Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
{{Hatnote|This page was last edited or modified by ] (]).}}<br />
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=User talk:Liz/Archive/Index
{{Center|'''Note: When emailing me, please also post a {{tl|You've got mail}} template to this page.<br /> I check my Misplaced Pages email account infrequently.'''}}<br />
|mask=User talk:Liz/Archive/<#>
<div style="text-align: center;">Wise words given to a blocked editor: ''This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount<br /> and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position.''<br /> ] ]⁄] 4 August 2013 <br /><i>Well said!</i><span style="font-family:Rage Italic; font-size:large; color:Purple">'''''L'''''iz</span> <sup>] ]</sup></div>
While Misplaced Pages's written ] should be taken seriously, they can be misused. <br />Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the ''letter'' of policy without consideration for the ''principles'' of policies. <br />If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ].<br /> Disagreements are resolved through ] discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures.<br /> Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves ] to reflect ]. (])
<br />
<br />
Recommended reading for editors who are upset RIGHT NOW!:<br />
''']''' - ]<br />
''']'''
<br />
<br />
''If you came here just to insult me, I will delete your comments without a reply.'' <br />
''And if I wasn't involved, personal attacks clearly warrant a block.''
<br />
== ] ==
Dear Mrs. @], please delete user pages ] because ]. Thanks..... ] (]) 04:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I blanked their User page. This editor made 3 edits 6+ years ago, this isn't an urgent situation. I'm not sure how you even stumbled upon them. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
== Move ==
Hello {{u|Liz}}, {{u|Hallowme|someone}} moved ] to multiple titles and went as far as to create a duplicate titled ]. My guess is that they were trying to get the credits for creating the Tyla article. Can you please look at the article, its talk and subpages and check if there's anything wrong? '''<span style="color:Purple">dxneo</span>''' (]) 14:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Though I'm late in responding, I actually looked into this situation when you posted about it last weekend and looked to see if any clean-up was necessary. The editor has since been blocked for disruptive editing and because it might be a compromised account. Thanaks for bringing this to my attention and I'm sorry that it's taken me a while to reply to your request. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
== Administrators' newsletter – November 2024 ==
] from the past month (October 2024).
]
] '''Administrator changes'''
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
}}
] '''CheckUser changes'''
{{Autoarchivingnotice
:] ]
|small=yes
|bot=MiszaBot
] '''Oversighter changes'''
|age=31
:] ]
|units=days
|dounreplied=yes
] '''Guideline and policy news'''
|index=./Archive index
* Following a ], the ] proposal that went for a trial to refine the ] (RfA) process has been discontinued.
* Following a ], ] is adopted as a policy.
] '''Technical news'''
* Mass deletions done with the ] tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. {{phab|T366068}}
] '''Arbitration'''
* {{noping|RoySmith}}, {{noping|Barkeep49}} and {{noping|Cyberpower678}} have been appointed to the ] for the ]. {{noping|ThadeusOfNazereth}} and {{noping|Dr vulpes}} are reserve commissioners.
* Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the ].
* The Arbitration Committee is ] for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.
] '''Miscellaneous'''
* An ] is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{tl|Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. ]
----
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1254686817 -->
== Procedural keep/close? ==
Hi Liz, could you give this a quick look please to see whether it should be procedurally closed. There is an active unclosed merge discussion and this seems to have been started as a novel means to close the merge. Thanks. ] (]) 07:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} I initially thought it was too late in the process for a procedural close but when I saw the nominator's deletion argument was actually an indirect request to get support for keeping the article, I decided that you were right and this was an incorrect use of AFD. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Many thanks Liz. It was all getting rather confused. ] (]) 20:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
==]==
May I ask how this could possibly be considered a no consensus result? It's a clear keep result unless you are overriding the five keep votes and deciding for some reason that the two deleters have stronger arguments (which is a bit odd since it comes down to people claiming he meets GNG versus people claiming he doesn't). What is the justification for this? You don't say in your closing statement. -- ] (]) 15:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Saying that keep arguments were "people claiming he meets GNG" is a fundamental mischaracterisation of your own argument which consisted partly of "The CMG is a high honour which isn't handed out in cornflakes packets" and which made absolutely zero attempt to assess notability based on sources. That's one of the weakest arguments I've seen at AfD in a while. No closer should take it into account at all. ] (]) 16:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::Agree. I'm not sure how I would have voted, but, like OzLondoner, I hope I would have pointed out the paucity of the argument. The close was good. ]'']'' 17:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Wait, that is ''Oz'' Londoner? I have been reading that forever as aus, as in German for out. Out of Londoner. Now I don't know what to think! ] (]) 23:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Oh and yeah, I think the close was good. ] (]) 23:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::{{reply|Sirfurboy}} like, aus, raus! :) ]'']'' 01:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::{{reply|Sirfurboy}} Haha that made me smile. Now I'm wondering about your name though. Sir Fur Boy? Or Surfer Boy? 😂 ] (]) 11:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Yes! I added the surfer emoji partly to clarify. When I first came up with the name I had know idea furries were a thing. Furboy was my Paladin when I used to play D&D. I do actually surf - although these days I have switched to a kayak. ] (]) 11:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::::I always thought "Aus" referred to Australia or, maybe Austria, but I now see from your User page, ], that you don't seem to participate in any WikiProjects on those countries so perhaps I've been wrong all of this time. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I gather that you would have preferred a firmer close as a Keep rather than No consensus? Well, first, as a frequent AFD participant, I know that you know that it's not a vote count. But when you have a divided discussion like this one, with some editors arguing that ] is met and others arguing ] is not met, then you need to review the arguments and, I believe, the experience levels of the participants in the discussion.
:I didn't think I could close as Keep without it signalling that I was ignoring the opinions of two editors who were arguing for Deletion, both of whom are very experienced in assessing articles and sources in AFD discussions. So, I closed as No consensus which is not saying that both sides were equally strong in their arguments but it acknowledges that their wasn't unanimity or agreement close to unamity in this discussion. This is not an uncommon outcome when you have experienced editors reviewing sources who come to opposing evaluations of them. It's not my job to review the sources myself because that would lead to a "supervote" so I have to rely on the arguments of the participants and, in this case, I didn't see a consensus.
:Of course, you can take this to ] if you want and present your argument there. In this case, you might have a few participants who agree with your interpretation but I think the majority of opinions would be that "No consensus" was a reasonable outcome that any closer might come to. I'm occasionally willing to revert an AFD closure if an editor is asking for an additional relisting or I've made some obvious error but I don't think I did here and I don't think a third relisting would have altered the outcome of this discussion. But that's your call. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::No, it's not a "vote count", but when you have more than twice the number of editors voting one way than the other, then not acknowledging that majority and closing in their favour does indeed look like a supervote unless they're spouting utter rubbish. {{tq|I didn't think I could close as Keep without it signalling that I was ignoring the opinions of two editors who were arguing for Deletion, both of whom are very experienced in assessing articles and sources in AFD discussions.}} I don't think I've ever seen that argument before. It's basically saying that because two editors, both of whom have a proven track record of being very keen on deletion incidentally, say it should be deleted then their arguments should be given more weight than the other five participants because they're "experienced" and it would be somehow insulting to them to close in favour of the other participants. That's just weird, frankly, and I think goes against the spirit of Misplaced Pages. -- ] (]) 09:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:::It's the effective same result so I'm not sure why you're complaining so much. Consensus is based on argument quality, not numbers. Maybe try and assess notability based on sources rather than tangents about cornflakes and your opinion will count for more at AfD. ] (]) 13:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Consensus is indeed based on argument quality. And yours weren't superior in anyone's opinion except yours. -- ] (]) 15:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Hi Necrothesp, I didn't participate in that discussion, but reviewing it now, I see two editors making good source based arguments to keep, as well as two making such arguments for deletion. Two said it meets ] but did not say how. So I think Liz evaluated that fairly. But there is also your argument that the CMG is a high honour. This was not related to any SNG, but is an SNG style of shortcut argument that many of us use in our first look at a subject to come to an initial view. For instance, today I have posted on an AfD school discussion that you also posted on, and expressed my own shortcut argument based on the age, prestige and size of a school. But such arguments are nothing more than a rebuttable supposition of notability. What always matters is whether sources exist from which the page can be written. A school can be big and old and so unremarkable that perhaps there really are no sources. A person can be an unremarkable civil servant or part of a diplomatic mission, so much in the background that sources do not exist. In such cases the assumption of notability will be rebutted by the searches that turn nothing up, and no page can be written. But certainly we can use such arguments to choose where we might be concentrating our efforts, and, when the matter is finely balanced, to argue the toss in favour of retention. Still, what really matters are the sources. ] (]) 16:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
==Creating a Previously Deleted Article==
Hi Liz,
I created an article for the Powhatan Hotel in Galveston (sometime in early 2023), which I realized was an ill-conceived mess, so I requested speedy deletion. Thanks for your assistance with that. Now I have a new source for the article, making two expert architectural sources for the same article. Before I re-create the article, however, I would like to recall the specifics of the mess I created in order to avoid a similar mistake. I am not finding my own conversations on this and without the text of the original, I am not recalling the specifics of my errors. Do you have any tips for pulling any helpful documents? I am in no rush to re-create the article, so whatever timetable works for you also works for me.
Best regards, ] (]) 11:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:It sounds like I might be able to help you out but you need to provide a link to the deleted article. You know the exact name of the article you created so it would be faster if you could provide this rather than me spending time looking for it. Then I could review the reason for deletion and see if the situation is as you state it is. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Does this help? https://en.wikipedia.org/Powhatan_Hotel ] (]) 22:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::Yes, that's what I needed. Oh, this was from 2023! This was a CSD G7, an article creator asks for deletion so this can be reverted if that's what you are asking for. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
== SPAs POV-pushing in The Keys to the White House ==
I completely agree with your concern, on ], that the volume of material is daunting. I spent literally hours researching, drafting, and editing my request, to try to simplify it as much as possible. (I'm responding to you here instead of there precisely so as not to add to the length of the thread.) I think this was also a problem on ]. The three SPAs flooded the zone with reiterations of their position, and only one uninvolved editor was dedicated enough to wade through it all.
And speaking of wading through it -- you presumably haven't waded through ]. You've done more than other admins by even reading my summary. Frankly, your hope that these differences could be resolved on talk pages is, alas, completely unrealistic. If you look at that page, you'll see that I've tried and tried and tried until I'm blue in the keyboard. The SPAs will not budge.
It's a classic case of ]. In June of this year there was criticizing Lichtman. At about the same time, these three accounts showed up pushing the bloggers' position. They even insisted on citing the blog's criticisms (in a BLP!). You can see several screenfuls of text at ] as I tried to get them to adhere to ]. But even that self-evident point couldn't be resolved on the Talk page. Just to get those improper citations removed, I had to expend yet more time to create a . Consensus-based dispute resolution just doesn't work when there are SPAs whose sole or primary purpose in editing is to push their POV. (The current, POV version doesn't directly link to the blog post, but it does quote the nonnotable bloggers as if they were experts. Coincidentally, the SPAs asserted that the bloggers were experts.)
I'm at my wits' end with these accounts. There's a limit to how much time I can spend banging my head against a brick wall in the hope of some miraculous resolution on the Talk page. If no admin will pick up a mop and ''do'' something (maybe even a 30-day article ban would send a salutary message!), then I'll probably just have to give up. The SPAs will succeed in thumbing their nose at ] and hijacking a BLP article to promote their views. ]<small> ] ]</small> 15:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I'm sorry that this situation has left you so frustrated. And also that I'm not willing, at this point, to go diving into this complicated dispute to try to settle it. But most of my time editing on the project is filled up with some routine tasks that take up most of my time and I've only recently returned to even looking at cases that come up on ANI so I don't see my time freeing up any time soon.
:Without coming to a conclusion on this complaint, I see that you have two problems: a) the complexity of this case that involves at least three other editors and the fact that it appears that this dispute has covered several different talk pages and noticeboards and b) that, right now, it looks like it is you against at least three editors. You'd have an outcome more to your preference if you had at least one other editor who was contributing to this discussion who supported your interpretation and could speak up. I'm sure it's maddening to see a situation you believe is inappropriate and be alone in this.
:Is there a related WikiProject where you could go to their talk page and ask for uninvolved editors to offer their opinion? Or you could post an impartial request for help on the talk page of a related article. Of course, numbers don't always determine consensus on Misplaced Pages but at least you could get a second opinion on whether the way you interpret this situation is correct. I've found that in many disputes on Misplaced Pages "me vs. you" situations (or, in this case, "you vs. them") are frequently resolvable if more editors join in the discussion. Any chance of that occurring? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hi, Liz, thanks for your response. I completely understand the limitations on your time and energy. I have a long Misplaced Pages to-do list, with some items dating back years, and I'm not even an admin.
::I wanted more editors to join in the discussion. That's why I started the RfC and then the Noticeboard thread. Each of those efforts brought a response from an experienced and previously uninvolved editor, and in each case the editor agreed with me. The three SPAs are unmoved, though. Their attitude is that their POV is correct, the article is fine the way it is, as long as they don't agree to a change there's no consensus, and as long as there's no consensus the version they prefer must remain in place.
