This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021

• New Library Card designs
• 1Lib1Ref May

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John McGraw, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boston Braves.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

	Barnstar of Awesomeness
	Congratulations Wehwalt for having the FA two days in a row. Thank you for all the wonderful and interesting articles! You are an awesome Wikipedian. — Diannaa 🇨🇦 (talk) 02:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Glad to see Apollo 7 as the TFA. Congrats! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 06:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John McGraw, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inside baseball.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

History of the Jews in Dęblin and Irena during World War II needs to be unscheduled. Thanks, (t · c) buidhe 07:17, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:06, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

If you want to have a discussion about The Devil Wears Prada's social media claims, that's fine, but you need to realize the article is not about their current state, but the sum of their output. The source is clear, and you should definitely add a section about the band's genre, but currently, their "Christian metal" output still outweighs their recent work. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:29, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

The lead sentence is about their present status. If you want to put that in the past they've been Christian, that's OK.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

WP:BRD You decided to revert after you were reverted rather than discuss. I have started a discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John McGraw, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ned Hanlon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for Columbia, South Carolina, Sesquicentennial half dollar, about "another of the commemorative half dollars issued in 1936. This one wasn't scandalous and they went out of their way to be fair, other than unnecessarily having the coins struck at multiple mints, increasing the cost to the individual collector seeking a complete set."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

... and today for Apollo 7, about "the first Apollo crewed mission to enter space, famous at the time but soon overshadowed and almost forgotten today except for the "mutiny" aspect which led to it not only being the last hurrah for Wally Schirra (who had already announced his retirement) but for the other astronauts as well"! - .. two in a row!! ... and silently scheduling TFAs for June, - a great set!!! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I wonder why in WP:TFAR, it says accepting noms to July 23, while all of June is scheduled. Not that we obey ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure why that happens. Thank you for your nice words.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

See my talk today, - it's rare that a person is pictured when a dream comes true, and that the picture is shown on the Main page on a meaningful day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Apollo 16, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mortar and Michael Collins.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

• Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
• Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

Technical news

• Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

• After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.

...I didn't mean in any way to impugn the long and important work you've done on the page, but I'm not sure it would pass FA today. None of the top 20 contributors to the page have made edits since February so it has the appearance of being neglected, hence the "RFC" asking about how to solve the image clutter problem. Best to you and yours. BusterD (talk) 15:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

No problem. I should have been stricter about keeping unneeded images out.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Having two TFAs in consecutive days? I think you've had plenty of fish in the fryer. Congratulations on your recognition. I'm not sure I've ever seen that happen before. I appreciate your kind reply. BusterD (talk) 15:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Caught your reversion of the baking soda-blasting material just now and pointed the editor over to the restoration page where we could use interesting cited detail like that they provided. BusterD (talk) 20:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for that. It's just too much for the main article.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:49, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Apollo 16, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Station keeping.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Apollo 11 50th Anniversary commemorative coins article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 20, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

... and Apollo 15 at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 30, 2021, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, York County, Maine, Tercentenary half dollar, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Congrats! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:04, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I actually started reading this article a couple of days ago, but haven't had much time to come back to it since. I haven't been that active here in general, and I must confess to being somewhat demotivated at seeing so many of the old FAs delisted without attempts at fixing them, not that such attempts would be successful anyway (that's why I haven't been doing the work myself). Thanks for giving me a reminder. I'll make sure to come back to it in the next couple of days. Cheers. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC).

Sometime in the coming months when you have enough time, could you go through the Mays article and let me know what would need to be fixed for you to support its promotion to FA? The most recent review closed because no one had given any supports; I am thinking that a lot of people just didn't have time to look through such a long article. This way, you can look at it whenever you get a chance, instead of having to do so within a certain amount of time. Let me know! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 23:03, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, meant to go through but it's been a busy time. I'll take another look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:28, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm changing them to President, because Vice president is being used. GoodDay (talk) 22:11, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Can you explain further? Presidency is a more common term than vice presidency?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:18, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

The optics are odd, if one section/subsection says vice president, while another section says Presidency. I can easily edit in the other direction, changing vice president to vice presidency, to maintain Presidency. GoodDay (talk) 22:21, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

I would think that "presidency" and "vice presidency" are preferable, if we must choose.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:25, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Cool & easier to implement, as it involves 15 bios, out of the 45 :) GoodDay (talk) 22:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

You may have seen it on my talk: User:Shoot for the Stars had the FAC of the same (user's first FAC) archived, for lack of interest, and heads for a second round. Would you be willing to then use your unlimited expertise in FA quality for a review, perhaps even a source review? - If yes please let Gog the Mild know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:40, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, though due to real-life busy it may be a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

That's great! Thank you today for Bring Us Together, introduced as another "in my ongoing Richard Nixon series, this is a short piece about a slogan Nixon used supposedly derived from a sign carried by an Ohio kid after the 1968 campaign. It is not without humor, and not hard on the eyes"! - Bring Us Together, can't be repeated too much! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:42, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Regrettably, I don't feel I can add much to the article, so I will pass.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

user retired, and I don't know what to think of it --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Wasn't aware of that, but I just have no background in that genre of music and don't think I could add anything.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Anyway, some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:01, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:30, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for New Rochelle 250th Anniversary half dollar, "about... another commemorative, of a somewhat small town and a fatte calf"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for trying a blurb for BWV 1. I have no time right now but think it's a bit repetitive about the chorale cantata cycle, and has thus too little about what's special. Perhaps look at that? 25 March 2022, - no rush ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

You are free to edit it. I'm doing it because Gog the Mild wants to run it in August, you might want to have a word with them.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Administrator changes Trialpears AGK • Eliz81 • Mulad • ThaddeusB • Vianello • Who Lacrimosus → Ikuzaf Interface administrator changes Ragesoss

CheckUser changes AGK • DGG Oversighter changes AGK

Guideline and policy news

• Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
• An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

• IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

• The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.

Hi, this is this guy again. I just now came across the article "Grammatical person", and am finding myself most emphatically in agreement, on this occasion, with the point you made re "hatnotes wasting too much valuable real estate". I suppose I don't disagree that those works deserve to be linked from the target of those redirs, but there's got to be a way to cut the clutter. I'm thinking maybe something like

"First person singular", "first person plural" and so forth redirect here. For works with those titles, see below.

where "see below" links to the article's "See also" section, which in turn links to the various works. Does that sound acceptable and sensible to you? No protection issue here, BTW, just asking for advice. Cheers!

- 2A02:560:4259:7600:B0A0:D414:4905:41FC (talk) 21:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Check the hatnote I did on Andrew Johnson to resolve some ill-feeling. As long as it's one hatnote, it's less of a problem. I feel in general though that people are too free in grabbing that real estate, which should be devoted to information on the subject of the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Before. After.

- 89.183.221.153 (talk) 12:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

On 14 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article B. Max Mehl, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that B. Max Mehl, a coin dealer in Texas who made the hobby popular, advertised his "Mehl-ing list" in the 1920s? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/B. Max Mehl. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, B. Max Mehl), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and I hope all goes well. I questioned Scott's spacewalk as well, but was working off the List of spacewalkers where he is listed as the ninth. Aldrin did spacewalk on Gemini without problem (which may have earned him the Apollo spot). Randy Kryn (talk) 17:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Irwin, Duke, Schmidt, and some of the Russians are also listed as stand-ups on that list. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

My guess is that the latter three are there for assisting on the deep space EVAs. As long as we're consistent and it can be backed up by RS.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:28, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'd personally remove them as non-walkers. They had their head and/or torsos in space but feet firmly on the non-ground of the spacecraft. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:35, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

That's how I see a spacewalk. Entirely outside the spacecraft.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

No fireworks, Brian's birthday, remembered in gratitude for his unfailing inspiration and support - today: remember the Chapel - the missed - the music. - Can I interest you in a user's first FAC, Carillon? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Greatly missed, glad I had the opportunity to meet him once. I won't have time for a review until I'm done with B. Max Mehl but will then. Are you interested in doing the DYK?--Wehwalt (talk) 16:58, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I can do a DYK for Mehl if you don't want to, - we have a few days. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, it's more or less done, suggest a DYK like "... was dubbed the father of modern coin collecting" or similar.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:43, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll see. Remind me if noting happens in a few days, - last night I discovered that Bill Ramsey died - article needs improvement while people look - and I began the opera I saw, very impressive even as a concert, - the main critic even said perhaps especially because that focus on the music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Music happens, Florestan was a singer of Siegmund, DYK, and Leonore Isolde in 2012. On the Main page now: "my" school, together with Mehl. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:42, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

More music: 2 songs, the morning song - about rising from being down, in more than one sense - is a GA, - there should be more given my initials, but I also want to care for articles of those who recently died (now Esther Béjarano), and psalms in memory of Yoninah, - more missing than there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for Apollo 11 50th Anniversary commemorative coins (United States), introduced: about "space and coins, which are the two things I've been writing about recently. A bit different from the standard fare of 1930s municipal anniversaries. I wrote this over the course of the past year, as events happened."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Did you know that Vivaldi composed cello sonatas? I didn't until I took the pic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for Apollo 15, about "a mission which went extremely well in most respects, but nevertheless had to overcome difficulties en route, and regrettably was overshadowed later!" - On the day my parents got married. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021

• Library design improvements continue
• New partnerships
• 1Lib1Ref update

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Administrator changes BusterD Kees08 • Nickshanks • Protonk • Schissel • Ultraexactzz • Wknight94

CheckUser changes TheresNoTime Oversighter changes TheresNoTime ST47

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

• Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

• Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

• You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

Is the new production just added to the article noteworthy? It only runs from July 31 to Sept. 25. The Regents Open Air theatre is about equivalent to NY's Delacorte -- a summer venue in London (but not West End) that hosts often big-name casts. I'm on the fence only because this is the first post-covid production. -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

It's the sort of thing that I rely on your theatre knowledge about.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 5 August, 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. A coordinator will draft a blurb - based on your draft if the TFA came via TFA requests, or from an existing blurb on the FAC talk page if one has been posted. Feel free to comment on this. We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the article about "One of the more obscure of the commemoratives issued in 1936. Still, the coin tells a story, and the only scandal seems to be that Congress let standards drop and chose to commemorate a very local event."! - When scheduling September, you might consider The Coral Island, rejected before as too close to similar articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:51, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Problem editing pattern by Kevin McE. You are mentioned therein, but only as far as the talk page of the Kalakaua Coins talk page from years ago. — Maile (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Rush Limbaugh § Presidential Medal of Freedom. –CWenger (^ • @) 21:29, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, John McGraw, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Ian Rose, while that's all very nice, the amount of time that TRM single-handedly delayed this is very concerning.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Well it's a big article, and TRM posted a review to match. Maybe the coords could've pinged him a bit earlier; in any case he apologised for not coming back sooner. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

