimal definition.

I'm afraid your short definition completely undoes the much-needed specificity of the article's definition, (a) because your short definition does not in fact define the Victorian Turkish bath, which, as you will see from the flow-chart at the start of the section called The Victorian Turkish bath process, is a totality of several parts. Splitting any part off does not give an indication of what the bath is by comparison with, for example, the banya, the vapour bath, the hammam, thermae, sento, or the sauna (all of which need better definition from someone with appropriate knowledge). (b) the shampooing is omitted, (c) one does not wash; one is washed (by a shampooer)

A similar flow-chart has appeared in Christie Pearson's landmark book The architecture of bathing: body, landscape, art (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2020) p.85 so it appears to sum up the totality of the bath effectively in the United States also.

The necessary first lines definition in the article is shorter than many, and does not appear to be too long for Collins Dictionary, for example. On Wikipedia the first line definition of Sauna is almost 6 lines long; that for Hammam is 9 lines long, that for banya (sauna) is 4 lines long, that for Irish Civil War is 4 lines long; that for vegetables is 6 lines long, etc, etc,

In short, I think the 2 line definition of VTb compares rather well.

This totally new article has only been on Wikipedia for five days and I most respectfully ask that you leave the definition alone for a month or so to see if there are any other suggestions which could first be discussed on a talk page. All the steps to be taken with this page were noted at length and very few differences of opinion can be discerned. The correction of errors or indication of omissions is, of course, welcomed and will be acted on.

Or have I totally misunderstood the notification I received, and there are actually to be no changes without discussion? If so, please accept my apologies.Ishpoloni (talk) 23:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arend and Anneesa Feenstra 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/Arend and Anneesa Feenstra 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.

Bearcat (talk) 20:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]