::As for WikiProjects, I did post at ]. I just want the BLP template placed on the Keys article, because the SPAs wouldn't even agree that BLP standards applied. Being cautious, I thought an uninvolved editor should add the template. No one added the template or even responded to my post. I also noted the RfC on the lists for Biographies; for History and geography; and for Politics, government, and law. I assume that many WikiProject participants monitor the applicable list for their project.
::My current inclination: (1) Hope that the AN/I thread gets attention from an admin who can undertake the admittedly burdensome task of addressing the problem. (2) If some time passes and no other admin responds there, I'll try starting a thread at ]. The weakness in that plan is that, even if it elicits comments from a few experienced editors, the SPAs will persist. Past comments from such editors have had no effect on the SPAs. (3) If that doesn't work, I'll consider your suggestion of ]. I've never done one of them and it seems to be a lot of work by me, and then hope that some admin takes an interest. My personal opinion is that the SPAs' violations of ] and ] are much clearer than the charge of contentious editing. If nothing can get done based on violations of two clear policies, I can't be very optimistic about AE. ]<small> ] ]</small> 20:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
== Merge vs AfD ==
Hi Liz, I'm writing about the odd situation with ]. I don't believe the AfD nominator (Selfstudier) was looking for a Keep result; they supported merging while ] {{tq|Might be better just to AfD it as POVFORK}}. They seem okay with either merging or deletion.
From my perspective, the merge discussion seemed to effectively evolve into a deletion discussion, especially now that the destination article already has relevant content and can't really fit more. So I thought it was logical to move to AfD, and there seemed to be some agreement for that from both sides of the dispute: myself and ProfGray on one side, Selfstudier and Hemiauchenia (the merge proposer) on the other.
I suppose the merge should have been closed before an AfD, but now that the AfD had developed, would you consider reopening it to let it run to conclusion?
I realize it could appear like I'm trying to work around a consensus to merge, but FWIW I those arguments should also be considered by a future AfD closer. I.e. I believe this should be evaluated as a deletion, but with consideration of all relevant arguments. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>\<sup>]</sup> 22:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Well, I was accommodating another editor who requested a procedural close since the merger discussion was ongoing. Since the consensus was going in the direction of Keep, it was not clear to me what a Keep would mean if a Merge was also being discussed. Would it negate a decision to Merge? If a Merge was opposed then a Keep decision would be irrelevant because a Merge would already have been rejected. And I didn't see much support for Deletion which is what AFD is typically for, to consider whether or not an article should be deleted. So, I don't see any purpose to having an AFD discussion ongoing while a Merge is being considered if the closure looks like it would just have Kept the article as it is. I don't think an AFD should occur to just see if there is widespread support for a Merge, that's what the Merge discussion is for. So, it looks like this was splintering the debate and since the Merge discussion was started first, I think it should continue.
:And AFDs should never occur just to verify that an article should be Kept, they should only occur if the nominator is seeking Deletion. Sometimes the outcome for an AFD is a Merge, Redirection or Draftification, but that decision arises out the consensus of the discussion, not as an outcome sought by the nominator. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for explaining further. So as I understand it, there were two concerns with the AfD:
::# The filer might not have been seeking deletion.
::# It was filed during an open merge discussion.
::On (1), my impression is that several editors like Selfstudier are seeking either a deletion or merge outcome, and probably don't feel strongly about the difference since there isn't really content that would be merged. The practical difference might just be a redirect. For example mentioned supporting "either deletion or merging"; the merge proposer also planned to file an AfD. I guess what I'm saying is, we can have someone else file if needed.
::On (2), I think ideally the merge discussion should be procedural closed (but its arguments still considered) to indicate that it has been supplanted by an AfD, but the question is who should make that call. I think Hemiauchenia might be willing to. If not, we could request an uninvolved closer, where a possible close could involve recommending a change of venue to AfD. Does that sound reasonable? — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>\<sup>]</sup> 01:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I don't think that is reasonable at all. The merge discussion had been open a week when the AfD started and had some 25 participants and represented a lot of editor time. The AfD was started without a deletion rationale and any outcome that overturns the merge outcome would instantly be challenged at DRV because it is out of process. It was just making a mess. ] (]) 07:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
==Notice of a discussion I think you'd be interested in knowing about==
Hey Liz, I thought you might want to be aware of ] (which includes not just the linked to thread, but a much larger one further above on VP/WMF). In summary, it appears that the WMF is prepared to imminently disclose personally identifying information about volunteers in a controversial Indian court case, where a news agency is attempting to suppress Misplaced Pages's tertiary coverage of the content of secondary sources (which it considers unflattering) by going after a number of individual editors as defendants. In order to comply with court orders in the case, it seems the WMF is prepared to share this information in what a number of us consider a pretty seismically bad idea and a betrayal of community priorities and values (the WMF has also already used an office action to remove an article reporting on the case, at the direction of the court for what said court regards as legitimate ] reasons).
While the deletion of the article has been framed by the WMF as temporary step to preserve appeal on the overall case, and there are mixed feelings in the community response as to that so far, there is a much more uniform opposition to throwing the individual editors (at least one of whom is located in India and has profound apprehension about what this could mean for his life with regard to litigation and beyond) under the bus. And yet the WMF appears to be prepared to share the information in question, as soon as Nov. 8. Can I impose upon you to take a look at the matter and share your perspective? '']]'' 00:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I've actually been following this issue for about the past 10 days. I'm always reluctant to jump into a very long discussion that I haven't been part of since the beginning because I'm sure I'll miss something important when I skim through all of the comments. But I agree that this is a very important issue so I'll check in on the current state of the discussion. I appreciate your efforts to publicize this problem. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:53, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks Liz: it's a novel form of project activity for me and I'm not sure my approach is optimized for exposure, but I've made such efforts as I could. '']]'' 09:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
== Deletion review for ] ==
An editor has asked for ] of ]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.<!-- Template:DRV notice --> <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 02:37, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I've already responded at the deletion review but I wanted to thank you for the notification. It's appreciated. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 6 November 2024 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-11-06}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 15--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 08:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1255531917 -->
== ] ==
Hi, dear Liz, thank you for earlier. I'd like to report sock puppets but I'm not sure how to do it. If you can help me I'd appreciate it if you could report ] and ]. ] (]) 06:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:It's not a process that is easy to describe here. I would just go to ], look at some of the open cases listed on that page and then follow the instructions to open a new case which is pretty obvious if you review the page. As a warning to you though, Checkusers will not connect registered accounts to IP addresses because it can be an invastion of privacy, sockpuppet investigations are really to compare registered accounts with each other. So, if you just have this registered account and an IP address, I don't think it would be worth your time to go through the steps to set up a case. But I suggest you at least look over the SPI main page so you are more familiar with the process. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::Additionally, I just noticed that ] is blocked for two weeks so that might help out with any problem you are having. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Dear Liz, Thank you for letting me know. ] (]) 06:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I thought they might accept it, so I made the request. ] Thank you. --] (]) 07:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your collaboration and kindness, you deserve this award. Best regards! ] (]) 15:39, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
|}
:Thank you, ], this is very kind of you. I'm not sure that I'm always civil but I try! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::You are cool, say what you want to say, and straight forward. Mine kind of people. Lets keep on this project going on better and better, and, please, poke me for whatever you need. I had been away and only focused on football for the last decade, or so, but earlier I had been active in many more areas of Misplaced Pages because I always did and still do find this one of the most amasirog projects on the entire internet. ] (]) 19:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
== Drafts ==
Please restore all the drafts you deleted. Thank you. ] (]) 15:56, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:@], Liz deletes a lot of drafts, and many of yours definitely shouldn't be recreated. Are there some specific ones you'd like to have back? -- ] (]) 00:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::Yes, ], you will have to be more specific and list the deleted drafts you want restored. You can also request restoration of a draft deleted for CSD G13 reasons at ]. But I have deleted tens of thousands of draft articles for legitimate reasons and I'm not going to blindly restore them all because you requested this. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I'm sorry for being vague. I would like to have ] restored. That's the only I want returned right now. Now that I have returned, now what... Any advice for me? ] (]) 03:14, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Hello, ],
::::{{done}} Sorry, I didn't recognize your name and didn't know that you had been unblocked. You were quite a prolific editor and I deleted many of your drafts during the time period you were blocked as they went stale. In the page history of your User talk page, there should be a record of notices from FireflyBot so you can see which drafts were due to be deleted via CSD G13. I'm happy to restore any of those articles if you give me a list of the ones you wish to continue working on. Any way, welcome back. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::My only advice is not to sock. There is no benefit from doing so, only risks and sanctions. If you want to have an alternate account, make it a legitimate one and put a notice on both User pages identifying it as such. I think that is where you got into trouble.
:::::Also, among editors working on recently released films, there is some kind of rivalry on being the editor who creates the article for a new film and multiple editors in this area have been indefinitely blocked for taking shortcuts like overwriting another editors' work or tagging a page for deletion and then recreating it yourself. Don't get caught up in this nonsense because, truthfully, no one is keeping score of "who got there first". Focus on quality, not speed. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::↑↑↑This is fantastic advice; I have been tempted many times to approach you, {{U|Crafterstar}}, regarding your creation, abandonment, and requested restoration of drafts. I have never seen this pattern outside of editors trying to be "first" when a draft they created becomes notable. It's not a particularly well-regarded approach to article creation.-- ]<sup>]</sup> 20:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::::], there is also one other area where I see this happen and that is with hurricanes, tropical storms and tornadoes. But luckily, there is a fairly sizeable community of editors working on storms, they have created their own norms and they generally police themselves. And this has come up with some articles on elections and current events as seen on ANI and in a recent arbitration case. But the movie business is so big, prolific and announces upcoming movies years ahead of them being made, spreading across lots of countries that it is on a different scale as those other subjects. I've seen drafts kept "alive" for 3-5 years just because a film has been announced to be produced but nothing has happened on it yet. There is a lot of anticipation surrounding them, especially some big budget films and sequels. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::The draft work is a useful process in the situations you note as the event (whether it be political, a storm, or similar) is imminent. It's a staging area where multiple editors work together in preparation to publish an article on a soon-to-be notable topic. The mass creation of drafts based on announcements is just sort of...hoarding. It really appears, to me, as an attempt at owning the creation. -- ]<sup>]</sup> 20:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:ok. Thank you for the feedback. If anyone else have any thing to say, please do. ] (]) 23:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
==Removing links after AfDs==
Hello Liz. Sorry to bother you, but I've noticed on several occasions you have closed AfDs on North Korean footballers (as delete) and then removed links to the article. The issue is that some of the links you are removing were incorrectly linking to the footballer and should have been linking to a politician of the same name. For example, in you removed a valid redlink to a member of parliament who would be deemed notable under ]. I wouldn't say anything if this was a one-off, but it's happened repeatedly over the past year (see of the 2014 North Korean election article, where this has happened at least seven times). As this seems to be specifically an issue for North Korea, could you be a bit more careful when closing AfDs on North Korean footballers if the outcome is to delete? Cheers, ] ]] 00:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:First, you are not bothering me. Thank you for bringing this issue to me but I'm not sure exactly how to respond. You say these are links are from articles deleted through AFDs and XFDcloser removes all links to deleted articles as part of its deletion process. And I'm not the only AFD closer, where are probably half dozen regular AFD admin closers and we all behave similarly, as far as I know. So, if this problem has reoccured then it's because I'm the only closer that has handled articles about North Korean footballers. The closure process doesn't make it easy to examine links to other articles to see what they are, it's kind of an "all or none" option and most (all?) closers choose to remove all links.
:I also wonder how common it is that a North Korean football player has the same name as a politican. Is this really a big issue? All I can offer you as a soljution is that I skip closures of AFDs about North Korean football players but I think you will run into the same issue with any other closer who does handle them. It's just the way XFDcloser operates and closers are dependent on this editing tool. I'm sorry that I can't offer you a more elegant solution than for me to just cease closing these AFDs. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::Are you sure that these links are all removed because of AFDs? Because we see a lot of North Korean football players in PROD'd articles and that is a different situation entirely. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Question: when using XFDcloser, do you see a list of pages you are about to edit/just edited when removing the links? Otherwise, it might be a good idea to check your own contributions after running the script, just to verify that removing the links made sense. For example, after you closed the Ri Yong-chol AfD, you made edits to the following pages:
:::*]
:::*] *
:::*]
:::*]
:::*]
:::*] *
:::*]
:::*]
:::*]
:::*] *
:::*]
:::*]
:::*] *
:::*]
:::*]
:::*] *
:::*]
:::*] *
:::*] *
:::Knowing you just deleted an article about a football player, many of those are obviously correct. However, the ones I marked with a * above are not as obvious, so you should verify whether your edit made sense and possibly self-revert. Obviously, that's not always necessary, only when the name of the deleted article could be ambiguous. And looking at your contributions, most deleted articles have far fewer incoming links, so checking if the removals made sense is even less work.