This is the production they are adding to the cast table. Its limited run, just over 2 months, is running now. It is a regional theatre. Normally, despite some big stars, it would not be a noteworthy production for the productions section and casting table. However, a filmed performance is being streamed internationally. In my view, though, it is still not noteworthy. If it transfers to the West End, obviously, that will be another story. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Wehwalt – I recently expanded and helped the article "Daisy (advertisement)" become a Good article. I intend to nominate it for Featured article, but wanted some feedback prior nominating. The article is somewhat similar in length and structure as "Bring Us Together". I would be delighted if you could help me by providing some comments on its peer review page. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Right now I have very little time for Wikipedia activities, just trying to maintain my articles and similar, especially with the month I am active as TFA coordinator coming up. If I can I will, but I can't say when.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

No issues at all. Feel free to add any suggestion you have in the next 30 days. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:46, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, B. Max Mehl, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

• Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
• A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
• A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
• A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

• The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Apollo 16, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atomic Energy Commission.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Long Island Tercentenary half dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 6, 2021 etc Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Nice, congrats! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:21, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

August songs

Thank you for improving articles in August! I try, today DYK for a GA by a banned user, - remember making Great Dismal Swamp maroons a GA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

That was a very long time ago, but I remember the fun we had.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

... and today: Teresa Żylis-Gara, the second soprano to impress me on stage, died, - long live the memory of her beautiful singing, remembered with thanks. 28 August 2013 was a special concert day: look. After Hillbillyholiday gave me a tree. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Always a shame. life can be horrible. Hope you are doing well though.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Personally well, yes, but missing too many, here and in RL. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey, sorry. When I added the reference to Apollo 9, I deliberately blanked out the boilerplate "undo" text in the edit summary, so that it wouldn't show up as a revert of your edit (which I agree with; without a source, that text should not be included). Yet it still shows up in the edit history as "Tag: Manual revert". It was not my intent to make your solid edit appear to be a bad one. TJRC (talk) 02:37, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Not a problem. I try to keep up sourcing standards. I've changed "manned" to "crewed", by the way.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021

• Library design improvements deployed
• New collections available in English and German
• Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

September songs

Thank you today for Mr. Dooley, introduced: "This article is about... a fictional Irish-American bartender who was very real to those who lived in the Progressive Era. Mr. Dooley, whose homespun wisdom was generated by journalist Finley Peter Dunne, was noted for sayings that outlasted their creator, such as "the Supreme Court follows the election returns" and "politics ain't bean-bag". I'd like to read what he would have to say about the current campaign. I discovered Mr. Dooley in law school, and was surprised we had no article. Enjoy." - Enjoyed! + an invitation to open monuments --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

... with some monuments now pictured if you click on "songs" - today: the day of bold red and black, for Dante who died 700 years ago, and Peter Fleischmann who died recently, leaving us films full of vision. Dante: just heard Inferno, imagined by a woman, the main character both speaking and singing with an inner 4-part voice! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:11, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

moar today: Fidelio, and my brother was in the orchestra, 10 July, as he was when I heard Andreas Schager as Tristan in 2021. (I heard Schager singing "Wehwalt muss ich mich nennen" in Wiesbaden, later). Remember that I said we'd hear more of him? He was Siegfried at the Met, - glimpses. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I remember. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:46, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for improving articles in September! On Peace Day, Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I understand.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:26, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Today: a woman in red (Omas gegen Rechts), two who died under "in memoriam" and LouisAlain missed - my first editnotice read: "Every editor is a human being" which is quoted from a comment by Geometry guy in a 2012 discussion on WP:AN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Apollo 16, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Are you able to assist at Talk:Habitant token#Mint, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:49, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Would you mind taking a look at Satrar? They've been POV pushing and are making disruptive edits at Separatist movements of Pakistan,CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder, and Para (Special Forces), and they are now making personal attacks when I tried to discuss it with them. They clearly are not here to build an encyclopedia. - ZLEA _T\^C 13:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the confidence, but I don't do that side of adminship.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:42, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

That's fine, thanks anyway. - ZLEA _T\^C 14:08, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Some information keeps getting posted to Loudoun County Public Schools by an anon. See [1] and [2]. I think it is inaccurate and not the right place for the information but I am not sure and so I wasn't sure where to bring this up to have more experienced editors make a decision on it. Thought you may have some thoughts on how to get the community to watch this. I also don't have much time to deal with this right now so trying to get other eyes on it so I don't have to work on it now. Remember (talk) 18:43, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

It may be appropriate to take it to AN/I. It is not something I feel comfortable acting on. It is good to see you, long time no see.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you AN/I it is! Good to talk to you too! Keep up the great work! Remember (talk) 19:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 25 November 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to comment on the draft blurb at TFA. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 30 November 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to comment on the draft blurb at TFA. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:24, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Apollo 4, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

October songs

Thank you today for Long Island Tercentenary half dollar, about "another in the series of commemorative coins issued in 1936. This one at least sold well and was scandal-free."! - Sharing the page with (RD) Carlisle Floyd. That great opera composer had a practically unsourced bio, - a shame. Thanks to Aza24 and others, that is cured. Compare Wilfried Gruhn, the author is blocked (see above, September). For what? (WP:AN, long thread which is illuminating what we do to each other, and nobody reasonable wants to get involved, and I even understand that, but I miss a friend.) - Pics and music for you, and another opera is planned for tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:21, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Today: DYK #1700, and I uploaded more images, mostly blue and green, for hope. The blocked editor translated the article. AN: some claim that sometimes a red link is better than an article, and I'd agree for propagande and maliciousness about living persons, but an architect? ... a museum? ... a musicologist? What's there contentious that absolutely needs references. The German Wikipedia has references not inline but as books, - can't we accept that, at least temporarily, and work on it together? I don't believe that draft space is the answer, - who will ever notice new articles there?? I see them when they pop up on my watchlist. I feel that I need to do something but also that I don't speak a language that would be understood over there. Music is better, - Handel opera yesterday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Today: see yourself, read about a hymn praying to not be on earth in vain, about a comics artist whose characters have character (another collaboration of the "perennial gang", broken by one of us banned - as if blocked wasn't enough), and in memory of the last prima donna assoluta, Edita Gruberová. I had to go to two grave sites last week, one who died now, one who died 10 years ago, so standing upright and in black seems appropriate. More colours - but subdued - can be had on hikes, - updated. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Today: a scandal, and more fall colours, including a short sermon, inspired by what you wrote about Br'er once: banned yes, but still a friend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Wehwalt. I talked to Gerda Arendt about possible FAC mentoring for Socrates Nelson, and she referred me to you for subjects relating to U.S. politics. The conversation can be found here, but the broad strokes are that this started out as a solo passion project that went way too far. Gerda advised me to submit the article for peer review first, which I believe I'm going to do; in the interim, I would also like to have a mentor for a future FA nomination, as I'm going to work as hard as I can to round out the edges and make sure the article can be accepted.

[Tangent] Admittedly, I would like to keep the structure of the article as a whole roughly how it is. I've thought this out for hours while working on it and experimented with other chronologies and different section orders; at best, rearranging the sections or the chronology makes the article very awkward. How the article's chronology works right now is effectively 'Early life' -> (branch off into 'Business ventures' and 'Political career', which can technically be read in either order, though 'Business ventures' comes first because there's a more natural transition from 'Early life') -> merge into 'Later life' -> 'Legacy'. The chronology is structured like this because sources have little to no interconnect between his business career and his political one. While I don't think this split detracts from the article quality whatsoever, it does mean that combining his business ventures and his political career into one chronology would mean constantly jumping back and forth with no narrative sinew connecting the sentences. (/Tangent)

As a disclaimer: I won't get into specifics, but I'm currently suffering from a temporary disability that makes focusing on tasks for long periods – like I used to be able to when I wrote the article – a lot more difficult. It also makes me more prone to overlooking small mistakes. However, I promise I'm still giving this 100% and that even if I have to work a bit more slowly, I'm still giving this the same energy that I did when I wrote it. If you have the time, would you mind giving it a once-over to see what you think of it? All the best. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Regrettably due to real life matters I can't take on any more commitments than I already have. I will be happy to review the article and offer comments. Just let me know when.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:59, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Wehwalt: That's entirely fair; my real-life issues have also meant a drawback on commitments. Regarding review, the article is as best I can make it at the moment (besides a lack of alt text, which Gerda mentioned), so I'm open to your feedback whenever you get an opportunity to read it, be that three days or three months. Even disregarding FAC, I just want the article to be the best it can possibly be, and at ~5 page views per day, it receives little oversight from other editors. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Administrator changes Clpo13 Brian0918 • JDoorjam • Karanacs • MrDarcy • Mindspillage Interface administrator changes Evad37

CheckUser changes Dreamy Jazz • Ferret • GeneralNotability • Girth Summit • RoySmith Oversight changes Dreamy Jazz • LuK3

Guideline and policy news

• Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

• Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.

Arbitration

• GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021

• On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
• Search tool deployed
• New My Library design improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:59, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

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) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		To Wehwalt, for extraordinary effort in elevating Apollo 16 to FA status. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk] 21:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

It had been some time since I had visited (much less worked on) the Apollo 16 page (and even longer since it had been elevated to GA), so you can imagine my pleasant surprise when the gold star appeared at the top, at long last. It made my day, and I thank you for investing your time in bringing it up to snuff for, and shepherding it through, the FAC process. I'd thought about tossing the Teamwork Barnstar here, but felt it would diminish the proximity and volume of your efforts and unduly inflate the role of my own, long ago. In any case, a decade long tag-team effort amongst countless editors marks a stunning transformation from where the article stood a decade ago and is a testament to the Project's collaborative spirit. Well done. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk] 21:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Your work in making such a solid foundation is greatly appreciated. I did not know who had done what, and would happily have added you as a co-nominator. If you worked on Apollo 17, when I get to it. I'd be glad to do that.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Not a worry. I'm happy to have played a small part. I did do similar work on Apollo 17 in bringing it to GAN, and I would certainly be pleased to join as a co-nominator when it finally goes to FAN. It will need a bit of tidying (and probably should see a bit of expansion) before then, so I also will look to allot some time to it once more. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk] 22:13, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Tyrol5, I've started work on Apollo 17.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. Will look to spend some time with it as well over the U.S. holiday weekend. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk] 00:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Farran Zerbe, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

November songs

Do you think you could take a look at the FAC for Jesu, meine Freude, BWV 227 soon? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I will.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

A round of prose polishing would be great! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for that and your support! - On a friend's concert day, 3 DYK, Brahms depicted + sadly Aga Mikolaj (listen!). May the roads that we travel make us meet again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Today we received the annual arbcom message, which made me think, of Doug and others lost. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Today, thank you for B. Max Mehl, about "one of the most prominent coin dealers in history, who built himself up from nothing in a dusty part of Texas, far from the coin collecting centers, and whose ads were familiar to many in magazines having nothing to do with numismatics"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanksgiving music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:22, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:26, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

In fast succession: thank you today for John McGraw, about "John McGraw, who not only spent thirty years as manager of the New York Giants baseball team, but before that was one of the legendary Baltimore Orioles of the 1890s, who originated many plays and weren't shy about abusing the umpire to get their way, a characteristic McGraw, despite great success with the Giants, kept through much of his career"! Looking forward to tomorrow's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I admit up front I am a little intimidated by your list of accomplishments, but I have an article I am thinking might be a good FA, and I need someone who knows what they are doing to take a look at it, and you seem like you fit that description. It is religion/philosophy and history with a tiny bit on antique law, so I was hoping you might be interested. There is no one on the list who specializes in religion or philosophy - my fields of study and all I ever write on - so I am hoping the topic won't be an obstacle. It's the product of a merger of two articles and it is much much better now as a single article but it is quite long. I hope its length won't intimidate you either.:-) If you aren't interested, I understand, but I would appreciate it if you'd let me know one way or the other. Thanx so much, Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I will look at it as I have time. I won't say It is a topic I know a great deal about, but I read a book on the history of the papacy a few months ago so I at least have a nodding acquaintance.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! No one could ask for more. What book did you read? I may be familiar with it. Knowledge of the topic may be less significant in this area than some others. Ignorance of all things 'religion' is more common than not, and if you are, it may be an advantage in discerning whether or not things are clearly and adequately explained for our readers. Your communication and writing skills will be applicable even without specialist knowledge at any rate. I am at least hopeful now. :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Roger Collins' Keepers of the Keys of Heaven.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I have not read it, so I went and googled a review. They said it was highly readable, technically had some flaws, but otherwise was a good choice for those with no background in the field or for beginning students in the field. Not bad, huh? Lots and lots of books like this out there, and the majority of them are not worth the time it would take to find out they are crap, so it could have been a lot worse, but this one wasn't! I'm actually relieved... I mean that in the best way!  :-) How does your impression of the book line up with the reviewers? Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:58, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

I found it interesting but a bit tedious sometimes..--Wehwalt (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, history and religion are both a bit tedious at times, so that makes sense. Jenhawk777 (talk) 23:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't mean to nag - what every nag says up front - but would you tell me if you would prefer I asked someone else about this? It's only been a couple of days, and I will, if you would, with no hard feelings, of course, you only need to say so.Jenhawk777 (talk) 23:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

No, I plan to start reading it tomorrow. Real life is busy and I need to concentrate.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

I do understand and thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 00:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

• Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
• The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
• The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.

Wehwalt, I'll try to figure out something else for the dual date that you need for your citation. — WILDSTAR^TALK 17:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

OK, sounds good.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:41, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Wehwalt, I found ((Vcite book)) which allows a less rigid date field and placed it here for you to review. — WILDSTAR^TALK 18:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. What's up with the "In" that starts it?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:39, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

 Fixed - Wehwalt, Let me know if that would be satisfactory and I'll substitute it in the article for you. — WILDSTAR^TALK 18:54, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

That's fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Missouri Centennial half dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 8, 2022... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:34, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Wehwalt, i had a quick question regarding this blurb for this article. would it be appropriate to replace "the dramatic Il tabarro and the lyric Suor Angelica" with "the tragic Il tabarro and the mystic Suor Angelica" or something similar? the article states that puccini had intended to write a triptych of three operas, "one tragic[,] one comic", and one "with a mystic or religious tone". (note that, although suor angelica may be more accurately described as "religious", i noticed that "mystic" would retain the rhyme between the adjectives, had that been intentional.) to be clear, i do not believe the adjectives currently used are incorrect, as tragedies tend to be dramatic, and operas lyric. i simply found the words chosen unusual, as they do not appear to reflect how the featured article currently appears to be describing the first two operas. i do not have a personal preference for which adjectives to use, but merely brought this issue up in case the apparent discrepancy between how the blurb and how the article describes the operas was inadvertent.

Gerda Arendt, i thought i might ping you since you were the one who nominated this article for tfa, so would likely have additional insight. dying (talk) 21:15, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

That sounds fine to me.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. English not being my native tongue, I'm always grateful for improvements. "tragic" is fine, no doubt, "mystic" I'm less sure, - it's an opera with only women singing, and the title character takes her own life in the end, - but perhaps I don't understand "mystic" properly, thinking it has to do with Christian mysticism, Hildegard of Bingen for example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe mystical?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:35, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

oh, i had interpreted angelica's vision of her dead son to be the "mystic" part, but i think "religious" may work better if there is no need to preserve the rhyme.

by the way, Gerda, in case you weren't aware, i believe "mystic" has a wider meaning when used as an adjective than when used as a noun. lexico considers the adjective a synonym for "mystical" (hence Wehwalt's suggestion), and webster includes a few, more encompassing, definitions, such as "inducing a feeling of awe or wonder". dying (talk) 22:25, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

If you two think "mystic" is fine, then why not. To my understanding, it has a function similar to the slow movement in a concerto, for contrast. Let's not forget the article is Gianni Schicchi, not the other ;) - as program notes say, Puccini's only comic opera, but with the dead person on stage, a rather dark comic opera. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Gerda, i agree that the second opera was chosen for contrast, not unlike the typically slower second movement of a concerto. was that why the adjectives "dramatic" and "lyric" were chosen? if so, then i withdraw my suggestion, as i had only made it because i had been unsure as to why those adjectives were used. the article lead had focused on the contrasting stories, though i can now see that the intention of the blurb may have been to focus on the contrasting music instead, which seems reasonable since the article compares gianni schicchi to "the final presto movement of a three-movement symphony". dying (talk) 23:07, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

by the way, Ravenpuff was vigilant enough to notice that there does not appear to be anything in the source of the image to support the statement that the image is of the premiere. if you agree, would you mind dropping the phrase "in the premiere" from the parenthetical in the blurb? dying (talk) 20:03, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't mind, but would have no idea which other production would have been photographed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

There's some musing about the photographer's studio (U.S.) on the commons. If we doubt it's from the premiere, - should we change the image caption in the article? ... which was already in place when it was TFA the last time (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gianni_Schicchi&oldid=422730565 May 2011])

I'm pretty sure it's from the Met production of 1918, the premiere, I remember seeing that image from when we researched this 11 years ago. This says it is, but they may be borrowing it from us. There was some google books magazine or Internet archive that confirmed this, but I can't find it right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

if you had done enough research over a decade ago regarding this image that you still remember doing it, then that's good enough for me. thanks, Wehwalt. dying (talk) 08:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for your share in the article, introduced: "Gianni Schicchi was the last opera that Puccini finished; his final work, Turandot, was left incomplete. Schicchi is Puccini's only wholly comic opera, a delightfully amoral tale of family greed thwarted by a resourceful rogue. Famous for the lilting aria "O mio babbino caro", the work has been received enthusiastically all over the world. The article has been peer reviewed, and has benefitted from other knowledgeable attention. For your pleasure, we trust. On behalf of conom Brianboulton and Wehwalt"! - more here with memories. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Apollo 5, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:10, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Scheduled as today's featured article for January 30, 2022... Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

hello, Wehwalt! i had two quick questions regarding this article.

• the article states that the coin contains "[t]he designer's initials, 'PB'", below the portrait of cleaveland. however, to my eyes, the initials appear to be "BP" in the image provided, although i am not certain of this due to the discolouration present. does the flynn source actually state that the initials are "PB"? i understand that the order of initials varies between cultures, though i see no obvious reason for brenda putnam to use "PB".
• i believe toronto is west of buffalo, but the list of cities represented, ordered "from west to east", has buffalo preceding toronto. as the list is in italics, which is sometimes used for quoted material, i do not know if this list was meant to be a direct quote. should these two cities be transposed? the list does not appear to have been ordered by longitude when the article was first promoted, so if this is an error, it was likely introduced since then.

dying (talk) 11:15, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I will look at the sources this afternoon and get back to you.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:25, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

looks good, Wehwalt. thanks for addressing these issues! dying (talk) 22:59, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:15, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

December songs

Thank you today for Cleveland Centennial half dollar, about "a less controversial half dollar than Thomas G. Melish's other venture, the Cincinnati Musical Center half dollar, which commemorated an anniversary that the government knew didn't exist. Thanks to the intervention of Congress, which was getting fed up with commemorative coin abuses, it was a fairly legitimate coin, and isn't that rare today"! - 2 in a row, jsu les obvious because two different months ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

I get some time off now, anyway. Thank you.--~~``

vacation greetings from Munich, rich in culture, culinary events and meeting dear people. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

on Beethoven's birthday - you would like the mezzo I heard in Zürich. DYK that Verdi said it's easy to cast Trovatore: just take the four best singers in the world. In Zürich, they tried that, - with their new GMD, by chance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:01, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

thank you today for Ezra Meeker in his second run, introduced: "I am nominating this for featured article because… I think it meets the criteria. Ezra Meeker was a legend in his own time: gifted with almost 98 years of life, he traveled the Oregon Trail as a young father, rose to wealth as the "Hop King of the World", lost it all thanks to hop aphids and an economic collapse, and as an old man, to promote the almost forgotten Trail, journeyed over it repeatedly in his final two decades, met several presidents, and was amazingly active right up to his death just short of his 98th birthday. Who else would run for office at age 93, drive an ox team in a Wild West Show at age 94, and appear before a Senate committee at age 95? Come and marvel with me at the life of Ezra Meeker."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:14, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:31, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Would you mind reinstating my MMS user group? I'm going to start back up the WikiProject Aviation newsletter next month. - ZLEA _T\^C 20:57, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

That's done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:05, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! - ZLEA _T\^C 21:06, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Administrator changes Amalthea • Ihcoyc (deceased) • Kateshortforbob • Kirill Lokshin • Rifleman 82 • Ryan Norton • Wrp103 Interface administrator changes Mr. Stradivarius

CheckUser changes Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes Opabinia regalis Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy Oversighter changes Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes Opabinia regalis Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Guideline and policy news

• Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

• Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.

Miscellaneous

• The functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you about the revert to my Dief/King edit. You were quite right. I had mixed up the 1926 by-election with the 1926 general election, which is when King and Dief crossed swords. My apologies. Thanks for catching it Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

No problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi!

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

January songs

in friendship

Thank you for all your help around FAs! - In this young year, I enjoyed meetings with friends in real life (see songs), and wish you many of those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for Missouri Centennial half dollar, "about... one of the early commemorative coin issues, which was intended as a major fundraiser and as usual that didn't work too well"! - I hope your own plans work better! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:36, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Much obliged for both.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:42, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wehwalt, Happy New Year and hope you are doing well and safe. I'm giving the Regine Velasquez article another shot at FAC and was wondering if you have some spare time to provide your review (again)? I would totally understand if you may be busy with other projects. Thanks and I hope you are having a great weekend! Pseud 14 (talk) 17:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll get to it when I can.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:39, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Much appreciated! Pseud 14 (talk) 17:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Baldwin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Go Tell It on the Mountain.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 9 February 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:50, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Double florin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles II.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Double florin at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Constantine ✍ 19:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 21 February 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Wehwalt,

Hope you're doing well. I don't know if you remember me from 2015 or thereabouts. We collaborated on Kurt Vonnegut. I am back around these parts again and working on James Baldwin. It was on the sharp side of a feeling really after reading a biography of him. I am about to start the semester in a few weeks and I do not want the project to die. So I was wondering if you would be interested in working with me once again on the Baldwin expansion. I understand if not. Cheers! ceradon 08:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Of course I remember you, and it is good to hear from you again. I'm not sure I have time right now between my commitments here and RL but give me a few days to think about it and look into what sources I have at hand.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) but Ceradon, that's a mighty fine article and no mistake—congratulations 🙂 SN54129 — Review here please :) 14:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

It is. If you can wait a week or so until I finish with Apollo 17, I'll be happy to help.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both so much! I appreciate it! --ceradon 23:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Ceradon, I got some books and have done some work but plainly the project is big enough that it will take both of us. Have you started the semester yet?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Not yet, and I will be free again beginning tomorrow evening and I plan on returning to working on the article then. I am hoping to continue with Baldwin's return to New York in 1957. The biographical details are relatively well documented so those sections should not be too difficult, but I've found had difficulty with a lot of the "tying together" sections about the themes of his work, etc. and I don't want that part of the article to be ad hoc. I'll just keep looking on that score, I guess. --ceradon 04:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I think there's enough written about Baldwin, journal articles and whatnot, that it shouldn't be impossible. Do you have JSTOR?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I do; probably was best to start my search there. --ceradon 04:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Wisconsin Territorial Centennial half dollar, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Congrats! Love your work on coin articles, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

See what you think of this edit. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

— WILDSTARTALK is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!  
 