:::<small>(note: in this case, {{u|Number 57}} already fixed the two election pages, I fixed four others, and the last one is a list of people with that given name, so it's a correct removal.)</small> --] (]) 13:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Apologies, I didn't realise it was automatically done by XFDcloser rather than you doing it. It's not a massive problem, but just as it had happened so often I thought it would be worth bringing to your attention. Perhaps it's an issue for XFDcloser and tweaking that so closers can examine the incoming links to make sure they are all relevant? I've never used it, so not sure how it works. ] ]] 15:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
== Retrieving my draft titled "The Jackson 5 Us Tour" ==
I request for this draft titled "The Jackson 5 US Tour" that was taken down by you on October 4, 2024. I wasn't aware until now that it was lacking editing and that it was taken. I'd like my draft back. ] (]) 03:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Please provide a link to the deleted page. Then I can see why it was deleted. That will determine whether or not it can be restored. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
::https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Draft:The_Jackson_5_US_Tour&action=edit§ion=2 ] (]) 06:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:::{{done}} This was a straight CSD speedy deletion G13, stale draft, ]. These are easily restored. You can find it at ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==
I was almost certain I added a reference and deproded this article. Could you check in the history to see if I did, or am I not remembering right? Thanks, ] (]) 18:58, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:You are right, I was wrong. Sometimes, I open up articles, each in a tab, that are due to be deleted. I saw in the page history that you added content but I didn't note that you had removed the PROD tag, this is often noted in an edit summary. But I should have refreshed my screen. Thanks for being on top of this and your work on PROD'd articles. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
== Altenmann's doubling down ==
Hey Liz,
Thanks for attempting to intervene with {{ping|Altenmann}}, who I have pinged for transparency. Unfortunately, they are clearly not getting the message that they're deep into battleground behavior. And insulting my coding ability, telling me I should be shamed by my behavior, and frankly, just throwing a temper tantrum instead of trying to actually engage in the issue, is not helping them achieve their desired outcome. Frankly, I'm surprised that they have so many edits (200k+) and think that this kind of behavior is acceptable. I think that they should be embarrassed by their behavior. I'd rather not waste ANI's time if it can be prevented. ] 01:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:Sure thing, politely revert warring with cosmonauts in the category of Russian Empire is a nice and pleasant behavior. Surely you are not ashamed of your ] attitude. Your coding creates a mess in[REDACTED] category, and it is a fact, not an insult. Yes with my 200k+ non-automated edits have brought me in a contact with plenty of bullies and sometimes I am losing temper. --] ] 01:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hello, ],
::This is typical of my experience with this editor over the years. Every once in a while, they will post here IRATE, not displeased but seriously angry, over some random edit I made that is just typical of the editing I do, nothing out of the ordinary at all. But it drew their attention and they were not happy about it.
::When I tried to discuss the situation, they might have made some parting shot but then they just moved back to continue editing like nothing had ever happened. I'm sure given their MO over their long tenure here, there is enough for an ANI complaint about civility but it would take a lot of time to track down all of the diffs and I'm sure you'd rather be editing categories. If I were you, I'd try to just shake it off and know that you are just the latest target of their displeasure and they are unlikely to be hounding you. I think especially among editors who been editing here for a long-time, they just learn to avoid disputes by keeping their distance from editors who push their buttons. No one at Misplaced Pages gets along with everyone. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Thanks Liz, it's good to know that this is just what they do. I assume that after the CFD closes with a rename, they'll move on to their corner of the internet. And yep, you're right, I'd much rather be futzing around with categories :) ] 01:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
== Request to re-open ] ==
I would like you to re-open ] because I was on wikibreak so I couldn't participate in the discussion. Per ], since it's officially approved by the government, and it passes ]/] and is very likely to commence operations. Referring to the ] as an example, it was approved in the same month last year and has now started operations. Moreover, we also have ] being approved before the ] and which is yet to start operations. ] (]) 06:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I don't see a strong reason to reopen that AFD. Besides, the article hasn't been deleted, just moved to Draft space. You can work on it at ] and submit it to AFC. No content has been deleted. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
== Arbcom ==
FWIW, I think you'd make a great arb. I hope I see your name on the ballot. ] ] 16:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you, ] and ]. I had a pretty grueling RFA but that was 9 years ago so maybe this wouldn't be a repeat of that experience. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
== They changed username ==
I'm leaving that anonymous here in case it breaches any outing policy 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 19:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:I don't understand, ]. I didn't see any indication of a changed username and generally, when a username is changed the renamer moves their user pages to those corresponding to the new username. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::I noticed it on 9 Nov 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 19:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I agree it is peculiar. 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 19:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Hey, ]. The same thing just happened with ] who might now be ]. Do we have a new renamer who doesn't know what they are doing? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::I am not sure. If it is the same one then a polite enquiry might bear fruit. I don't get very close to arcane things like renaming, I'm afraid 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 21:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
== Radka Zelníčková ==
Hello @] I thought I'd answer your question here rather than on the AFD discussion as it isn't relevant to whether the article is deleted or not (it'll be not by the way). ] (]) 00:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Welcome to my User talk page. But I don't see an answer here. And because I edit so much, I've forgotten what the question was. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hello again @] I've now left an answer on the page in question. I've had enough of all this business and would like to be left alone now. I will not be participating in any further AFD matters after the current ones are closed as 1 I started doing Misplaced Pages for fun not hassle and 2 the process is a biased farce based on who says what rather than facts and rule adherence. Have a great day 🙂 ] (]) 11:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
== AfD Barnstar ==
{{AfD Barnstar|For all the work you dedicate, every day, to closing or relisting so many discussions. Thank you for keeping AfD ticking! ] <sup>]]</sup> 03:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)}}
:Thank you, ], I've never seen this barnstar before. You must have created it. There's about half a dozen of us regular AFD discussion closers, happy to play a part. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:58, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::You're welcome! Yes, I did create it, because it must take so much effort for you (and the other closers) to do the pretty thankless task of reviewing ALL the AfDs that close every day and I thought a little recognition was in order. I thanked you first because from what I've you always throughly evaluate the consensus and close with reasonable ATDs that might not have been considered. So, thanks I guess! ] <sup>]]</sup> 05:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Well, if I have a bias in closing AFDs, ], It's not for "Keep" or "Delete", it's for a valid ATD. But I found out early on when I first started that I can't introduce an ATD, it has to come out of the discussion. So, hopefully, a participant can find a relevant article to redirect to and bring it up in the discussion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
== Deleted redirect from student mis-merging ==
Hi Liz,
] had been a bare stub in mainspace. Then a student-project began working on it in draft-space. It was recommended they merge the stub with the draft, which they did. But they did "stub merge+redirect to draft", rather than leaving the stub existing until the draft was ready to move to mainspace. Should the mainspace be undeleted and returned to the stub state, rather than losing mainspace content? ] (]) 05:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Feel free to do whatever you think is appropriate. It was just deleted as an CSD R2, cross-namespace redirect, not because of the content. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for the quick response! ] (]) 06:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Well, ], I"m trying to turn over a new leaf. I have been remiss in not replying to messages on my talk page very promptly. I was waiting until the end of the day to respond to them all and then something would come up. I'm trying a new way of responding to messages soon after they are posted. Wish me luck. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::::"Good luck!" If you're in the northern hemisphere at the moment, perhaps you can find some nice autumn leaves for turning-over or shuffling-through. ] (]) 06:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
== An editor you blocked ==
Hello Liz, you recently blocked from category namespace for improper editing there, and it appears they have now transferred that same behavior to file namespace. Can you please take a look and consider taking additional administrative action? Thanks. ] (]) 09:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:{{tpw}} It seems like the accounts has now been globally locked. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 10:45, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for the update, ] and ]. We have a number of sockmasters who focus on children's TV series and animated films and this was probably one of them. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 16:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
== Your light touch is needed ==
Hello Liz
Dr. D. presents his compliments, respecting you to be one of the (alas, now very few) sensible and rational administrators of this community.
Since Dr. D's group members do not edit Misplaced Pages article space, he requests yous to kindly arrange with like minded admins to Revdel all references to his bodies on this project, for which he shall be obliged.
PS: that's a really cute kitten(meister).
PPS: The medium is the message ] (]) 17:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Welcome to my User talk page. First, I have no idea who Dr. D is so I wouldn't know how to search for references to him on this enormous project. If there aer specific edits you are concerned about, please provide a "diff" or link to an individual edit and I'll see whether or not it fits in with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. There usually has to be a good reason to remove content from an article (unsourced claim, BLP violation, copyright infringement, etc.) so if you could provide a reason why these mentions are unsuitable, that would be helpful. But first, you really have to first provide a real name before any action can be considered.
:If you have any general questions about editing on Misplaced Pages or its policies and guidelines, please bring them to ] where experienced editors can offer you advice and support. I'm not always available but there is almost always someone available at the Teahouse to address any concerns you have. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::Many thanks for the prompt revert. Here's the . and here's in conversation with famous journalist and author . Since we presently have no intention to edit in mainspace, your welcome offer of the Teahouse is politely postponed to a future date. (Sorry for any misunderstands, English is not my first language).] (]) 19:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::Well, I see no reason to revert my comment on ] but I'm not sure that's even what you are asking of me. And you still haven't provided a name for who is this "Dr. D". I read through that link you shared and I didn't see anyone who is a "Dr." who had a last name that started with "D". Your intentions for your contributions on Misplaced Pages are unclear to me so I don't know how to respond to you. You are being very indirect and not spelling out what you want to happen. But discussions on Misplaced Pages are public and not censored as long as they don't violate our guidelines and policies. So, I guess, for the moment, this discussion is over. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Dr. R.S. Dalvi, CEO of Hindu Raksha Dal requests Administrators of Misplaced Pages (English version) to delete all references to Hindu Raksha Dal and "Hindu News" / "Hindunews.stream" from WMF hosted computer servers. Specifically, for the present, Hindu Raksha Dal desires that the following threads be REVDELed and as they contain unacceptable, derogatory language and ignorant opinions about the organisation and its projects. ] (]) 03:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::I figured out you were referring to "Rajendra Singh Dalvi". I did a search on Misplaced Pages and he is not mentioned in any article on the project. I'm not going to delete entire discussions about the Hindu News and no other admin would either. That would be censorship. Just because a discussion can contain criticism does not make it defamatory. Discussing subjects in detail is how editors come to a consensus on how to treat sources and come to decisions.
:::::If you want to make a complaint to WMF about this, I recommend going to ] and asking them how to contact our parent organization. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::Certain privileged confidential material criminally misappropriated from a private website of Hindu News is being discussed on your website by strangers to the Hindu Raksha Dal/HRA. In these discussions highly disparaging and derogatory remarks are being made about Hindu Raksha Dal (an intensely private body) and its projects. Your editors have no cause to discuss HRD / HRA (private bodies) or its private projects, '''it's a blatant violation of your CoC'''. When an HRD rep visits your website to protest he gets blocked. When we approach WMF (in the past) they say they have no editorial control over this website. Having previously gotten these matters escalated all the way up to the Supreme Court of India (where WMF was severely rapped for its selfsame stand) on the 2024 Kolkata rape/murder victim naming issue, HRD is now left with limited options (incl. but not limited to enforcing its own CoC in place of WMF's). If complaints to Senior Administrators of this website go unheeded it only spirals the situation, especially since HRD/HRA is not your typical "rule of law abiding" aggrieved stranger coming here to complain. NB: When WMF pleaded "no censorship" to the Supreme Court of India, they were told categorically WMF would be blocked in India. Its a slippery slope. If legally ill informed Misplaced Pages editors generate content about a private Indian organisation that contravenes India's cyber, media and criminal laws , we should not be told that only US law and Misplaced Pages (English) policies like "no censorship" apply. ] (]) 07:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::], I've already advised you to go to ] if you want to get in touch with WMF. Additional comments here, trying to itimidate me into doing what you ask, will have no effect so I see reason to continue this conversation. I do not know anything about the Indian courts, I'm just an administrator, taking care of my daily tasks and my concern is the health of the project, not your organization. I advise you not to make any legal threats which would result in a swift block of your account. Since your interest seems to be into debating and not actually contributing to this project, I'll ask you politely to move on from my User talk page and find something more productive to do with your time. Good bye. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::We have more than one email communication from WMF Legal (eg. from WMF erstwhile counsel Michelle Paulson -Date: Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 12:27 AM-, and/or jpgordon, and/or legal@wikimedia.org "On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation") asking us to reach out directly to Misplaced Pages (English) admins in such situation. Because you are an Admin who has posted multiple messages on the Administrators Notice Board thread we are concerned with and in accordance with the afore described WMF communications to us, we are reaching out to you, and you specifically, to get those 2 threads entirely redacted / revdelled IN GOOD FAITH as contrary to US Law in addition to Indian law, as well as WMF's CoC and ToU. We are puzzled why you feel intimidated. As an Administrator of this website and its policies, surely you are obliged to follow the policies of your website and those of your media hosts which we are approaching you to enforce with the administrative tools at your disposal which are not available to us. ] (]) 08:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
== Invitation for Your Insight and Guidance ==
:Hello Liz,
I am Muhammad, and while you don’t know me, I’ve noticed and greatly admire your work on improving Misplaced Pages. I’m reaching out because I’ve recently been given a 72-hour block (that's now expired), but I’m still not entirely clear on the reason behind it.