Spread the holiday cheer by adding ((subst:User:Flaming/MC2008)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

I am no longer watchlisting Middle Ages as I do not choose to engage with the "death by a thousand cuts" that is taking place at the talk page. Not a productive use of my time - so if you're expecting me to do anything about the page before a TFA, it isn't happening. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Is it worth running or has it badly deteriorated in your view?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I doubt it's that bad - it's more that every single statement is being queried and the prose is going to be made so full of density and quibbles that it almost becomes unreadable - not that there's POV pushing/etc. I just don't care to engage with that style of "discussion" ... it's tedious and the only point I can see is to play "score points" and "look how smart I am". @Johnbod and Nikkimaria: probably are still engaging there, if they have thoughts, they can weigh in. I just wanted to let you know that I won't be around to fix the usual TFA crap. -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

It's the sourcing that's mostly getting queried; there's a notable absence of considering whether the statements are actually right.... and no new sources are introduced. There is also a consistent eastwards push, introducing more on Central/Eastern Europe & the Balkans (as we've seen before), and removing some stuff on France in particular. Johnbod (talk) 16:07, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm just going to replace it. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey Wehwalt, would you be able to review an article for FA? Buffs (talk) 01:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Which one?--Wehwalt (talk) 13:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Texas A&M University Buffs (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I see it was archived on the 12th. You plan on bringing it back on the 26th or soon after? I am willing, so long as you have in good faith addressed any outstanding issues from the last FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:45, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I want to bring it to FAC as soon as possible and have, in good faith, addressed everything I can see. Buffs (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

What kind of timeframe are we looking at for a review (no real rush, just want to have reasonable expectations)? Buffs (talk) 17:47, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Probably within a week or ten days of the time you renom it. I know you've assured me that outstanding issues have been taken care of, but from the discussion at WT:FAC, I'm not sure others feel the same way.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Rather than waste your time, what issues haven't been addressed? I don't see any outstanding issues listed at WT:FAC or elsewhere. The only remaining complaints are procedural. Buffs (talk) 23:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Then nominate, if you think it will fly. I'll review it as soon as I can, but this is my busy time as TFA coordinator so it may be a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Given that people have asked that I jump through the hoops of getting a mentor before nominating, that sort of defeats the purpose of the request. If you don't have time right now, I understand. I can wait or find someone else; your call. Buffs (talk) 16:29, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm not available to be a mentor due to lack of time. I'll review the article when it goes back up.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:31, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I looked around to find an answer to this question, but I couldn't seem to find one, despite the fact this may have been answered before. Is there a prose size requirement for an article to appear on TFA? If so, does 1000 words fit that requirement? Asking for a friend. Panini!^🥪 13:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

If it passes FAC, it's eligible to run as TFA. Length is not a consideration here.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021

• 1Lib1Ref 2022
• Wikipedia Library notifications deployed

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for adjusting in the new image. I always feel a bit odd removing images, but do think the full costume is better than a closeup. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.5% of all FPs} 17:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

No problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Administrator changes AustralianRupert • Cimon Avaro • Euryalus • Jehochman • Nunh-huh 28bytes Bureaucrat changes 28bytes

Interface administrator changes Evad37 • Galobtter Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.

Technical news

• The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
• The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

• Community input is requested on several motions aimed at addressing discretionary sanctions that are no longer needed or overly broad.
• The Arbitration Committee has published a generalised comment regarding successful appeals of sanctions that it can review (such as checkuser blocks).
• A motion related to the Antisemitism in Poland case was passed following a declined case request.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2022 Steward elections will begin on 07 February 2022, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2022, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• Voting in the 2022 Community Wishlist Survey is open until 11 February 2022.

I'll try to revisit Monday when I don't have an impending migrane, hopefully. I do thank you for the work you're doing, it's appreciated. You know I just want the best articles we can get. -- Ealdgyth (talk) 22:04, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Of course I understand. No problem whatsoever.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I've moved this thread here so that anyone else following this is better able to weigh in.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Wehwalt -- I'm reaching out because you previously worked on 1789 Virginia's 5th congressional district election and got it through an FAC. The last time I briefly poked my head out into FAC for a different political article, I got a bit walloped and I've been spooked by the process ever since. I've decided that I'd like to go another round with a different article this time, 1997 New Mexico's 3rd congressional district special election, and I would love if you could even give me some just general pointers on things that I should be looking out for in it or steps I should be taking to ensure a smoother experience this go around. Know you're busy with TFA, so completely understand if you can't-- thanks so much. Nomader (talk) 00:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it as soon as I can. Hopefully this weekend.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:04, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much! No rush at all, really appreciate it. Nomader (talk) 15:00, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I just noticed that you made edits last week-- thank you so, so much. I really appreciate it! Nomader (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

On 30 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Double florin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the double florin (example pictured), a British coin, was criticised both for being too close in size to the crown and because the crown on it was too small? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Double florin. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Double florin), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today, same day, for Benedetto Pistrucci, introduced (in 2017): about "a most talented but temperamental artist. In a way, Pistrucci's career can be divided into two periods, one as a rising star, the second as a bitter sinecurist. Still, his brilliance lives on and is familiar through his iconic design of Saint George and the Dragon."! - did you know that 30 January was the day that Precious was called Precious? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. Odd how two somewhat related articles made it at the same time.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

February songs

Thank you today for Apollo 5, about "the first flight test of the lunar module. Today, it's somewhat sunk in obscurity but it was important and a big deal at the time"! - and for scheduling March TFAs! - TPF is also nice, from Falstaff. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for James A. Garfield, about "a President of the United States. James Garfield is almost forgotten today but for the manner in which he met his death. Yet in 49 years he rose from poverty (the last president born in a log cabin) to the White House. He did much in those 49 years, and possibly could have done more if he had been spared for four more."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome--Wehwalt (talk) 14:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Double florin, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Apollo 17, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Administrator changes Modussiccandi BOZ • Brookie (deceased) • Jackmcbarn • Jamesday • Jonathunder • Master of Puppets • Saravask

CheckUser changes Callanecc Oversighter changes Callanecc

Guideline and policy news

• A RfC is open to change the wording of revision deletion criterion 1 to remove the sentence relating to non-infringing contributions.
• A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.

Technical news

• The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (T296645)
• Special:Nuke will now allow the selection of standard deletion reasons to be used when mass-deleting pages. This was a Community Wishlist Survey request from 2022. (T25020)
• The ability to undelete the talk page when undeleting a page using Special:Undelete or the API will be added soon. This change was requested in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. (T295389)

Arbitration

• Several unused discretionary sanctions and article probation remedies have been rescinded. This follows the community feedback from the 2021 Discretionary Sanctions review.

Miscellaneous

• The 2022 appointees for the Ombuds commission are Érico, Faendalimas, Galahad, Infinite0694, Mykola7, Olugold, Udehb and Zabe as regular members and Ameisenigel and JJMC89 as advisory members.
• Following the 2022 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AntiCompositeNumber, BRPever, Hasley, TheresNoTime, and Vermont.
• The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey results have been published alongside the ranking of prioritized proposals.

Hello, I saw you changed in two US president articles. I fixed more better and why you changed? Usernogood (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it's better the way it was.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:56, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Kurt Vonnegut has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 11... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:44, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

and Connecticut Tercentenary half dollar for April 12. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:53, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

and Apollo 16 on April 16, 2022... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:56, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Re Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/The Shadow (magazine)/archive1, my only suggestion is that the phrase "The Shadow knows!" is widely enough known that it would be good to get it into the blurb, if we can think of a way to do so without taking up too much space. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:47, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

I've made an edit to that effect; I tried to avoid making it too much longer as I recall there's a length limit for the blurbs. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:48, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

It's a little over but I think it's OK because we aren't using an image. If it isn't, probably Dying will shorten it when they make a run through the article about a week in advance.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:09, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

On 9 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jubilee coinage, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on the Jubilee coinage, Queen Victoria wore a crown so small that critics said it might fall off her head? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jubilee coinage. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jubilee coinage), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Always precious

Precious

ten years

thank you for competence, helpfulness and friendship --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

thank you today for Farran Zerbe, about "a major figure in numismatic history, if a controversial one. He seems to remain controversial, as in 2021, the American Numismatic Association took his name off its major award, some 110 years after the events in question."! - Prayer for Ukraine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:34, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your help at John Tyler. However, I noticed that the protection you put in is significantly shorter than the previous protection which expired only a short time ago. Would you please take a look at the page's protection history and consider making the semi-protection longer? Thanks. Turnpike Tony (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

If someone wants to lengthen it, they are welcome. I'm going to keep it at a few hours and hope the person gets discouraged.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:59, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

What do you think of these changes? I'm not sure that most of them were improvements: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carousel_%28musical%29&type=revision&diff=1078202265&oldid=1076044535 -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:36, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022

• New library collections
• Blog post published detailing technical improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Evening Wehwalt,

I hope you are keeping well and that life is returning to something approaching normality for you. I’m also hoping that you can help me out with your encyclopaedic knowledge of US presidents. Having become interested in this, Tower of the Koutoubia Mosque, I wrote this, Villa Taylor. I’m now wanting to check I’m right about the villa’s original owners. The sources list the builder as Mr Moses Taylor, who I think is this guy, Moses Taylor Pyne, or his wife/widow, who is only ever listed as Mrs Moses Taylor. But the Fox Weber, Architectural Digest, article, Source 3, does identify Mrs Taylor as a granddaughter of Ulysses S. Grant. Puzzlingly, most sources suggest Villa Taylor was built somewhere around 1922-7, and Moses Taylor Pyne died in 1921. Do you happen to know which of Grant’s granddaughters married a Taylor, descendants of this guy, Moses Taylor, and what her name was? Any help gratefully received. Equally, a “not got a bloody clue” response would be entirely understood! All the best, KJP1 (talk) 17:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Regrettably, "not a bloody clue". All's well, hope the same for you?--Wehwalt (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Understood - shall keeping digging away. Getting back to normal this side of the pond, and a glass with Riley at the Wehwalt Arms will shortly be on the cards. KJP1 (talk) 17:31, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I wish I could be there, but I don't expect to be in London until possibly next year. It's reasonably normal here now.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:13, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

March songs

Thank you for improving articles in March. Music if you like. Prayer for Ukraine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with Bach's works towards FA, and his No. 1 especially today, scheduled by you! - Do you think you could look at the FAC for San Marco in Venice (not by me)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll try this weekend.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

thank you! - I went outside, Sunday flowers and sounds, don't miss the extraordinary marriage of the beginnings of the theme of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1, and Prayer for Ukraine - here! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I looked at it. I'd rather wait until they're able to clear Gog's oppose, especially since Tim riley also has reservations.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

you decide - I feel that (in this case) GtM didn't really look, and I feel sorry for the nominator, who will rather have no star than cut the article up, reminding me of The Caucasian Chalk Circle --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:41, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll look at it as soon as I'm done with Frank Russell, 2nd Earl Russell. I'm almost done with that.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:52, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for being open, - the key question I see is if all FAs have to be created equal, or if a special topic may receive special treatment. It's the nominator's second FAC, - the first was also a building in Venice, which appeared on 25 March last year, - the day I wanted but didn't get the article to FA until 26 March :) - well, it appeared now, creating a record of 5 items on the Main page one day, a sad record because of all the dead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).

Administrator changes Firefly • Sdrqaz Ad Orientem Geschichte • Ryan Postlethwaite • Sabine's Sunbird • Wassupwestcoast

Interface administrator changes Evad37

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.

Technical news

• Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928)
• When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)

Arbitration

• Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
• A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
• A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.

Any chance you'd be able to help on an FAC article review prior to submission for Texas A&M University. Buffs (talk) 19:37, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm trying to get some articles done. No promises, but I'll try to leave some comments.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Wikipedia:Peer review/Texas A&M University/archive2 when/as able. Buffs (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Buffs, as I see Hurricanehink has left extensive comments, could you ping me when those are dealt with?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I'd be happy to do so, thank you. Buffs (talk) 19:28, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Those issues have been dealt with. Buffs (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I want Federico Gatti be a FA. This article is arleady being GA Reviewed (by someone who's not very active, feel free to review it) but I constantly improve its content (I'd nominated the article for GA on 9 February but I've since then really improved it - look here). Can you teach me how to make it a FA? Dr Salvus 10:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Unhappily, due to upcoming travel during the next two months, I'm not able to commit the time it would take to do it properly. I will happily give it a review when you need one but would prefer to wait until the GAN review is done.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:04, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 9 May 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 9, 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Jubilee coinage, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

April thanks

April songs

Congratulations, and thank you today for Connecticut Tercentenary half dollar, about "a commemorative coin that for once, was not beset with scandal. And the Charter Oak is a bit of American history they don't teach much these days."! - ... also nice to see a tree pictured! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for Apollo 16, introduced: "... the next to last mission to land on the Moon. It's actually the only one that I remember watching astronauts on the Moon since I was home from school when it was on the lunar surface. Difficult to believe it is fifty years in April."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

dance and singing, peace doves and icecream --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Agree, especially the ice cream.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Administrator changes Colin M David.Monniaux • Fribbler • Grue • Kpjas • West.andrew.g

CheckUser changes Ks0stm Oversighter changes Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
• Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.

Technical news

• The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
• A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.

Arbitration

• Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.

Can Where the Wild Things Are be on the Wikipedia homepage as the featured article for November 13, 2022?--2603:7080:7403:18F0:9415:1C24:24DE:6CB9 (talk) 23:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

It's not a Featured Article, WP:FA. It's not eligible too be on the main page.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I intend to nominate an article you have contributed significantly to (Apollo 4) for Todays Featured Article Googleguy007 (talk) 02:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

That's fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Wehwalt, thank you for your vigilance and mindfulness regarding Wikipedia's Nixon article. I was delighted by your invitation and it's a privilege to discuss it with you. The reason I inserted the image of the "Man of Steel" button into the end of the "Personality and public image" section was that it emphasizes what is usually assumed to be Nixon's foremost problem, the "toughness" self-image that he prized and that appears to have isolated him from actual friendships. Quoting Richard Reeves from the section---Nixon's presidency was doomed by his personality, Reeves argues: "He assumed the worst in people and he brought out the worst in them ... He clung to the idea of being "tough". He thought that was what had brought him to the edge of greatness. But that was what betrayed him. He could not open himself to other men and he could not open himself to greatness." Earlier in the same section we have this: Nixon biographer Conrad Black described him as being "driven" though also "uneasy with himself in some ways". According to Black, Nixon "thought that he was doomed to be traduced, double-crossed, unjustly harassed, misunderstood, underappreciated, and subjected to the trials of Job, but that by the application of his mighty will, tenacity, and diligence, he would ultimately prevail." This is the basic thrust of the section (and, one might venture to say, Nixon's life) and is crystallized by that weird slogan on that campaign button "Man of Steel." I think placing it right there, as a conclusion to the section as well as the entire actual text of the article itself, is irresistible. I remember the 1960 campaign vividly but I'd forgotten about that button until I spotted it in Wikimedia, to my delighted surprise. To place it in that spot emphasizes and truly serves as an actual illustration of what that section is about. Changing the subject to a different photograph, the picture of Nixon in his Air Force One cabin winging his way to China to ultimately change the global economy completely (for better or for worse) is worthwhile because photographs of Nixon depicting a good view of his Air Force One cabin, a diverting symbol of presidential power itself, are rare and this one is particularly superb. (You mentioned that you feel that there are too many photographs in the article so I'm going to remove one that I had placed in the Civil Rights section right now.) I hope that you agree with me on both counts after listening to my point of view. Please let me know what you think, and once again, it is a privilege to interact with you. Racing Forward (talk) 18:35, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for posting this. I greatly appreciate your work in updating the Nixon article, which is one of the important ones on Wikipedia. Could you post what you've just written to Talk:Richard Nixon? That way it will get more eyes and hopefully opinions.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Wehwalt. I'll do that within the next day or so if not before, and I appreciate your commiseration. Perhaps I'll do a little light rewriting since it will be aimed at everyone. Racing Forward (talk) 23:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

No, the photo that you removed was the only one of Mao Zedong and Nixon in the whole article. The fellow in the other two photos in the China section was Zhou Enlai, the Chinese prime minister, not Mao Zedong. Racing Forward (talk) 00:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Grand Coulee Dam for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 04:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Frank Russell, 2nd Earl Russell, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

May songs

Congratulations to another good one, and thanks for scheduling June well, and today thank you for Double florin, about "a very short lived British coin. Not only was it the curse of barmaids, but the two men who designed it died less than a year after it was abolished, and the conflict over the designs may have contributed to their deaths"! I have a song on the same page that is hardly known anymore but was prominently used for a chorale in a Bach cantata. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

today performances in Ukraine - for Ukraine - for peace, at the bottom an imaginary set of eight DYK - and more May pics--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

today more pics, and should this woman have an article? - or only her sons? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I suspect she would satisfy WP:GNG.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for that. What do think about questions raised here? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I like my talk today (actually mostly from 29 May - I took the title pic), enjoy the music, two related videos worth watching! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 50, March – April 2022

• New library partner - SPIE
• 1Lib1Ref May 2022 underway

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC) (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Administrator changes Tamzin Barek • Darkwind • Geometry guy • ProcseeBot • RoyBoy • Sean Whitton • Valereee • Visorstuff • WAvegetarian Sn0wflake → VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• Several areas of improvement collated from community member votes have been identified in the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines. The areas of improvement have been sent back for review and you are invited to provide input on these areas.

Technical news

• Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
• The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

• Remedy 2 of the Rachel Marsden case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to delete or reduce to a stub, together with their talk pages, articles related to Rachel Marsden when they violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
• An arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been closed.

I think all of these changes are wrong. If you agree, would you please revert? I've already had to revert other bad changes by this IP a couple of times. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:58, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Nixon calling himself Dick to JFK and LBJ probably had more to do with the fact that he served with them in Congress for a decade or more (counting VP service) and they knew him as Dick before he dropped the nickname gradually in the 1960s.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

In those mischievous White House tapes, civilian Nixon greeted then-President Johnson as "Dick Nixon" at least as late as 1967, if you look it up and listen on YouTube, so it was certainly going full-blast then, although the "Tricky Dick" version might have taken the fun out of it for him. In informal conversations with peers, he was known for decades as identifying himself as "Dick Nixon." I chose the word "peers" with great care, however, since he liked "friends" such as Bebe Robozo to address him with his current title long before he was president, as "Senator Nixon" or "Vice President Nixon" or whatever he happened to be at any given time. He certainly considered Jack Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson to be peers although of course he always used "Mr. President" during the presidency of each and expected and received the same when he finally became president himself. The name "Dick Nixon" should certainly be cited in bold print because it was how he was widely thought of the entire time prior to his presidency, hence the darker but even more pervasive "Tricky Dick" (which should probably also receive mention in boldface because it was so relentlessly prevalent throughout his career). I lived through all of this myself, getting most of this information in real time. Listen to him on tape with Kennedy or Johnson and you'll see that he calls himself "Dick Nixon." What I don't remember until after he resigned is his dropping his middle initial, which was always in evidence on posters and in newspaper articles about him. I knew that he dropped it but I don't think it was before his political career had ended although it's certainly possible that it was. It was a sign of the times; now middle initials are generally out of favor but were once practically a necessity for practicing politicians, especially most presidents. While we're talking about alternate nicknames, unfortunately "RMN" doesn't have the same ring as FDR or JFK or LBJ although Nixon's last name was so short (five letters) that it practically made it a moot point. Nixon tried "RN" in imitation of his idol Theodore Roosevelt's "TR" but it never really caught on. I think we should definitely restore "Dick Nixon" in boldface; after all, Kennedy's Wikipedia article offers his nickname "Jack" in boldface and it would be a shame to shortchange Nixon's nickname. And "Dick Nixon" was far better known to the general public than "Jack Kennedy" at the time: the press was usually so reverent toward Kennedy during that era that they couldn't bear to bastardize the apparently shimmering elegance of "John F. Kennedy." Hey, if you happen to also be interested in Kennedy, check out "The Dark Side of Camelot" by Seymour Hersh, the investigative reporter who broke both the My Lai and Abu Graib stories, assuming you haven't read it already. Racing Forward (talk) 02:36, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

I see this has been resolved on article talk.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Jubilee coinage article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 4, 2022, cheers, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:36, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Now July 6 Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

and History of Chincoteague, Virginia on July 27, 2022 Jimfbleak - talk to me?

and Apollo 4 on July 29, 2022 Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Wehwalt, i had a question regarding this blurb for this article. what was the reasoning behind the addition of the comma in this edit? admittedly, i was about to remove it, to conform with the article lead, before i noticed that you had intentionally added it.

i am assuming that the comma was added to convert the restrictive appositive "Elizabeth von Arnim" to a nonrestrictive one. however, i believe this means that the use of the definite article before "novelist" would imply that enough context has been previously established in the blurb that a reasonable reader would have some idea which novelist was being referred to without reading the appositive, and i could not find any such context.