I saw your comment on my prior talk page , and it seems you may be familiar with my actions. I’m open to discussing the situation further in case there has been any misunderstanding or if I missed something. Any insight you have to help me understand the reasons behind the block would be truly appreciated.
I’ve written a response here and would be grateful if you could take a moment to review it. I’m more than willing to engage in a constructive conversation to clarify things and if I had indeed done something wrong to get 72 hours, I will take responsibility for those actions. But it's hard to take responsibility when you don't even understand the error.
Thank you so much for your time and consideration.] (]) 23:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:If you are evading a block, please stop editing right now. Wait for your block to end and then we can talk. Block evasion can result in a much longer block for your original account, lasting weeks and months, not 72 hours. This is a short block and don't do anything to jeopardize your original account. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:49, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
::No, I had waited until the entire 72 hours is over before asking you on your talk. (https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:BlockList&ip=49.181.58.245) There's no current block because it had expired almost one day ago. I know it's short so that's not a big deal. What's a big deal is not even understanding it. ] (]) 00:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::Well, I'm glad to hear that your original block is over. I have posted a response to you on the User talk page of your original account, the one that got blocked. I'm sure you won't be satisfied by my comments but it's the best advice I can offer you. I'm not saying that your block wasn't a "big deal", every block is a big deal to the person who has been blocked. But if you want to continue to edit here in harmony with the community, you need to move past this block and work on improving the articles and other productive work you could do. Think less of the past and more about the positive ways you can contribute from here on out. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
== The conversation with SumoAvocado ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 09:00, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:I know you are more than capable of handling this incident yourself, as you have been. Sometimes, though, the protector needs protection. I hope I have not overstepped the mark here. If I have, and if I have upset you in any manner over this, first please accept my apologies, and second please ask me to withdraw the ANI report. 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 09:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::I actually only came by to thank you for offering bludgeoning advice to the Gerard Gertoux editor. The SumoAvocado behaviour offended me greatly. 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 09:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::To be honest, ], I wasn't pleased that you brought this discussion to ANI because while I, in general, agree with removing vandals, I didn't think I need "protecting" from this particular conversation. And also I was wondering how far this editor was going to go with their demands. But I didn't object here, or at ANI, because I had ended the discussion here and I thought that this subject of threats against Misplaced Pages is bigger than me and this User talk page and my interactions with this editor. I was considering sharing this discussion on AN but that was just to inform other administrators about the revision deletion demands, not to take action against the editor. But now that NRP has identified the editor as a probable sock, if I had known that earlier, I would have blocked them myself. But I see you had good intentions when you took your action. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::@] I was in two minds over this. Please accept my apologies for the displeasure I have caused you. 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 21:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Oh, no, ], no apologies are necessary. I know that you do what you do for the benefit from the project and clearly this was an attempt to exert undue influence over our discussions and content. As a woman, the language of "protection" probably strikes me differently than if I was male or gender fluid.
:::::But I also appreciate having editors watch my user talk page because, for some reason, I seem to have a lot of socks and bad actors reach out to me, maybe it's because I'm female, I don't know. Additionally, I do try to engage with some blocked editors to help them understand why they have been blocked and perhaps that is an unwise use of my time and I should rethink that activity. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::You may not believe this, but I had not considered your gender, your username notwithstanding. I see you as a valued colleague, no more and no less. I consider Misplaced Pages editors to be equal in every respect with each other. I think I need to stop digging this hole now!
::::::Juxtaposed with Trump I can now see why that wording would upset, though. It was an inappropriate word choice. 🇺🇦 ] ] 🇺🇦 22:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
: That's {{noping|Blaxstocatamazon}} or someone related. ] (]) 16:34, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
== Peer pressure ==
I know there is usually a last-minute rush but at the moment we don't even have enough candidates to fill the open spots. And although several former arbs are running, the committee needs people who aren't as jaded and prone to burnout. I think you could bring the perspective of a ''very'' hard-working admin who knows what it is like to be in the trenches to the committee, something that it may be a bit thin on right now. I'm also more or less positive you'd get in if you ran.
The process really isn't so bad, you answer a bunch of questions, maybe a few people comment on your discussion page, that's pretty much it, the rest is just waiting. I expect it will be considerably easier for you than it is going to be for me. ] ] 00:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I actually just posted my statement but had some glitches so if you could double-check it, that would be awesome. I noticed during the same half hour, that two other admins also posted their statements so maybe this is the beginning of the last minute rush. But thanks for the encouragement. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
::Good luck, Liz! Though I'm sure JSS is right and you don't need much extra luck. There's lots of folks on standby ready to pick up the slack if you have to drop some of that hard work you do to handle ArbCom business instead. :) -- ] (]) 02:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
:::], you know, besides repeating the horrendous experience that was my RFA, the other reason I was hesitating to file was because I greatly enjoy the work I do as an admin and it keeps me very, very busy. I'm reluctant to let that go as it provides me with little boosts of energy throughout the day. But, if I am elected, we'll talk more and maybe I can start delegating some of the projects that I spend time on to other competent administrators who might have some time on their hands (just/kidding) <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
:I look forward to supporting both of your candidacies @] @] (and full disclosure, a root vegetable of whom I'm quite fond). You are exactly what ArbComm needs to move this project forward in its next decade but also amid this world mess which will lead to more CTs and not less. Good luck! ] ] 02:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, ], I appreciate your support, as always. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
:Great to see you run Liz! Best of luck with your candidacy. Cheers, ] (]) 03:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
::And the same to you, ]. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
::ooh another one I'll be supporting. Didn't realize you were running @]. ] ] 13:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Yeah, things are looking much better this morning. Best of luck. ] ] 16:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
==Indefinite semiprotection of ANI==
Hi, Liz. You have semiprotected ANI from editing ''indefinitely'', which is very unique and surely not desirable. Usually it gets protected for 6 or 12 hours or a few days at most. Did you perhaps misclick and mean to semi ''moving'' the page indefinitely, which is usual, and from editing for 3 days? ] | ] 09:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC).
:Oh, never mind, I see you changed it as I was posting, with ECR protection for 3 hours. Mind you, I still think moving the page should be indefinitely limited to admins. Basically, nobody needs to move it. ] | ] 09:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC).
::That was a mistake, I meant to semi-protect it for 3 days but it sounds like even that would be too long. I'm not sure why the default duration of protection is "infinite". I didn't want to protect for only extended confirmed editors but this troll seemed to have an infinite number of accounts and reverting them was burning up our supply of editors. But it's just for 3 hours, hopefully, long enough for him to get bored and move on. But sorry for my mistake. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 09:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
:::No problem, and I see you caught it yourself. The short ECR protection is novel but seems a good idea in this situation. (But, sorry to go on about it, what about the move protection? Move vandalism is quite popular, if the trolls get a chance with a major page.) ] | ] 10:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC).
* Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Misplaced Pages Library
* Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
* Tech tip: Mass downloads
<big>''']'''</big>
</div>
</div>
<small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --12:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=27730094 -->
== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==
Hello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
Take the survey ''''''.
Kind Regards,
]
<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->
==Comment==
Hi Liz! I hope it's ok to reach out with this suggestion, you know so much more about Misplaced Pages than I do but I'm wondering if I might be able to help a little with blocked editors, considering what you've said?
I've been working on getting more experience with editing (specifically with the Typo Team) as you kindly suggested, along with some basic copy editing of random articles. I've come across editors who were otherwise decent, but became embroiled in a dispute to the point that they lost perspective & wouldn't drop the stick.
They were angry because they cared about their work but let it get the best of them & just needed someone to acknowledge their feelings, so I continued on their Talk page to say if I could help. I'm glad to say that it definitely did and the stick was dropped - you can see the discussion link in the Barnstar on my Talk page if you want to see an example, or I can post a direct link for you?
If you come across someone who you think might benefit from a similar positive message on their Talk, feel free to let me know and I'll be happy to do so! I realise how busy you are (and will be, I can see everyone's rooting for you for Arb!). Needless to say, I'm too inexperienced to discuss the reasons for a block, policies, other people's actions etc., so I absolutely will ''not'' discuss that. If things go awry I'll immediately stop and seek advice.
TLDR: If you come across someone who might need a positive post please let me know; similarly if you don't think this is a good idea then I completely understand, I just wanted to throw this out there to see if I can help 🙂 ] (]) 05:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I moved your comment to start a new discussion as it had nothing to do with the rather intense conversation that you placed this in the middle of. Please do not insert content that is not relevant to a discussion, especially in the middle of an ongoing conversation. I don't think you have enough editing experience to be advising other editors (maybe when you are extended confirmed) but I encourage your efforts to deescalate situations. We always need more peacemakers as long as they aren't telling other, more experienced editors what to do. That will not be appreciated. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:56, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
== Bojan Ilievski (deleted page) ==
Hello,
Two years ago I created a page for Bojan Ilievski after his debut for the Macedonia National Team. You deleted it, saying he is irrelevant and it was only one friendly game. He is now summoned again by the national team for the upcoming UEFA National League fixtures. Is there a possibility to bring back his page?
Greetings. ] (]) 10:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello,
:I assume you are talking about the article that was deleted through ]? First, I didn't say anything about the quality of the article or the notability of the subject, I just assessed the consensus arising out of the discussion and closed it. I have no opinion on the subject.
:Secondly, I'm willing to restore this article to Draft space or User space but you MUST submit the draft to ] for review. If you just move it back to main space, it will be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4 which is for articles deleted through AFD that have been recreated. It will then be much, much more difficult to restore it a second time. Are you willing to do this? If not, then it is better to write a new article in Draft space from scratch. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
== Restoration of Ivy Wolk ==
Hi {{u|Liz}}. Still wondering if you could possibly restore my userspace draft for Ivy Wolk so that I could get a look at it and possibly move some things to the page that exists there now. Thanks! ] 18:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:First, sorry that I didn't follow up your original request that is somewhere in the middle of this User talk page. I typically just look at the bottom of this page and can miss updates to older discussions.
:Secondly, as you mention, there is an article, ], in main space that was moved from Draft space. Is there yet another version of this article that was deleted? Please provide me with a link to the page of the deleted article so I can look into the circumstances of its deletion. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:03, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
::Totally fine! The draft I'm talking about was located at ]. I moved it to mainspace before it got deleted so I'm not sure if the page's history will still be intact, but let me know if it is. ] 19:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::Sorry for the delay, I've been busy with other work on the project. Here's what I can see, there is only one deleted edit at ] so there is no content on that page. However, there was content that you made at ] which had gotten deleted when the article was tagged for speedy deletion CSD A7, G4. I have restored your edits now that this article has gone through a deletion review. I did not restore deleted content that was removed through an AFD discussion deletion and I don't think I could, but that is not what you are asking for. However, even though this content has been returned to the page history, do not revert this article back to your original edits. The edits remain there as a source of content you could draw from to add to the new version of this article but do not just restore this article back to a version of the one you created. That would erase all of the work that has been done since this new version was created. Make sense? Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
== Recent revert ==
Hi Liz,
There has been major disruption in the article and the version you restored for maintaining the Afd tag is about a different politician. It was earlier about a different person who is serving as a minister in Government of Bihar. But, now the version you restored is about a poltician, who is not notable. ] (]) 16:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
*See, this person ], about whom the article was earlier is notable, but someone changed it to present version, and this person with same name is not notable.] (]) 16:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hello, ],
::The AFD might have the same outcome that you were trying to achieve with this article. It's just that once an AFD has been opened, it can't be bypassed. Tags should not be removed or the article redirected, moved to Draft space or blanked until the AFD is closed. Your best bet is to go to the AFD discussion, if you haven't already, and make your case there. If it is persuasive, you'll probably achieve the results you want. But the decision has to come out of the AFD discussion consensus. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
== Advanced rights ==
Hi Liz,
I no longer need any of my advanced rights. Can you please remove them? ] (]) 02:05, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
:{{tps}} I removed the rights for you {{u|BilledMammal}}. ] ] 07:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you, ]. I'm not sure what brought this on, ] but I hope you are okay. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:31, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I didn't action this as closer of the ANI but echo @]'s concerns. Don't hesitate to be in touch @] ] ] 19:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
==About==
I don't understand why Primefac blocked Saqib by --] (]) 09:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
:{{tps}}
:ArbComm blocks such as this will not be discussed in public @]
:Given your close call at SPI, I'd suggest a focus on articles. ] ] 23:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hello, ],
::I was surprised, too, so I inquired about the block at Primefac's User talk page even though I expected the reply that I did receive. But ] is correct, ArbCom blocks are not discussed publicly so we'll just have to accept what is as reality. But know, if Saqib wants to be unblocked, they can appeal their block, also, to ArbCom for review. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
:::{{ygm}} no rush and no answer needed. ] ] 01:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
== ANI closure ==
Re , I think it was clear enough there wasn't going to be any more bickering, so I wonder about your comment. I'll take minor offense to the half of it directed at me. No big deal. The main point there was that GoodDay was in the wrong from the start of that issue, and never said as much (nor did anyone else). Cheers, ―] ] 12:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Mandruss & I were both in the wrong, IMHO. That being said, I thank you for the close. ] (]) 16:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ], I apologize if you found the word "bickering" as implying that you didn't have a valid reason for opening a complaint. That's not what I meant. By bickering, what I typically mean is a discussion that goes back and forth between two editors who disagree, that is not moving towards a resolution. I closed the discussion because I've found is that, often, on ANI, the longer a complaint stays open, the more frequently it receives unhelpful comments from the peanut gallery that watches noticeboards. I also see that the longer a complaint is open, the more likely it is that sanctions will be imposed on one or both of the editors involved and I did see that as an appropriate outcome to this dispute. You outlined your disagreement, there was a response, GoodDay withdrew from participating on that article which seemed like it resolved the problems you cited. If it instead continues on a different article, you are welcome to open a new complaint and cite this one for reference.