i had also been thinking of removing the comma preceding "Bertrand Russell", but figured that the use of that one seemed more reasonable, as the blurb had already mentioned the name "Russell", and i believe bertrand russell is public enough of a figure that it would not be unusual for a reader to deduce, before reading the appositive, that the philosopher being referred to was bertrand russell.

if you agree that the comma may be misplaced, i think replacing the definite article with the indefinite article "a", so that the blurb reads "a novelist, Elizabeth von Arnim", could be a way to resolve the lack of context while retaining the comma. dying (talk) 02:29, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

It was to conform with what I understood to be the practice in British English regarding false titles.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

admittedly, i am not too familiar with the practice of false titles, and have noticed that i have largely stopped following british print journalism in recent years, so you are likely more experienced in the area than i am. the false title article states that false titles do not begin with an article, and "the novelist, Elizabeth von Arnim" (as well as "the novelist Elizabeth von Arnim") clearly does, so i am assuming that the passage currently does not use a false title. had you been intending to use a false title, or avoid doing so? if the former, i think dropping the "the" so that the blurb reads "in love with novelist Elizabeth von Arnim" would create the desired result. if the latter, then if there was initially no false title, i would assume that the addition of a comma would not remove one. dying (talk) 02:59, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm trying to eliminate a false title. Does Tim riley, who reviewed the article at FAC or any talk page stalker have any views on this?--Wehwalt (talk) 11:59, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I think it is still true that the best writers of the Queen's English would not write "in love with novelist Elizabeth von Armin", but once the requisite definite article is added, there is no need for a comma after "novelist". If it were an indefinite article, the comma would be wanted, because with the definite article the phrase is a restrictive (defining) one, whereas "a novelist, Elizabeth von Armin," is a non-restrictive (describing) one. It is the difference between the restrictive "Englishmen who are pedants are boring" (which may very well be true) and the non-restrictive "Englishmen, who are pedants, are boring" (which is, I suggest, an unkind and untrue generalisation). Tim riley talk 12:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Then I'll delete the comma. Many thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

looks good. thanks, Wehwalt. also, thanks, Tim riley, for providing a better explanation than i did. dying (talk) 01:52, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Apollo 6, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

June songs

Congratulations! Also, thank you today for David Scott, about "one of the four living people to have walked on the Moon. David Scott, commander of Apollo 15, is still around after a distinguished military and NASA career"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

June music

Ukrainian peace music is now "on"! - Pentecost (on last Sunday and Monday in Germany) brought a harvest of great music in two church services (one with me singing in choir) and two concerts with my brother in the orchestra, - four pictures I took besides the symphonic one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for Frank Russell, 2nd Earl Russell, about "the second Earl Russell. He wasn't prime minister like the first earl, Lord John Russell, nor a famous philosopher like the third, Bertrand Russell. He had three marriages, all of which ended badly, and other events that marred his life, but he still accomplished a good deal. He was also the last person convicted in a trial before the House of Lords, and the first celebrity to get a Nevada divorce, the two being directly related."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

My song collection in June is especially rich, look, and the hall where I first heard DFD, Pierre Boulez and Murray Perahia. Do you find the baby deer in the meadow (last row)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Which image?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

You click on songs, then last row --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes I do but I would not have seen had you not said.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:54, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I have reverted this twice. Sato was an important supporting player, but not a starring role, as confirmed by the poster shown in the article. If you agree, would you either revert and warn the editor about warring, or else semi-protect the article? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Now that is editors working together! Glad to see it. Thanks Wehwalt! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 19:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks!--Wehwalt (talk) 19:11, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey Wehwalt! I see you have drafted a blurb for "Dear Future Husband" (Thanks for that!). I wanted to ask if it would still be okay to run another Trainor song, "Like I'm Gonna Lose You", as TFA on December 22, 2022, which would mark her 29th birthday. I was planning it for that date for a while and have it listed at WP:TFAP already. My original plan was to use "Husband" for Trainor's husband's birthday (June 14).--NØ 16:40, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

I know of no reason why it would not be OK for December 22, but I don't know what's coming along that people might nominate so I can't commit myself absolutely. You've put it at pending, that's swell. Regarding Husband, Gog the Mild who is scheduling August, listed it here and I volunteered to do the blurb. If you prefer a different date than listed there, you might want to tell them.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:27, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming. I am totally fine with running "Husband" in August then. Have a great day!--NØ 17:44, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Administrator changes AA • Gwalla • Ioeth • Laurascudder • Moriori (deceased) • Nat • Rfl Drilnoth → AFigureOfBlue Bureaucrat changes Lee Vilenski

Interface administrator changes Nihiltres

Technical news

• user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case regarding conduct in deletion-related editing has been opened.

Miscellaneous

• The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.

Wehwalt, i had a question regarding this article and the associated blurb. was apollo 4 originally scheduled to launch in late 1966? the article body mentions that, early in 1965, the program director scheduled the mission for early 1967, and i could not find anything in the article stating that it had been scheduled prior to that. dying (talk) 06:21, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I've changed that. If I find a source that justifies it, I'll change it back. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:28, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations, Wehwalt! The article you nominated, Old Head coinage, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hog Farm (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but what's the logic? A few of the other numbered footnotes also cite books. Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Having a reference there might cause the reader to believe that it is the source for the information in the preceding sentence.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 26 August 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 26, 2022, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/August 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:53, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Wehwalt, i had two questions regarding this article and the associated blurb.

• i was confused by the statement in the article that "[t]he public ... would not confuse the double florin and crown", since they clearly did, which is why the former was dubbed "Barmaid's Ruin". had something else been meant? i thought perhaps this was simply goschen's opinion rather than fact, but the cited source does not appear to have explicitly reported that either, stating the following.

  The public had become quite accustomed to the difference between the florin and the half-crown and no confusion existed with regard to them. There would be a similar difference between the new double-florin and the crown.

• why did the government decide to exclude the bronze coins from the jubilee coinage "due to a surplus of them in commerce" (according to the blurb), but still mint over 50 million pennies during those years (according to a section of the linked penny article)? i recognize that this might be outside the scope of the article, so no worries if you are not sure why either.

dying (talk) 22:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Goschen was optimistic and what he said did not come to pass. The public did confuse them just was they would (in the US) the quarter and Susan B. Anthony dollar in the 1970s. I saw one source that said even bankers couldn't tell if all they were looking at were the (identical) obverses rather than the (very different) reverses. Goschen was apparently unwilling to admit the Mint had made a mistake. As for the mintage of pennies, I don't have a good explanation. I looked very hard for a better explanation, including in books of the time.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

oh, apologies, i should have made more clear that i raised the issue because the statement in the featured article, that "[t]he public, however, did not confuse the florin and half crown, and they would not confuse the double florin and crown", clearly should not be interpreted as fact, but i had only realized this because i remember reading the double florin blurb, while other readers may not end up having the same realization upon first encountering this statement. also, i did not know if the statement should be interpreted as goschen's opinion (though your response suggests that this was the intention) because the cited lant source does not appear to support this interpretation.

to me, lant appears to present the passage quoted in my earlier comment as fact (and not simply goschen's opinion). however, this passage differs from the statement in the featured article because lant simply points out that the difference between the double florin and crown is similar to that between the florin and half crown, while the statement in the featured article concludes that there would be no confusion between the double florin and crown. this seems to be a reasonable conclusion to make from the assertions in the lant source (and, i assume, was what goschen had believed), but the lant source does not appear to state this explicitly (as either fact or as goschen's opinion). i assume that you had found a source that explicitly states that this was goschen's opinion, but if you had encountered this in the lant source, i am admittedly having trouble finding the same in the pages cited.

in any case, upon further reflection, i realized that this issue was probably not a big deal because the readers more likely to be confused are probably also the ones more likely to understand that the two coins were indeed confused by the public.

also, thanks for letting me know that you were not able to find an explanation for the penny mintages. if you were unable to scratch that itch, it is probably not worth it for me to waste more time reaching for it. dying (talk) 23:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I think people will understand that it is Goschen's prediction. He cannot possibly know, it is a future event. I think Lant is just setting down what Goschen said in detail for the benefit of an audience well-versed in numismatics who knows that the double florin was confused with the crown. Thanks for all the work you do with the blurbs. Wehwalt (talk) 00:06, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

July songs

Thank you today for the article about "the British coins issued for Victoria's Golden Jubilee, of which the double florin, recently promoted, was one. It lasted less than six years, but outlived its sculptor by two of them."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:27, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

yesterday I attended a unique concert - the 18th Thomaskantor after Bach conducting - and with some good luck caught him happy afterwards! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

... and another 14 July: Voces8, pictured - I have a FAC open, in case of interest again --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:40, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

... and another 27 July: History of Chincoteague, Virginia, introduced long ago: "... because… well, many of you may know I fell ill this summer. Although I've thankfully recovered fully, I did spend several weeks at home afterwards. My first trip that was not business, in late August, was to meet my brothers and their families for a few days in Chincoteague. It was a very pleasant five days, and while there, I had the idea … here is the result."! - It's great to revisit, and than you for steady energy you put into this project. Meeting with friends right now, for a sad reason, with a cheerful Psalm on DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:14, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

... amazing, just two days later: thank you for Apollo 4, about "an uncrewed spaceflight, long almost forgotten, but it was a very big deal at the time, attracting VIPs by the score to Kennedy Space Center, including Walter Cronkite, who got a bit more than he expected"! - pics of hiking in the alps (last done in 2015) and one of the funeral flowers if you click on songs, and a "romantic" DYK --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for following through on the women's suffrage addition to the Borah article! PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 21:30, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 51, May – June 2022

• New library partners
  • SAGE Journals
  • Elsevier ScienceDirect
  • University of Chicago Press
  • Information Processing Society of Japan
• Feedback requested on this newsletter
• 1Lib1Ref May 2022

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I was thinking of doing the source review for this, but the case citations in the Notes section are in a format I've never seen before, and I was wondering if you have seen this approach or have an opinion about it. To me it looks like legal shorthand for something that Wikipedia might expect to see expanded. Any thoughts? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:22, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

They are proper legal citations, how I would cite those cases if I were writing a legal memorandum. It's the way we were taught to cite cases in the first year of law school.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

And would you say that's a legitimate (per MOS) way for Wikipedia to cite it? I ask because of course most of our readership won't know that format, particularly. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I believe so. You might ask the nominator to note they are legal citations for the cases in question. I used them myself in the articles I've done that involve lawyers (William Howard Taft for example) or legal issues (as in Benjamin Tillman, for example)--Wehwalt (talk) 20:57, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I see you did; that's very helpful. I'll just accept them as is, I think. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:01, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

		The Reviewers Award
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently an ongoing dispute at Talk:Andrew Jackson regarding a number of statements in the lead. As a significant contributor to the article, I invite you to participate. If not, no problem. Thank you. Display name 99 (talk) 02:55, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Part One

From your interest in FAC articles, I've been able to get a successful GAN for the music group BTS and have made improvements since then for further peer review development. Could you see if you might be interested in either co-nominating or mentoring for FAC nomination. Would this be of possible interest? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Give me a few days to look it over. I'm traveling right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

There is no rush on this. Let me know how it appears to you after looking at it. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

It looks in pretty good shape to me. I'll do some copyediting and then let's discuss what next.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll be around for most of this coming week and can discuss things after you are able to do the copyedits which you mention. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

I've now read the unsuccessful FAC. What work has been done to address the point that the article does not use the available book and scholarly sources?--Wehwalt (talk) 13:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

My Sandbox contains a draft version of the paragraph written taking those sources into account and for possible addition to the Impact section of the article. Also it was discussed with Bluepurplegalaxy on his Talk page and there is a question of whether those "available books and scholarly sources" should be better addressed on the sibling page for 'Cultural impact and legacy of BTS' which was created during successful GAN. Some of the available "fan" books mentioned at the unsuccessful FAC turned out to be adulatory fan-books for teenage audiences not as good as the direct sources being used in the current version of the article. The article currently has nearly 350 formatted citations, with over 1,000 fully formatted citations in archive and in the sibling articles (about two dozen sibling articles now) for BTS. Possibly you can mention your view on the Sandbox draft paragraph I have done either for the Impact section of the BTS article or for the sibling page for Cultural impact and legacy of BTS. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I looked over the paragraphs in your sandbox. I see the use of that book (as an aside, page numbers would be a good idea). There seem to be other books that touch on BTS, just from a JSTOR search. I haven't read the sources yet, so there's only so much I can say as yet. I think you need to justify the amount of time you spend on the Korean-language program. For example, has BTS led to an increase in studying Korean? Forgive me if I'm being scattershot, I'm still traveling and will be so for the next two weeks.

By my estimation, the reviewers are saying you have to use those high-quality sources in this article, the top-level article in the BTS tree, which doesn't have to contain everything in the sub-articles but should cover the highlights. FAC is a reviewer-driven process. There are times when you can show reviewers to be off base. I don't see this as one of those times, given that FAC requires high-quality reliable sources. If you don't have JSTOR access, I can get ahold of the items available there and send them to you by email.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

The sandbox paragraphs were written AGF from the previous FAC reviewers; the page numbers for the chapters are not available for the digital version of the book which I have been using. If you would like to bring that paragraph in my Sandbox into the Impact section of the top-level article for BTS, then I'm fully supporting. When I asked the FAC reviewer about this, Biude, she mentioned that she had not read any of the citations or books she was recommending, and that she was relying alone on a keyword search for "BTS" in JSTOR as definitive. Nonetheless, I did read through it and found that it seemed much more related to Korean Wave as the main topic and not the BTS main page (you can read her comments on her Talk page). User:FrB [3] from the unsuccessful FAC also made similar comments which I used to write the paragraph you have read in my Sandbox. In either event, I have no issues with adding it into the Impact section of the BTS main page and you can adjust it in anyway you feel is best for the article. Regarding your question about growth in usage of the Korean language and BTS, an important recent trend over the last two years for the group is that they have moved significantly in the direction of shifting their new song lyrics to English language usage, as seen in their recent hits "Dynamite" and "Butter", which each have Wikipedia pages of their own. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Consider asking what those reviewers think of the changes you have made, then. Wehwalt (talk) 15:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

No response from FrB since May 6th here [4]. The other negative review at FAC was from Biude who has archived my inquiry from April 25the to her archives after she made a general comment here: [5]. Any thoughts about this or other parts of the article to improve further for a renewed FAC? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd just received an answer from FrB saying that my Sandbox paragraph looked fine, though he might like to see more academic book references for the BTS article. I mentioned to him that although some adulatory fan-books are out there for BTS, that there is an absence of academic-level books like those available for the Beatles or The Rolling Stones. Can you think of a way to bring my Sandbox paragraph into the BTS article which might help move the article forward? ErnestKrause (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

That's fine. But it would be Buidhe I'd want to make sure was onboard with the changes. Wehwalt (talk) 04:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I've put it on her Talk page here: [6]. She appears to prefer to have the new version of my Sandbox from this morning in the article replacing the paragraph about the groups which BTS has influenced with the new paragraph in my current Sandbox. If you think it sounds good, then possibly you could add it into the Impact section of the BTS article with any further changes or edits to it you see as best for the article. FrB seems to state that the BTS article is ready for renomination at FAC on his Talk page. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

And you're comfortable that every citation properly supports the text cited?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

The Impact section is now updated with that edit from my Sandbox which you looked at. Do you have any further copy edits for the article and the other sections? ErnestKrause (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Not at this time. If you nominate it, I'll give it a review, but it won't be until next week when I am home.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Could you see if you might be interested in either co-nominating or mentoring for FAC nomination since I have not done a promoted FAC. Would this be of possible interest next week when you are back home? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

It might be. I'll touch base with you middle of next week. It's just impossible to find the time to really focus on this right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

There's no rush on this. I've just added the visit of BTS to see Joe Biden in the White House yesterday and others have added images of them with President Biden to the article. When you are back home and rested, I've asked if you might be interested in either co-nominating or mentoring for FAC nomination sometime in this month or next month since I have not done a promoted FAC. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Those were nice edits over the week-end. I've put in the renewed FAC as archive2, and it should be ready to start. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I've just added a short edit for the new BTS album which came out today to the article. This was the comment from FrB here: [7] who made edit requests at the previous FAC; should he be pinged about the new FAC review or just leave it as it is now. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:57, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

I would just leave well enough alone. When we've added all the scholarly sources we can, we'll ask Buildhe to reassess. I'm looking through the Kim book on Hegemonic Mimicry. In the meantime, I'll try to attract some reviewers. And somewhere I think you said that you've checked re Buidhe's concern about whether the references support the text and they do?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I actually contacted her on her Talk page and Buidhe seemed to say it was "an improvement" on her Talk page a week or two ago here: [8]. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:02, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Update. The BTS article FAC seems to be about half way progressed through the list of new nominations now without as much comment as other articles received there. Possibly there are some ways to follow-up. The Kim edits you added look like strong additions to the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

I think we need to ask Buidhe to reconsider because without that, it's going nowhere. I've done a couple of FAC reviews the last two days in the hope that the nominators there will reciprocate, but we need to see about that oppose. Wehwalt (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

I'd previously contacted her on the Talk page of James Madison though without much response. If you have a better way to approach Buidhe, then possibly give it a try. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:58, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Before I do that, have we addressed everything that it is within our power to address? Have all the book sources been converted to sfn, for example? Wehwalt (talk) 15:33, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

I've just converted the 2 new books in the new Diplomacy section to sfn, in addition to your previous conversions to the sfn format. It should be set. Regarding the edit history of the article, I'm not sure that it was clear to Buidhe that the primary historical difficulty with the article was that it grew to over 600 citations and over 400Kb in file size last year; therefor it was the bulking down process which was important to successfully get through GAN in the history of the article. The edit history of the article then allocated these 'overabundant' references to sibling articles, which brought the article to its current more reasonable size. Regarding your question above, the sfn formats should be consistent now. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Still no response from Buidhe after two days. I'm still not sure also why she appears to have singled out this BTS article for what seems to have been automatic opposes for both the first and second FAC, even though there are three other coordinators for FAC nominations. Possibly its time to make a least a few invitations and contact some selected editors to see if they could at least make some comment at the review. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:09, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

New response from Buidhe on FAC indicates that there is one book by Kim which is cited 12 times which fell below your radar and my radar, which was written in Harvard cites by another editor. All the rest is fully converted to sfn. The question of Forbes cites was dealt with extensively during GAN and Wikipedia policy is that Forbes may be used for article written by editors only; this was all converted during GAN with over one dozen Forbes articles by non-editors removed or changed to other sources. The last point remains of Buidhe apparently not being familiar with the history of the article which the previous editors from the last 10 years had bloated to over 400Kb in size. Those 'authors' of the articles made a sprawling mess of the old version of the BTS article, and GAN was successfull only because the article went through an extensive bulking down process to get it through a successful GAN. Buidhe appears not to know the history of the article, and she keeps wanting to give credit to the old previous editors who caused it to become bloated at over 400Kb in size last year. Can you find a way to mediate this with Buidhe; I have tried both on her Talk page and at the previous unsuccessful FAC but apparently she does not want to hear this explanation. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

I think you should make that point at the FAC in response to the last post. I'm somewhat at a loss otherwise.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:17, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

I've added it at FAC; and you can check to see if you can add anything further to clarify the issue. The only book by Young Kim which she mentions, you had already apparently added into the sfn list; it was a previous editor who left a handful of references to the Harv-cite version of this one book. Buidhe also refers to one article from Forbes magazine which I think is now addressed. I do not know which SPS sources she is indirectly referring to. Could you check my wording at FAC and add anything which may be missing. ErnestKrause (talk) 17:45, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm working on the citation errors, some of which seem to have been introduced by putting sfn inside ref templates, which you shouldn't do. Just use a sfn template each time, even if you duplicate them. There is code for your monobook .js and/or .css pages that allow you to see such errors, look around for them. I'm probably going to have to wrap it up for the day soon as I have eyestrain from searching for curly quotes (admittedly, partially my own fault there). I'll keep plugging away.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. Buidhe has had the week-end to consider the clarification we have provided regarding her opposition to BTS but has still not responded. Apparently she is using her position as co-ordinator to deflect attention of the other editors away from the article for what seems to be no rational reason. Since she has not done this for any other FAC article currently nominated, and since this is the second time she is putting in an automatic oppose for this BTS nomination, perhaps there are personal reasons she has decided to post her co-ordinator's warning which she has not told us about; is this appropriate for one of the co-ordinators of the FAC page to do? In the mean time, the sole respondent to the nomination has been FrG, who also has a FAC nomination in process at this time; maybe I can put in some review comments on his nomination in the meantime to recognise his helpful BTS comments. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Which article does FrG have up? I will do a review.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

He has nominated Oscar Isaac which comes directly after the BTS FAC nomination. His full user name is Nominator: FrB.TG. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Just a thought, it might help to do additional reviews, especially of music articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:39, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll try to pick up the Pop music song "Dear Future Husband" nominated by User:NO at FAC. Also, I can put in a Support for FrB.TG, since I have read through that "Oscar Isaac" article, if you think its useful. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:54, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

If you think it meets the FA criteria, by all means take a position on the nomination. Constructive comments are also helpful in a good review.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with you on both of them and have left comments for each of those editors on FAC. The editor for "Dear Future Husband" got back to me very quickly at FAC, and I'm supporting that article for promotion. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

In agreement with your reading of 'high quality' sources meaning that they are not listed by Wikipedia as unreliable. Are we waiting for Biudhe to confirm this, or should all of her comments on 'high qaulity' be treated as a new category. I do not think that is what Kyle meant when he used this phrase 'high quality'; he appears to have meant to show that they were not unreliable. Should we wait for response from Biudhe prior to further Q&A on the review page? ErnestKrause (talk) 15:48, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I like my defining of high quality sources as ones being used by high-quality references such as published books and articles even more. I would look for books and, even better, peer reviewed articles in which those websites are used.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Published academic books are likely the best possible sources, however, a basic issue for the BTS article is that as a relatively new group that there is a genuine lack of book-length studies about them. Unlike the Beatles or The Rolling Stones who each have over a dozen book-length studies available, the BTS article uses journal articles and website articles for over 90% of the material. It seems that the journal and website material is useful here, since much of the material is coming directly from them. If they are not disqualified by Wikipedia RS standards as unreliable, then shouldn't the article retain these sources as acceptable? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:08, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that if the website which has been challenged has been used as a reference by a high-quality source such as a book or paper, it's a strong indication that website is itself high-quality.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