:I see my job as an administrator on ANI as trying to resolve and deescalate disputes and so this was my mindset when I closed this discussion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for the clarification. I thought you were referring to bickering between me and GoodDay, which had clearly ended some time before your closure. {{tq|withdrew from participating on that article which seemed like it resolved the problems you cited}} No, the problem was resolved (far too late) by GoodDay's self-revert. Their participation at the article was never an issue—as I said in the ANI thread. ―] ] 00:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
== Signature controversy ==
You have sparked a major scolding operation on my User Talk Page on a irrelevant thread which was not supposed to be some sort of discussion so I moved it to a new section ] (]) (]) 02:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Except that you invented a new header that I didn't add. I don't think of this as a "controversy", other editors are just sharing their opinions. Look at any long-term editor's User talk page and you'll see a mixture of compliments and complaints. And, believe me, this is not a "scolding" and I definitely didn't start anything. You moved my comment down from the middle of the page, where no one would have noticed it, to its place at the bottom of the page, where editors are trained to look for new messages.
:You seem to be ignoring the advice that experienced editors are offering you which is to focus more on improving articles and less on the "discussion" aspects of Misplaced Pages. We are an encyclopedia, not a forum or social media channel. Please focus less on socializing and more on article improvement. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
== Request undeleting ] ==
I am requesting restoration of this article deleted in ], I believe circumstances have changed, and I plan to rewrite the article. ] (]) 05:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I can not restore an article that was deleted through the AFD deletion discussion process. Your best bet is to start a new article in Draft space. If you think my closure was an incorrect reading of the consensus of participants, you can make an appeal at ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hello @],
::It is noted, thank you.
::Happy editing! ] (]) 06:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
== 15.ai Controversy ==
Ugh. It was unpleasant on ], but I had no idea, and you probably no idea, just how ugly it would get on ] so quickly.
I will be back in about three hours, and will post something, but I have no idea what will happen in the meantime. ] (]) 20:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Well, thank you for sharing your DRN experience on the ANI complaint. I've been reading over the pages related to this subject and it seems like folks are basically in agreement now. It helps when you remove sockpuppets from the conversation. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
::Once in a while an obvious offense such as sockpuppetry makes it easier to deal with a messy situation. ] (]) 02:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
== Best Wishes ==
Hi Liz, I noticed that you are running for Arbcom elections. I want to wish you good luck for it. ] (]) 10:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Thank you, I'll accept your good wishes! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 18 November 2024 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-11-18}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 16--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 23:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1258243105 -->
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/04&oldid=1258243549 -->
== Just as a technical matter ... ==
{{tq|It's not like there is a big red button that an admin or arbitrator can push to cause a blackout to happen.}} Actually, any admin with the interface-administrator bit could do this, in various ways, depending exactly on what was meant by "blackout", like what level of blacking out the community intended. If the idea were extreme, to literally make the content unavailable except to technical experts, then changing the CSS of most of the important divs and other elements to <code>display: none;</code> would do the trick. If it were to visually hide the content at first but still make it accessible with a little effort (and have no effect on users of screen readers), a common means, used for spoilers and such at various websites, is to make the text the same color as the background so that it has to be selected with the mouse (causing a highlight color) before it can be read. A third approach is simply visible effect; the original web blackouts (which I helped originate back in the '90s) did not render the page unreadable at all, but simply changed content and most other site elements to black with light-colored text on top, so it was stark and a major change (well, except maybe for some goth scene and horror film and death-metal music sites, heh). The usual approach is then to provide a message spelling out why things have gone black, to raise awareness about whatever the issue is.
I argued in the RfC why this was a poor idea for something like this in particular (complicated legal questions few would understand, yet an activism method designed to generate an immediate "no!" reaction, with a target, which in this case would basically be a WMF hand attacking to cut off WMF's own nose to spite its face). <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — ] ] ] 😼 </span> 12:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I appreciate the technical explanation. It is disconcerting to me that one admin, with a certain degree of privileges, could cause a blackout to happen. This is like blanking the main page, there should be safeguards in place. I don't think this is how things should work, that one person could unilaterally make this happen. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
::Well, they could do it and then get immediately desysopped for vandalism or something akin to it (mega-POINT?). Ultimately, for any "big deal" there will be some gatekeepers whom we have to trust. Someone somewhere has to be able to edit the "interface" pages including our CSS specifications, just as a technical matter. I suppose that the "pending changes" system or something like it could be bent to putting any such change on hold until another interface-admin approved it, but I'm not sure how much that would impede interface-admins' normal workflow. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — ] ] ] 😼 </span> 05:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
== cand q ==
Thank you for standing for arbitrator. I am far away from it all (travel, mourning), not in the mood, so just an informal question you can answer or ignore:
* ''']''' chose ]er by five composers whose music was banned by the Nazis—], ], ], ] and ]—for a recital at the ].
What does this 2024 DYK tell you about infoboxes for classical composers in 2024? -- ] (]) 16:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Oh, Gerda! You are one of my favorite editors and are such a positive presence on the project. But I really do not have strong opinions on infoboxes and I don't really know what your take is on that long-ago arbitration case. Sometimes, infoboxes can provide a useful summary of information for biographical or historical articles and sometimes, they are completely unnecessary. ARBCOM doesn't rule on content decisions or MOS issues but on disruption caused by editors so I just hope that if there are still disputes about infoboxes, they can be resolved at the appropriate noticeboard or policy talk page and not erupt into a dispute that finds its way to an arbitration case request.
:I'm sorry I can't give you a more definitive answer but I really am neutral on infoboxes and would support whatever decision a consensus of editors has come to on an article talk page. But I support content creators all the way! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you, but sorry, I don't think you got the question. There was an arbcase in 2013, but the "contentious topic" came in a later one. Do we still need it? Look at discussions on the talk of 5 composers and tell me. --] (]) 11:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
| image = Ehrenbach, snow on grass melting.jpg
| image_upright = 1.3
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
}}
:: November was rich in sadness and happiness for me, expressed in ]. Regarding my question, I found one so far who looked into the matter and didn't stay at the surface, ]. There are two composers on the Main page today, ] and ]. I find the response of my friend ] to a question on Copland's article talk promising. What do you think? --] (]) 08:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:: ] comes from a DYK about a concert that fascinated me, and you can listen! For my taste, the hook has too little music - I miss the unusual scoring and the specific dedication - but it comes instead with a name good for viewcount. I'd still like to know what you think about the Copland posts. --] (]) 16:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
:: On the Main page today ] on his birthday. Listening to Beethoven's ] from the ]. We ] today. --] (]) 20:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Listen today to the (new) ]. - Congratulations to being elected! Could you look at ] and tell me if you miss something in his infobox? --] (]) 10:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Listen today to ]'s 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the ] when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with ], because he was on my ] this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. - I can report happily that the Barber situation was resolved. --] (]) 16:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
:: I come to fix the cellist's name, with ] and new pics - look for red birds --] (]) 19:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
== ANI notice ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> ]] 08:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:@] I emailed you hours ago explaining the situation, and have just had to go to Oversight ''again'' to request suppression of the ANI thread where you and @] disclosed the supressed username. Utterly stupid behaviour. <span style="background-color: RoyalBlue; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">''']''' <small>]</small></span> 13:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
== Request for retrieval of a deleted article: ] ==
Hi Liz,
I published an article about an academic journal, Functional Diamond, almost a year ago, which you deleted in Jan this year for the reason that the journal is not notable enough. After a year's progress, now the journal has been indexed in ESCI. So, I think it has reached the requirements and hope you could restore the article. Thank you very much :)
Randypanda90 ] (]) 10:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Can you provide me with a link to the deleted article? Then I can look into the circumstances of the deletion which will impact how or if I can help you. Just write <nowiki>]</nowiki>. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hi Liz,
::Sure, I added a link to the topic title. Hope that could help. Thank you so much for your help! ] (]) 02:14, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::{{done}} ] was deleted as a ] which can be restored upon editor request so I have done so. However, I know the editor who tagged this article for proposed deletion and they are likely to start an ] deletion discussion on this article in the near future. I recommend editing it in order to improve the article and address any problems stated in the PROD tag which you can see in the page history. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Hi, I just saw this only now. Indexing in ESCI is not enough to pass NJournals (and GNG even less). I am therefore taking this to AfD. --] (]) 12:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Understood. Thanks for your help though :) ] (]) 03:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== APH ==
Misplaced Pages ] (]) 15:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I'm going to need more context here. APH? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
== Quick note ==
Hi Liz
Just a quick note to say I hope you're ok after those inappropriate and disrespectful comments at ANI. I want to put on the record that I and many others appreciate your work here, particularly in AfD, PRODs and categorisation. Explicit also does important work which is why it was pretty disappointing to see that whole mess at ANI. ] (]) 18:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Well, actually, I'm just getting up and I haven't looked at ANI since the complaint was posted so I haven't seen anything new that was added to it. But this has been simmering a while, at ], several times they have called for me to resign and they were so vitriolic on my User talk page years ago, that I asked them to stop posting here except for required messages. After 11 years, they are the only person I've asked to stop posting here and that includes trolls! But, my mistake, I haven't been collecting diffs over the years so depending on what they say, it could take a while for me to defend myself. I'll head over there in a few minutes. Thanks though for your support. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
== a social work book collection ==
i recently found a website started by a social worker academic which is a database of open source (freely available) social work textbooks on every course a social worker would need to take from entry all the way to an advanced practice degree. will be useful for building Misplaced Pages articles. also please spread the word if any social workers you know would benefit. URL: https://opensocialwork.org/textbooks/ ] (]) 12:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
== G13 reports ==
Hi, I have created a G13 report at ]. It filters out all bot edits, including those by {{u|CommonsDelinker}} bot, and identifies drafts that haven't been edited by a human editor in six months. My bot updates it every hour. Please feel free to use it if you find it useful. – ] <small>(])</small> 09:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Thanks ]. We generally make useful of the lists created by SDZeroBot but it always helps to have multiple sources of information plus you list the drafts last edited by a bot which is invaluable. Thank you for your work and for letting me know about it. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 09:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
== Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/1993 in Croatian television ==
Just a reminder/clarification that I expect a response from you at ]. Thanks. ] ] ] 22:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I didn't know you were waiting for a response from me so thank you for the reminder. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
== Green redirects ==
I came across ] at ] (closed a few hours ago). I appreciate your work of informing editors that redirects aren't suitable targets for redirecting/merging; I just wanted to let you know that redirects are blue for most editors (they're only green for you because you've installed ]). ] (]) 05:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Okay, well thanks for letting me know. I've been editing for over 11 years now and have so many scripts installed that I am not always cognizant of how my view of a page is different from another editor's. But it's amazing how often editors will suggest a target page for a redirect that is also a redirect. I guess they don't go and check it out first. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
== RFPP request ==
Hi Liz, if you have time would you consider actioning ] ? Thanx, - <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">] <small>(])</small></span> 20:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I don't patrol RFPP much but I don't really see vandalism occurring, just overlinking some words. Is there more that I'm not seeing here? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::It looks like Isabelle Belato did a range block here so that should take care of your problem. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
== Draft:Loretanos ==
I deleted https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Draft%3ALoretanos&action=history as an abandoned draft, but now in the history note that you had undeleted it the day before. Was the draft refunded to a requestor? Should I undelete it? Thanks. — ] ] 03:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Oh, this is very embarrassing to me. For CSD G13s, we use lists produced by SDZeroBot that, a week ahead of time, produces a list of upcoming stale deletes. See ]. I regularly keep 7 tabs open for the subsequent days of the week that are coming up. Accidentally, last night, I started deleting stale drafts that were due to expire on 11/25 UTC, instead of 11/24 UTC. I was a day off because I had closed one of the tabs. After a couple of hours, I realized my mistake and just restored all of the drafts I deleted a day early. It probably makes no difference at all, I mean, no one has edited these pages in 6 months but you should always check the page history to make sure there are no recent edits to the drafts.
:Given the discussion on ANI last week, I didn't want to delete any page early since that was mentioned as a problem. So, go ahead, there is no reason not to delete these pages now that it actually IS 11/25 UTC. But I appreciate you checking in with me. Over the past 5 years I've been working with CSD G13s, this has only happened to me one other time so I don't expect this to be a regular occurrence. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for the info. From what I can see (]), those have been taken care of now. And no need to be embarrassed by a mistake: I'm accumulating a few of my own that I hope remain one-offs! — ] ] 03:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::That GalaxyBot report is very, very new. It's only been around for a day or two and you can see DreamRimmer announcing it ]. It was originally a list to report drafts whose last edit was by a bot, that wouldn't show up on the SDZeroBot report, but it's turning out to be useful in other ways, too. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
== You've got mail==
{{You've got mail}}
Hi! Just sent a message to inquire about some Misplaced Pages wisdom. Would be grateful for any insight you can offer! ] (]) 08:47, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:HI Liz, My Self Sujit Kumar Mishra, I'm author and actor. Last time year I have created wiki page for me. but that time lot's of mistake and my profile was deleted by you I think. So Now I want to create my new wiki pages. How Can I Start Pls. Guide me, Thanks Advance. ] (]) 14:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
::], can you give me a link to the deleted page? Perhaps it can be restored. As for advice on editing on Misplaced Pages, I'd recommend bringing your questions to ]. The Teahouse is a forum to help new editors with learning about editing here. I don't really spend time advising editors on content creation. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
== Quarry help ==
Hi Liz. You seem to be familiar with Quarry? I'm rather hopeless with SQL. Could this be used to produce a list of articles created (excl redirects) by an individual user? I got a bit carried away trimming my watchlist and want to make sure I have them all captured. doesn't work due to edit count and I can't find any other way. If not, are you aware of any other tools? No urgency at all for this .. only if/when you have time. Thanks. ] (]) 23:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Welcome to my user talk page. Am I familiar with Quarry? Well, yes and no. I run queries on Quarry throughout the day and so I make use of it a lot. But as for the queries themselves, the ones I use were all written by more technically-savvy editors than I. That happens a lot on Quarry, an editor will find a query that produces some report they are interested in and then they "fork" it or make their own copy.
:One way to find editors that might know more about writing queries than I, is by looking at and see which editors are using Quarry. If you are friends with one of the editors who appear, you might try approaching them. But from looking at this list, I see ] who just wrote an awesome query that helped us find expiring draft that had last been edited by a bot. Perhaps they would be able to whip up a query to help you.
:You also might try ]. I once wanted to find out how many Teahouse invitations I had posted (which was in the tens of thousands) and someone there helped me with it.
:As for Watchlists, I'm the LAST editor to give advice there as I have over 200,000 pages on my Watchlist. I made the mistake of checking off a box that added every page I edit to my Watchlist which makes it practically useless to me now. I'm not even sure how to get it down to a manageable 10-20,000 page list.
:I hope there is some advice here you can use. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:35, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
:@], you can use ] query. – ] <small>(])</small> 03:41, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
:::It's like magic, ]! I didn't even have to say your name three times and you appear! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
@] & ] – Thank you both. That's perfect. ] (]) 03:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
== Requesting review ] ==
Hi @ Liz. I hope you’re doing well. Recently I created this article about a Radhikaraje Gaekwad is one of the most progressive Maharani of India. Can you please review it? This has gone unnoticed for a while.Can you please tell me when and how will this article appear as the top search result when someone will search the topic? ]
] (]) 20:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I'm not sure what you are asking for here. ] has been a main space article since July 2024. When editors ask for a "review", it's typically of a draft article and they are asking if it is ready to move to main space. Main space articles are only reviewed by our New Page Patrollers and it doesn't look like any have examined it yet. But after all of these months that have passed, it's unlikely to be reviewed by a NPP now because they review recently created articles.
:As for Google search results, that's nothing Misplaced Pages has control over. But you might get better advice than I can offer if you pose your question at ], there are a lot of experienced editors there and maybe one of them knows more than I about search engine results.
:If the problem is you want this article deleted, I suggest looking at ] or ] which can give you guidance on tagging an article for deletion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
== response ==
it IS relevant.[REDACTED] has a shortage of articles on many important concepts in the social work profession.
my purpose in sharing the link was to jumpstart the building of[REDACTED] articles in this aria.
and since the "wikiproject social work" is pretty much dead, I'm enlisting the help of wikiprojects sociology and psychology which are the closest academic disciplines to social work.
what else should i do ? ] (]) 19:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
== Can you restore ]? ==
I'll populate it now with some entries based on ] (I am not sure if there is a
Wikidata entry to link) <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 03:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} That was an easy request to fulfill. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks. Can you now undelete ] - we have several subcategories now (I'll populate it). <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 06:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:::{{done}} <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
== Quick cleanup ==
Is it necessary to promptly and systematically remove all links to articles deleted at PROD? E.g. It makes it much harder to fully restore these articles in the event they are deleted in error (which happens frequently at PROD IME). ~] (]) 18:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I hope you are having a good week. This is a more complicated question than it appears. It started when I first became an admin in 2015 and I was instructed that when I deleted a page, I should remove all of the red links. So, that's been my practice for the past 9 years. But lately, for PROD deletions (it doesn't seem to come up with AFD deletions), I've been asked to not just leave the red links but to go to each article and remove all of the references to the deleted article completely. Since some articles are linked to dozens of related articles, this could be very time-intensive additional work to do when you are focused on admin tasks, like I am.
:I'd question you on two points: Is it really that hard, if a PROD'd article is restored, to undo my edits? Is it that they are hard to find amidst my long Contributions list? They are usually mentioned in my edit summaries and my guesstimate is that only about 1 out or 20 PROD'd articles is later restored. Secondly, I'm not sure what you mean by "deleted in error" for a PROD'd article. Are you simply asserting that, if you had known about these tagged articles you would have removed the PROD tag? Because all admins I know who review PROD'd articles make sure they have not been PROD'd or to AFD before so I'm not sure what you are referring to as an "error". Additionally, I'm not the only admin who reviews and deletes PROD'd articles so if you want this unlinking behavior to end, it should probably be discussed at ].
:Thanks for any clarification you can provide. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
::I think you're right, we should discuss this at ]. I'll open a discussion.
::Can you tell me where you receive these directions to delete links and mentions as part of deletion?
::By ''error'' I mostly mean that ] has not been respected as I believe was the case with ] recently. I have suspended my ] activities because it is not a workload I can sustain. When I have been active, I tend to deprod over 30% of proposals. Your assessment is 5%. I wonder why there is such a big discrepancy here. ~] (]) 15:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::First, I appreciate the work you do with PROD'd articles. They don't get the kind of attention that articles nominated for AFD discussions receive. CSD-tagged articles and pages receive even less attention and are more difficult to restore than PRODs but that's another discussion that can occur at ] one day. I'm sorry you can't sustain your PROD patrolling as we only have a few other editors who keep up with PROD'd articles and then tend to focus on specific types of articles like ones about Olympians or films. Unfortunately, we don't have many "generalists" like yourself.
:::As for numbers, we are talking about apples and oranges here. Your figure is the number of tagged articles that you have de-PROD'd. I was talking about the number of articles and files that are deleted through Proposed deletion that are end up being restored through ] or through a request to the deleting administrator. Also, I said my figure was a guesstimate that is just based on how many articles I delete as PRODs vs. how many articles I'm asked to restore. So, I wouldn't put any money on my figure.
:::I hope you have a pleasant weekend! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::::That makes sense. I've never tried to assess how many prodded articles are restored (not an easy task for a non-administrator). I'm surprised it is 1 in 20. That means that as many as 1 in 6 iffy prods are being restored. I assumed that having to make a REFUND request and the near cloak of invisibility on deleted articles would provide a higher barrier than that. I don't know whether to be encouraged or discouraged by this information. ~] (]) 15:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:I can't find an email message from you. When did you send it to me? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
::Hello, on Nov 26.
::I sent it again now, at 2:39 UTC.
::There were not urgent issues, mainly replies. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 02:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, I sent two topics on Dec. 3, 5:22 pm UTC and today, 3:56 pm UTC. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 16:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
== Undeletion request for article ] ==
soft deleted at ]. (Nominated by @]) There are various references available about the topic now. So, I would request you to kindly restore it. ] (]) 12:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:@], this article is eligible for ], please use it. ~] (]) 15:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::@] {{tpw}} I think ] is attempting to do exactly that. I doubt there's a hard and fast rule about using requests for undeletion. ] ] ] 18:20, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Kvng}} Appealing to the admin who deleted the draft is as valid as REFUND. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 18:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} An editor can appeal to the admin who deleted the page but also, as Kvng advises, ] is possible and you might get a quicker response there. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:57, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you @], I also appreciate your advise @]. And thanks for adding your valuable comments @], @]. ] (]) 02:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
== Deletions ==
Please do not delete category:Kimberellomorphs , since it is not empty anymore. ] (]) 20:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I know, that's why I removed the speedy deletion tag. It still needs some "parent" categories added to it. Our categories are in a hierarchy so what would be the logical categories that it would be a "child" or? It shouldn't be too difficult as species/genus also are sorted into hierarchies themselves. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
==Greetings, Talk page stalkers!==
Hello, all,
I seem to have quite a few editors who have this User talk page on their Watchlists and you often help me out by supplying answers to queries either before I can get to them or when I don't know the exact answer to the question. But now I'm writing directly to you to encourage your participation in an annual election on the English Misplaced Pages.
This is the last weekend of ]. Please take a moment to review ], scan over ], if you want, browse through ] created by your fellow editors and, if you have formed any opinions, ]. Your options for each candidates are "Support", "Oppose" or "Abstain"...Abstains are not included in determining the level of support for a candidate. Voting is open until 23:59 UTC, 2 December 2024, this Monday (3 days from now). Depending on where you live, this UTC time could correspond to 4 pm, 7 pm or 10 pm (Monday) or even 3 am, 6 am or 9 am (Tuesday) so check your time zone and clocks.
But here is your annual chance to cast your vote for the future arbitration committee members. Voter eligibility is outlined ]. Typically, I think elections draw between 1,000-2,000 participating editors so it's a fraction of our active editors. Consider your options and if you choose to participate, than please do so before Monday, midnight UTC, Dec. 2nd. Thank you for reading, now return to your regularly scheduled editing routine. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:This would've reminded me to vote, if I ever voted in ACE. On behalf of those who do vote, thanks. ] ] ] 23:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::Just curious, ], is this election just a distraction from the editing work you prefer to spend your time on or is not voting a "protest vote" because you think the whole thing is political? And if you don't want to answer, that's fine, too. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I'll answer. It's not terribly deep, though. I just never got in the habit. ] ] ] 02:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::::{{tps}} ], never mind, vote. That should more than make up for you. ] | ] 03:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC).
:::::As a tonality indicator, I took that as a joke. ] ] ] 03:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:👍 ] (]) 04:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:Already voted. Thanks. ] (]) 10:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::That's great. I don't care how you voted, I'm just glad to see editors participating in the process. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 10:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:Good luck to you and all the candidates @]! ] ] 16:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
== My section on the admin noticeboard ==
Apologies for wasting space on there. Was that just not necessary to bring up at all? ] (]) 10:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:It's not a matter of "wasting space", it is just not an urgent matter than needs the attention of the entire admin community. If this had been persistent vandalism, then it would have been suitable for you to report it at ], if it was an incidence of edit-warring, go to ], if you believe it was a case of sockpuppetry, file a case at ], if it was an ongoing dispute that you cannot seem to resolve, then ] might have been appropriate if talking to another editor hadn't worked. But ] is for issues affecting the admin corps or for certain other issues like a request from a banned editor to be unbanned from the project. Like many areas of this project, it takes a while to figure out where to go to find an answer to a problem.
:This incident, however, was just 2 rather odd edits from a new editor but they weren't disruptive or damaging to the project. Instead of coming to AN, you could have tried talking to the editor or alerting an admin on their User talk page. But it definitely wasn't urgent and it's likely that this editor won't return to edit on Misplaced Pages. We get a lot of new accounts that are created, make one or two edits, and then leave. And, surprisingly, most accounts that are created don't make any edits at all!
:You might want to look over ] to see the variety of places you can go for help. I'm sorry if it seems a bit overwhelming but we have a lot of noticeboards broken down by the nature of the problem that is being discussed. Finally, any time you bring a complaint to a noticeboard about another editor, you have to notify them of the discussion. On the noticeboard, a code should be displayed that you can use or you can just leave a personal note that you write.
:If you have any other questions about noticeboards and when you should use them, please bring them to ] where experienced editors can offer you advice, support and a second opinion. Have a good weekend. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz. I see you removed the PROD from ]. I used to think it was for one-time use, but when I've recently double-checked, I'm not finding such restrictions, only restrictions on reverting and edit warring. Am I missing something? - ] (]) 20:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I hope you are having a nice weekend.