That makes good sense, and I've done it using the google books search box as you did also. It seems that all are covered now? ErnestKrause (talk) 17:06, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I think so. There's a few things left I think on the main portion of the source review, but in changing work to publisher, I've probably accomplished some of them.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Well that looks like one supporter. I've just noticed that Drmies is listed as a participant on the Korean pop culture Wikiproject, though I've no interaction with him. Should he be pinged or possibly approached on his Talk page about participation in the FAC review? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Are there other possibilities? I haven't seen Drmies doing much reviewing at FAC in recent years. Once we get a third support, I'm pretty sure I can get an image review from someone and then we can ask Buidhe again to reconsider.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

There is a second support now. I've also gone ahead and made an offer to AJona1992 to pick up one of her GANs if she would do support/oppose comments for the FAC, though I have not heard from her during the last day. Maybe you or I could offer to do other editors GANs is they could make support/oppose comments at the FAC? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:12, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Is there one you would suggest?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:49, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

One possibility might be the song GAN for "Pretty Please (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | links | watch | logs | page views (90d)) (start review) (Reviews: 19) LOVI33". User LOVI33 has done 2 featured lists and 19 GANs. If you offer for her to do support/oppose comments for the BTS nomination, then you could offer to do her "Pretty Please" nomination in order to move both articles forward... it might be worth a try. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:08, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I've just noticed that you are editing the article at the same time so I'll stop for a few hours until you are done. It looks like you have a new TOC in mind? ErnestKrause (talk) 15:33, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Not really, just renaming in a way that Ippantekina might find less promotional. At this point, we have enough reviewers. We just need too satisfy them. If you'd rather edit now, I can hold off.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

You can finish the rest of the edits you had in mind for Ippantekina and then let her know its done on the FAC review page; I'll sign in a few hours to do any copy edits if needed. It looks good so far and I'll wait to see your changes to the TOC and section titles. Nice comments from Hawkeye on the edit history page. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:49, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Part two

Btspurplegalaxy, ErnestKrause, if there are as many source problems as Mike Christie says, then the only thing we can do is ask for a week and go through every source, then ask for a recheck. Thoughts?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

That's what we'll just have to do then. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 21:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

How do we divide it?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Each person can be assigned their own section and check the sources for the section they were assigned. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 06:06, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Fine. Go ahead and split them. ErnestKrause, you'll participate as well?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:08, 18 July 202ErnestKrause (talk) 22:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)2 (UTC)

If your offer is to check all of the sources then I'll suggest the simpler division of footnotes as follows: Wehwelt: footnotes #1 to #130; Btspurplegalaxy: footnotes #131 to #260; ErnestK: footnotes #261 to end. If that sounds equitable then all 3 editors can go ahead. There are still comments from AJona which might also be divided up in some way. A procedural question for Wehwalt concerns whether it is Gog-the-Mild or Biudhe who is coordinating the FAC review of the article; normally Gog-the-Mild 'recuses' himself as coordinator (his word) when he starts commenting as a reviewer of FAC articles, which leaves open the question of whether Biudhe is acting as a recused coordinator for this FAC review, or, otherwise? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:22, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

• Hi ErnestKrause, I have just noticed this in passing. No FAC coordinator ever "reserves" a nomination. Any coordinator may comment on any nomination at any time and a comment from a coordinator is no indication that they will ever look a the nomination again. Additionally, if I have recused from a nomination, this means that I won't close it, I will feel free to comment on a possible archiving due to lack of reviews, chase reviewers or the nominator for timely responses and deal with other procedural matters - although see proceeding sentence. Does this clarify things? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:18, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks for the note. My previous note to Wehwalt was about coordinators "recusing" during the review process, not about 'reserves' which you typed above (I do not know what 'reserves' are in this context); Wehwalt then answered my question below from last week. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

At this time, the footnotes from 376 to 383 appear to all be validated for the Concert tours section. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further, the footnotes 369 to 375 appear to all be validated for the Members section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further, the footnotes 354 to 368 appear to all be validated for the Endorsement section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:09, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further, the footnotes 338 to 353 appear to all be validated for the Fandom section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further, the footnotes 323 to 337 appear to all be validated for the Diplomacy section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:15, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further, the footnotes 308 to 322 appear to all be validated for the Impact prefatory section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:51, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further, the footnotes 291 to 307 appear to all be validated for the Lyrics section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:51, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

At this time adding further the footnotes 280 to 290 appear to all be validated for the Music style section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:55, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Validating cites 272 through 279 as consistent with text. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:03, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Validating cites 261 through 271 as consistent with text. Btspurplegalaxy can confirm here when he validates the rest of the cites in this section on "Permission to Dance". ErnestKrause (talk) 23:03, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

That's fine. I'm certain Buidhe is recused. We have to get this done or lose the nomination. I will get started on mine either tomorrow or Wednesday, depending on personal matters.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:02, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

I've checked 1 through 4. I did not have much time for this today and will get seriously into it tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Could you also look at Footnote 338 which uses the book you have previously accessed; Mike Christie has made a special request on your quotation. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:20, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

That's done.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Section III of the designation of the citation check list appears to be valid for purposes of informing Mike Christie on the FAC page when the other two sections of citations are completed and validated by Wehwalt and Btspurple. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC) ErnestKrause (talk) 23:03, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

You're sure every fact in the article in your section can be found in the sources? Also, I need a source for saying the 2014 show at the Troubadour was their first US show.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

That was done yesterday and today I'll check through for dead links in the archival cites; you are welcome to do random spot checks to ensure it all looks good. It would be nice to hear on progress from Btspurplegalaxy for Section II of the citations. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Except for that, I'm done up to what was ref 50 and is now ref 41. I"ll resume later or tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:49, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Up to what is now #56 and was before 65 I think. Half done and done for the day.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Regarding your question on footnote #40 as being a dead link on 80,000 viewers, my suggestion would be to change over to the version recorded on the BTS Red Bullet Tour article for that edit which states: "Shows in Dallas, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City were all sold out in the matter of minutes. BTS performed for over 12,500<ref name="Mwave" /> fans for the US leg alone", and state that the edit is adapted from the Red Bullet Tour article by CWW. The "Mwave" cite is defined on that page as well. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:39, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

OK, will look at it tomorrow. I found a source for the 80,000 so that may do. Still need help on the Troubadour being the first US show. Hopefully btspurplegalaxy will be available, but we'll do what we have to do. This is just very time-intensive.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:35, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

The 'Troubador' material has been apparently fully taken out of the article, and there is one image with caption of the Troubador remaining in the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

OK, did my third. Through ref 121 which formerly was ref 131.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:28, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok, did my third. That leaves the part by Btspurplegalaxy which he has not answered my last 2 pings about. Maybe we should divide his section between Wehwalt and myself; Wehwalt #122 tp #172; Ernest #173-261. Does that sound ok? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:12, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I've already checked cites #131 through #185. Had to add some sources as some content wasn't supported. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 00:22, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Btspurplegalaxy Any chance that you'll be able to get the rest of your third done up to #185 to #260 over the next day or two? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:33, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I should be able to finish it sooner. That's what I'm in the middle of. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 00:37, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I've finished and everything looks good. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 00:27, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

As soon as you're done, let's do a few random checks of each other and then notify Mike Christie we're ready for them. I did the remaining outstanding issues from the earlier review. The finish line may actually be in sight.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:10, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Still need a source saying the Troubadour show was the first US show.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:57, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The 'Troubador' material has been apparently fully taken out of the article, and there is one image with caption of the Troubador remaining in the article. Can the caption be changed to address this cite request? (The only reference to Trubador is in the caption: "Exterior of the nightclub Troubadour (photo taken 2006) where BTS held their concert in the US for free.") ErnestKrause (talk) 01:12, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I guess what I am expecting, and what will be checked for, is that in each reference, every fact asserted is present in the article used as the source. Every fact. Taken in a very literal sense. Are both of you prepared to say that your portions of the article will pass muster in that regard? Not most facts, but all facts.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

In my case all the links have been checked and cross-checked; the main issue was that there was a substantial abridgment and shortening of the article with many of the references being pulled out in the process. The current version of the article reads very well given the long history of revision and abridgment. You are welcome to cross-check my section (Section III) of the citations checks as needed. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:10, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I will. Why don't you check a few of mine and a few of Btspurplegalaxy's and see what you get?--Wehwalt (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

From your references I've just checked through cites #80-92, and #92 main link points to an unrelated COVID article, while the archive link is accurate. Regarding a check of Btspurplegalaxy segment, I've just checked and rechecked the last 20 cites there and they all seem to be clean links with no dead links. ErnestKrause (talk) 19:50, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

And is what we say in the article supported in full by the sources cited?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:06, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

In addition, there's one major issue from AJona1992, the question of the awards.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:57, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

In the lead section, is it supposed to look like this? gold|RIAA certification Gold Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 22:18, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I fixed that. Did you look at my questions above? Also btspurplegalaxy.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I'll check them. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 23:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Please do. Be as literal-minded as you can, everything, everything we say should be in the underlying source, even if it seems obvious. We've come a long way on this, it would be a shame to fall at the final hurdle.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I'll let you know when I'm done. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 00:15, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I finished. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 01:45, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Mike's comments illustrate what I was saying about everything needing to be sourced. If we say it in the article, it needs to appear in the underlying source. How do you want to proceed? It isn't just a matter of fixing his comments, it's saying that if he's asked to do it again, that he won't come up with significan problems.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Its important to keep up with Mike's findings and responde to them on the FAC review page: there were a large number of edits for downsizing the article and deleting many references such as this one here [9], and Mike's request to restore some them is a good idea for double checking. ErnestKrause (talk) 18:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

What I very strongly suggest is that you implement what he's saying, such as the Grammys. In the interim, I'm going to go through the rest of the references (leaving aside the ones I did earlier) and check them. I strongly feel the article should be as stable as possible right now, if we add more refs, that opens the door for possible goofs. I'm doing my best and spending a lot of time saving this nomination, if the coordinators will let me.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I've just pulled some cite requests (and the narrative corresponding to them) and added other cites based on the indications which Mike has made on his most recent FAC comments. It should be better now, and all of Mike's requests are now answered as he has presented them. ErnestKrause (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I've just answered some of Mike's questions and added some further citations. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:58, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Go for it. I'll be back tomorrow to finish up whatever's left.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Query, Any additional edits needed. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

No. I think we just wait. Possibly post something to the FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Its been several days since your messages to her without response and it seems that Biudhe is busy attending to her own new FAC nomination; can one of the other coordinators be asked to take a look? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I would wait still. It's a long FAC and whoever closes it (not Buidhe) will have to read through all of that. We've made our position clear, and it's been a while since the articles at the bottom of the FAC page have been looked at.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Another message from the coordinators was placed on the review page earlier today. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:15, 9 August 2022 (UTC)