:According to ], {{tq|PROD is one-shot only: It must not be used for pages PRODed before or previously discussed at AfD or FfD.}}. This article was PROD'd (see , and then de-PROD'd (see ), in May 2007 so the article is not eligible to be re-PROD'd. In fact, no article can be PROD'd more than once unless the tag used is actually a ] which is for BLPs that have no references, citations or external links. I hope this explains my decision to remove the tag. This only means that, if you wish to see this article deleted, you must nominate it for a discussion at ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks! --] (]) 21:06, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:::@] {{tpw}} Just to add in my opinion, PROD is good for checking if a low-quality, abandoned article is actually abandoned. If it is, it gets ]ably deleted. If it isn't, it goes through AfD.
:::Of course, it's sometimes hard to know when an article has been PRODded if it's happened years before. Ask me how I know. {{wink}} ] ] ] 23:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::::This is why I am so eager to convince editors to use Twinkle to tag pages for deletion, because Twinkle will leave a relevant edit summary stating that it was posting a PROD tag. It's easy to see when you are looking at the page history. But we have some senior editors who like to manually tag pages for deletion and they do not always leave a helpful edit summary stating what they did so sometimes you have to check all edits that are of a certain size to see if they were PROD-taggings. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::{{tquote|we have some senior editors who like to manually tag pages for deletion and they do not always leave a helpful edit summary stating what they did}} Sounds like Misplaced Pages. ] ] ] 23:33, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::I've been meaning to set up a better editing environment for myself that includes Twinkle. (Yes, I still use WikiBlame and I miss reFill and it's predecessors.) I'm fairly good with the edit summaries at least. --] (]) 19:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== Raleigh Memorial Auditorium ==
Hi! I saw that you are the editor that deleted the ] article. I was wondering if you would be able to undo that, or provide the old body from the previous article so that I can add that in when making a new article under the auditorium's new name "Martin Marietta Center for the Performing Arts"? -- ] (]) 04:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Actually, ] was just a redirect that pointed to an actual article, ]. You should make this request to the admin who deleted that article which was ]. I think you might have better results if you asked for the article to be restored to Draft or User space so you could work on improving it. Good luck. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
::Oh, my mistake! Thank you so much! I will try that. -- ] (]) 04:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Thanks Liz. ], you are better off starting from scratch. Since its creation, the page has been almost entirely lacking in ] or any real facts to show that it meets the ]. It's also promotional in tone (recently ''enhancing the space to blend state-of-the-art technical amenities with traditional theatre traditions... a unique experience perfect for ballet, opera, concerts, and comedy... this space is also the idea blank slate for video shoots, meetings, and corporate luncheons'') and a substantial copyright violation of the theatre's website. In any case, the G12 precludes restoration as a draft. ] - ] 13:46, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
== You've got mail! ==
{{You've got mail}} ] (]) 08:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
== Civility ==
Bit confused by your post over at ]. I believe that people who use techniques like a ] are trying to manipulate which is a clear sign of disrespect. I had hoped you knew me enough to know that I am direct when necessary and kind when possible. And remember: free pitchforks! ] (]) 13:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
On an unrelated note, now that ] has been deleted, can we move ] there? ] (]) 19:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Maybe you can explain ] and ] to Robin82346? They won't listen to me, and they've been deleting red links with the editsummary {{tq|Fixed dead link}}. Many of their edits are subpar, and many of them should be reverted. ] (]) 01:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== About the categories of North Indian and South Indian descent. ==
Greetings,
I noticed that you placed a speedy deletion tag on the categories ] and ]. I would like to offer some reasons why these categories should be retained, as they highlight important aspects of diversity within the broader Indian-American community:
Recognition of Cultural and Regional Diversity:
India is an incredibly diverse country with distinct regional identities, languages, cuisines, traditions, and cultural practices. Categorizing individuals of South Indian and North Indian descent helps acknowledge these unique aspects within the diaspora, which otherwise might be overlooked in broader, generalized categories.
Better Representation:
These categories allow for a more granular understanding of how various communities contribute to American society. For example, South Indian Americans have made significant contributions in fields like technology and classical arts, while North Indian Americans are prominent in areas like politics and Bollywood-inspired media.
Facilitating Research and Accessibility:
Scholars, journalists, and readers looking to explore specific contributions or experiences of South Indian or North Indian communities in the U.S. will find such categorization invaluable. It ensures that resources and information are easier to locate and study.
Reflecting Diaspora Identity:
Many Indian Americans identify strongly with their regional heritage (e.g., Tamil, Kannada, Punjabi, or Gujarati). These categories validate and reflect the lived experiences and identities of people within the diaspora.
Consistency with Other Ethnic Subcategories:
Misplaced Pages frequently recognizes subcategories for other ethnic or national groups, such as ] or ]. The proposed categories are consistent with this practice of nuanced representation.
I believe these categories enrich Misplaced Pages’s diversity and inclusivity by acknowledging the varied and vibrant backgrounds within the Indian-American community. I hope this perspective provides a reason to reconsider the deletion proposal.
Looking forward to your response! ] (]) 16:19, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:P.S. Please reply on my talk page. ] (]) 16:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
::@] {{tpw}} I see that you put an identical message on {{U|Explicit}}s talk page. ] ] ] 16:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Yes. I copied and pasted it. ] (]) 17:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Hello, ],
::::As advised, I responded on your User talk page. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
== Duplicate !vote at ]? ==
{{diff2|1260659780|This}} looks like a mistake - the !vote was by 1keyhole, not the nom. ] ] 00:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:You are absolutely right. I'll revert myself if no one has already done so. Thank you for catching this. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== Logging speedy deletion nomination of Ashutosh Niranjan. (Mistakenly posted to ]) ==
Regarding Logging speedy deletion nomination of Ashutosh Niranjan. this ia an official page of ias officer. ] (]) 13:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC) - moved by <b>]] (])</b> 01:44, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I have no idea what this message is supposed to mean. Why are reposting a message from May 2024 on my User talk page? What are you asking for? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::I have no idea either; you can contact the original commenter. I was just moving a message that had been misplaced on the wrong page in case it meant anything. <b>]] (])</b> 03:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== Deletion of Jayson Sherlock on Misplaced Pages ==
Hi there Liz! My name is Jayson Sherlock and I'm a musical artist and have been on Misplaced Pages for many years, I have many fans worldwide who use Misplaced Pages to find out information about me. I have no offensive material on my page and would never accept anything of that nature. I hope you will reinstate my page so my fans can continue to learn more about me. Thank you so very much. Blessings, Jayson. ] (]) 07:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ]/Jayson,
:Before I can say yes or no, I need to see why the article was deleted. Please provide me with a link to the deleted page. THank yuo. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== Regarding that EE fellow over at ANI ==
Would you be willing to entertain the notion that it's someone related to the recent ArbCom case? I have filed an SPI request yesterday (under a different IP, as my home IP granted by my ISP is dynamic), but it seems that the request was shot down by an admin before it could have been reviewed.
I have been detailing that account for a while now and with their recent harassment by copypasting a CTOP warning (intended for themselves) to their victim (which is reminiscent of their behaviour on the Japanese wiki), I am confident to say that it is the very same person behind it, from the topics involved to the account they're (currently) harassing, as well as the edit timelines between the 2 (1 has been active, while the other has stopped completely). I have also sent an email with updated info regarding this to the CU team, perhaps you should ring them up regarding this.
On a final note, previously I was told off by users with something along the lines of "that misconduct on non-EN wikis aren't indicative of a user's behaviour on EN", I would like to think otherwise, misconduct is misconduct and a leopard never changes its spots. ] (]) 11:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:All I can say right now is that I don't think they are a new editor. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== RD request ==
Hi, Liz! I was wondering if you could RevDel that I made to my userpage (and the first edit of my userpage) in November of 2020, it unfortunately has my real name in it and I don't want to be self-doxxed on Misplaced Pages, especially since I'd assume people go to "first diffs" of pages just to see how they've changed over time. Thanks! ]<sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup> 17:15, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} Happy to help. But, wow, you've made a lot of edits to your User page over your time here! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks! <small>I know, it's a lot. :)</small> ]<sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup> 18:07, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== RD request ==
Hey there, I saw that you handled one of these for EF5, and I was wondering if you could get everything from diff back to the beginning of the user page, and for the same reasons.
] (]) 19:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} And I took care of 2 edits on your User talk page, too. But there is a message in your talk page archives you're going to want to remove as well. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::I'll get that one; is there anyway to RD the name from my talk page history or am I just going to have to live with it?
::] (]) 20:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I've edited the PI, if you could RD the previous revision of the archive that would be great!
:::] (]) 20:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::::{{done}} That was a lot of edits but I understand wanting to keep your personal information private. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Thank you so much! I've been a bit worried about this for a long time, so I really appreciate this!
:::::] (]) 20:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Unfortunately, I found one more, it's the edit summary on my archive page. Sorry for the bother!
:::::] (]) 20:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::And what about the redirect from your previous account? Do you want that deleted as a CSD G7? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Yes. The reason I didn't say anything is because of the renaming policy, where it says something about linking to previous names. As long as it's OK to delete that, I would love to.
:::::::] (]) 21:07, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::I'll double-check then. How about I email you if there is anything further to discuss? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::Sounds great, thank you so much!
:::::::::] (]) 21:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::{{You've got mail}} ] (]) 21:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== Scammers on[REDACTED] ==
Hi Liz! I saw you made edits on the Simple Misplaced Pages. I have no idea what site is that, but you said it is your name. This is a famous convicted scammer with the fake agency for bots and fake accounts online.All the articles there are paid and fake and you can see that when you check them. https://simple.wikipedia.org/Michael_Graziano
They made a Simple[REDACTED] page to keep scamming people online. This is their scam agency, it is called Mindful/Monopolize. https://www.mindfulagency.com/ One of their "owners", a convicted pedophile was jailed last year.https://whoradio.iheart.com/content/2022-09-01-nevada-man-accused-of-child-sex-assault-arrested-in-iowa/
Here is the article about their scam with link to the lawsuits. It is disgusting. Do you know how to nominate that page to be deleted?His contributions are for the same scammers and his team. Someone I know was scammed by them. https://www.thephoblographer.com/2023/06/27/photographer-sues-monopolize-for-50k-in-the-craziest-story-ever/ ] (]) 20:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I am really not well acquained with the Simple English Misplaced Pages and how to nominate articles for deletion. Every Wikimedia project has their own system. But I do know that ] is an administrator on the Simple English Misplaced Pages. I'd recommend posting a request on their ] and see if they can look into this matter for you. But admin privileges are not transferable so I am just a basic editor on that project and I don't visit it very often. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::I do see that I edited but I'm not sure what led me to that page. We have an article on this project about ] but it's a different person with the same name. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you! I will ask him. ] (]) 20:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
== Hi ==
Please see ]. – ] <small>(])</small> 02:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I have to be careful when discussing this editor as we have had conflicts in the past. It's not an accident that they happened across this draft deletion. I'm sure they will be reading this discussion, too.
:I'll just say, thank you for addressing the mistake so quickly. All systems like bots have errors and the important element is to note when they happen and fix them promptly which it looks like you did. Thank you for your efforts to be responsive and for creating GalaxyBot. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Hatnote|This page was last edited or modified by ] (]).}}<br><br>
|]
<center>Wise words given to a blocked editor: ''This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount<br> and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position.''<br> ] ]⁄] 4 August 2013 <br><i>Well said!</i><font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="Purple">'''''L'''''iz</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="Navy">]</font> <font face="Times New Roman" color="Green">]</font></sup></center>
|]
{{Signpost-subscription}}
}}
{{centralized discussion}}
:] ]
<br>
<br>
While Misplaced Pages's written ] should be taken seriously, they can be misused. <br>Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the ''letter'' of policy without consideration for the ''principles'' of policies. <br>If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ].<br> Disagreements are resolved through ] discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures.<br> Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves ] to reflect ]. (])
<br>
<br>
] '''CheckUser changes'''
== Popular pages talkback ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
] '''Guideline and policy news'''
{{Tb|User_talk:West.andrew.g/Popular_pages}}
* Following ], the ] has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the ] within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
* Following a ], a new speedy deletion criterion, ], has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
] '''Technical news'''
== Thanks for the mention ==
* Technical volunteers can now register for the ], which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
] '''Arbitration'''
Hi Liz, thanks for citing me in ]. I won't contribute to your discussion there, for fear of making it too long :p but I totally agree with the issue you raised. <span title="Meta-Wiki profile" class="plainlinks"></span> <span title="Meta-Wiki talk" class="plainlinks"></span>] 05:45, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
* The arbitration case '']'' (formerly titled '']'') has been closed.
: Well, <span title="Meta-Wiki profile" class="plainlinks"></span>, I think your discussion about deletionism was very important. If you look through Teahouse questions, you'll see the same question--new editors frustrated with speedy deletions of new articles--over and over again. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 13:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
* An arbitration case titled '']'' has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.
::] of this deletionist regime in action, along with the obligatory knee-jerk reaction to the provided examples. Also, I've mentioned you in my ]. Thanks for your support previously. ] ]</span>] 20:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Sorry to read about your frustration, ] ]</span>. I find the image copyright legalese confusing so I have done absolutely nothing with photos or images on Misplaced Pages. I'm sorry that this has led to you deciding to quit but, remember, accounts aren't deleted, they just go inactive. You can always return at another time. Policies do change over time as do attitudes. And, in WP, ] and it'll still be here tomorrow and next year. All the best, Augur! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
----
== Kate Winslet ==
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 16:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1259680487 -->
== Need help with editor's behavior ==
Hi. I noticed you undid my removal of tabloid sources for contentious information on this article. On consideration, I have restored this edit. I made it in an admin capacity while enforcing ], so I'd be grateful if you could refrain from restoring it a second time. Could you instead take it ti article talk or (preferably) find better sources for this info? --] (]) 08:34, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
: Okay, ]. But I don't know how an Editor (me) is supposed to know when an edit is made "in an admin capacity" and when it is a normal edit. How are these special edits distinguished from others?
: Plus, I thought that according to ], that the sequence goes, 1) Editor A makes an edit, 2) Editor B chooses to revert, then 3) Editor A goes to Talk Page to discuss the edit...not that Editor A re-reverts the edit. At least, I thought that was how Misplaced Pages was supposed to work based on what I've been told to do when someone reverted my edit. It's up to the original Editor A to go to the Talk Page and get consensus for their addition or deletion. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 10:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey. You left some comments in ] in November 2024. That discussion was eventually archived and no actions were taken. However, that same editor wrote ] yesterday, which is once again targeted at me. Actions by administrators must be taken, because this has been going on for far too long. – ] 20:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:: talkpage stalker swoops in to suggest... that if an admin (or indeed any editor) wants to communicate some desire to future editors, of a page that they are about to edit, then the best way is to use a short HTML comment, placed 'in the editing path' so that the future editor cannot miss it. <!-- hello future editors of my comment, please be aware that WP:TALK says changing my words is bad etiquette, please put a comment onto my personal talkpage first if you plan to make an edit here, thanks for improving[REDACTED] --> There is in fact just such a secret future-editors-only comment in *this* paragraph.
:Hello, ],
:: Usually, if you are editing a mainspace article, and plan to put a hidden HTML comment in there, you should first create a talkpage section, and explain why future editors should be cautious, and then manually archive that talkpage section you just created (to prevent linkrot). Then, in the appropriate place on the mainspace article, put something like this: <!-- hello, please read http29823982932982322989823 on the article talkpage before you make edits here, thanks --> .... the only gotcha is that you should not utilize double-dash characters in you brief comment -- do not do that or this -- because they can confuse browsers into mis-displaying your stuff. I realize you and John have been at this longer than me, but sometimes remembering wikipedia's five bazillion helpdocs is not so easy. :-)
:That wasn't a polite edit summary, I'll admit, but why on Earth are you editing a draft that this editor created when you have a history of disputes with them? Stop looking at their contribution history and just keep distance between the two of you. I'm not going to sanction this editor for snapping at you when you came to a draft they created and were working on and chose to edit it, given the past history between you two. Don't monitor each other. Just work on your own projects. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:: p.s. I prefer that editor A makes an edit, editor B collaboratively modifies that edit, goto step one. But that's a rare mode of interacting nowadays. Failing that, I prefer editor A makes an edit, editor B starts the talkpage discussion *before* just flat reverting (except for BLP or COPYVIO or NPA or blatant destructive vandalism or somesuch), then after some discussion editor B collaboratively modifies that edit, goto step one. p.p.s. Actually, I have a scheme slash proposal for colorizing edits, so that it was possible to see how long ago they were made... adding an admin-action-taken tint would be cool. Anyhoo, time to swoop out again. Thanks for improving wikipedia. ] (]) 03:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
::First of all, that draft was largely abandoned about five months. In addition, that draft is a WP:CFORK of multiple pages that have all that information. And I see that editor's contributions, because there are some pages on my watchlist that are sometimes edited by that particular editor. The "snapping" has been going on for more than a year and it all started when I tried to explain about WP:DATERET, which that editor ignored. So yes, I have a very good reason to look at history, because someone is getting away by constantly making personal attacks and breaking guidelines/policies. – ] 22:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==
== Indef blocks data ==
I PRODded this article on November 26 and then the page creator proceeded to remove the PROD template, which led to the category for the proposed deletion being deleted (by you). What should I do here? ]] 23:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I just lost interest in it, or rather I wasn't that interested in it initially. The raw data comes from the ], which are still being generated. '''''<font color="#FF0000">]</font>''''' 09:32, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
: Thanks, '''''<font color="#FF0000">]</font>'''''. I guess you need significant knowledge of coding to get this raw data into a manageable form to analyze? I don't have a background in programming. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
:I'm going to need more information here. The category for the day's proposed deletions (like ] for today) is deleted at the end of the UTC day when all tagged articles and files have either been deleted or de-PROD'd. It's a maintenance category and the day has passed. You must mean a different category. Can you provide a link to the category you are concerned about? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
::The way I did it was extremely messy, but I don't know anything about the proper way. I would regenerate the data based on a more recent database dump, but the format of the dumps has changed and I'd have to rewrite the program. You might well be able to find someone who can generate this data for you. ] maybe. '''''<font color="#FF0000">]</font>''''' 22:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
::] - basically, the article had a proposed deletion tag with mine and another editor's comments and they proceeded to remove it, and since they removed the template it also removed the category (which caused it to get deleted as empty). ]] 23:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
::: Yeah, I've since learned that there were pitfalls when I chose to focus on qualitative research rather than quantitative research in my degree work. More stats classes and I could probably figure out this myself.
:::], once an article has been de-PROD'd, you can't PROD it again. A PROD happens only once. An editor removing the PROD tag doesn't need a good reason to remove the tag or offer any reason at all. You'll need to bring this article to ] if you are still seeking its deletion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Can the author of a page remove the PROD tag? ]] 01:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: I have been curious about this subject as well, just this past few weeks... I have some programming skill, but knowing where to start, and what to look for, is often more difficult than writing the few lines of code that will give you the answer. (Knowing how to ask the right question is hard, in other words.) So, in an attempt to ask the right question, is there still any interest here? I don't understand the context of this conversation, or what the goal was, so that makes it hard to ask the right question. As for my own interest, I have a hypothesis that users with specific editing-styles (as measured by percent mainspace versus percent talkspace and bytes-added-versus-bytes-removed per edit and such) will be banned less often by admins with similar profiles, and more often by admins with differing profiles. Ping my talkpage if you or Hut_8.5 are also still curious, maybe we can figure out both our answers. Danke. ] (]) 03:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::Anyone can remove a PROD tag, the article creator, a registered editor, a random IP editor. I think you are thinking of CSD Speedy deletion, for CSDs, the page creator can not remove a CSD tag. And no one can remove an AFD/RFD/CFD/etc. tag until the discussion is closed. I hope this clear things up. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::@] Personally, I only use PROD to see if a low quality, seemingly abandoned article is actually abandoned, or if it's on someones watchlist. ] ] ] 04:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::{{reply|Cutlass}} Prod is for deletions which are relatively uncontroversial–if anyone disagrees with the tag, then ''by definition'' the deletion is not uncontroversial. --] ] 06:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
== Whisperback ==
== Muhabbat Gumshuda Meri ==
Seeking some direction on this deletion discussion. The main reference being argued for showing notability was discussed where even one of the keep votes suggested it needs additional consideration, and where there is clear consensus that it is not reliable. ] (]) 07:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
{{wb|Kudpung}} 08:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:I also did not want to taint the discussion but who voted keep is awaiting behavioral review at SPI. Was hoping they would have been blocked before the end of the discussion but SPI appears to be busy. --] (]) 07:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
::Hello, ],
::I'm not sure what you are asking me to do here. Reconsider the ]? Even if Sunuraju is judged to be a sock, I don't know if they would be a sockmaster or a sockpuppet and that would affect whether or not their AFD argument was struck. I'm not going to judge evidence on an SPI when a checkuser has been requested and, unfortunately, SPI is usually backlogged. And I wouldn't be surprised if there are some open cases from October that haven't been closed yet! And Sunuraju wasn't identified as a sock in the first two instances of this SPI in November that were closed so it is far from clear whether they would be identified as a sock in the current open investigation.
::But even if Sunuraju's AFD argument was struck (and it wasn't even an argument so I didn't give it any weight), then I still think there was enough support for a Keep of this article or, at the least, a No consensus closure and the Keep arguments relied on more than the Youlin Magazine reference. Are you considering taking this to ]? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the reply, Liz. I am not asking based on the SOCK. I think I am mentioning it because of the SOCK activity that we see in these pages and don't want one of their keep votes to influence others to vote keep. The SPI was just re-opened which is a separate issue so please disregard me even mentioning it.
:::I don't feel like wasting time with a deletion review. You made the best decision based on the information presented so not questioning why you closed it. I think that I should have at least left a comment prior to close about the discussion with Youlin not being considered reliable by the film taskforce. This could have possibly led to a no-consensus at the least but not sure. So no, I won't be at DRV as you made the decision based on the information presented. Maybe hoping you could turn it into a no-consensus based on the new information about the source being unreliable. If not, that is fine as well. Cheers! --] (]) 19:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
==Currently empty category==
== Disambiguation link notification for October 4 ==
Hi Liz,
you put a speedy deletion tag on ] because it's currently empty. The problem is: I've detected that someone created ]. I then created this category according to the model of other already existing categories ''Peruvian companies established in yyyy'', and added the 2011 category to this new article. ''After'' this, another fellow wikipedian the new article from mainspace to draftspace where it's now awaiting revision: ]. So that emptied my category.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>
So what should I do? Wait whether the revision will be successful and then create my speedy-deleted category again? Remove the speedy deletion tag because I assume the new article will be moved to mainspace again soon?
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 12:34, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
--] (]) 08:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
== Teenly ==
:Hello, ],
:Empty categories are easy! You can only remove the CSD C1 speedy deletion tag from an empty category if it is no longer empty. We don't keep empty categories because they might be needed in the future. But here's the thing about CSD C1s...if the category is ever needed in the future, it can just be recreated! Either by an editor or you can go to the admin who deleted it or go to ] and ask that it be restored. No problem. So, don't worry about a category that you might need when your draft is in main space, the category might not be deleted yet but even if it is, poof! we'll just restore it. Sound good? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 08:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
::Sounds good! Thank you! (I also created a copy on my local PC, so I don't even need to bother an admin, though.) --] (]) 09:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
I've been crying after reading that talk page and her contributions both the articles and other pages. I find it difficult to believe that she was as young as is stated but even if she was three times that age, well, what she had to offer was amazing. Life just isn't fair sometimes. - ] (]) 20:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Good Humor'''
: I'm not sure how you came across my question about Teenly, ], you must have that Departed Wikipedians page on your Watchlist. Yes, it's hard to believe that a 6 year old was actually editing on WP and communicating with others. But her User Talk Page doesn't read like a hoax. And, in my years on Twitter, I'm pretty familiar with accounts that pretend to be sick children. This doesn't sound like those.
|-
: If you found her Page moving, read the note that mentioned her passing at ] ...I think any Editor would tear up after receiving a note like that on their Talk Page. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | More than four hours after my last edit, I still have to smile at the "''poof!'' we'll just restore it". ] (]) 13:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
::Yes, the Departed page is watchlisted from the time when Tito Dutta was improving it earlier this year. I agree that Teenly is not a hoax. She was clearly a very gifted child, and I've known a couple. I just find it very upsetting: what we've lost and what she gave. I don't usually get too bothered about deaths or about children but reading of and around this particular one hurts. It seems that I have a heart after all but it is preventing me from editing right now, so I'm going to sign off for a bit. - ] (]) 21:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
|}<!-- Template:The Barnstar of Good Humor -->
::: Well, it's a surprise to me that WP brought a small child pleasure but with what she was dealing with, I'm glad it could provide a little distraction from her illness. Take care, <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
== Question ==
== ''The Signpost'': 02 October 2013 ==
Hello Liz. I nominated the European Cricket League 2023 for deletion with the suggestion it could be merged with the overall league page. You kindly agreed with this and closed the AFD today. But I checked and the page is still there. I'm still quite new to this process so could you explain how the merging happens and do I need to do anything as the AFD nominator? Thanks for your time reading this. Best wishes.
:Forgot to log in. It's still early here! The above is my question. Thanks again. ] (]) 11:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
</div><!--Volume 9, Issue 39-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
:Hello again Liz. After lots of reading into page merging, I've made sure the relevant content has been included and set up a redirect. Hopefully I did it correctly. Anyway you can ignore my question now. Sorry to trouble you. All the best, ] (]) 15:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
* ''']'''
::Hello, ],
* ]
::No problem with asking questions although it can take me a while to respond. Who actually takes care of a merge is really up to whomever wants to take on the project or which editors if more than one person wants to be involved. The AFD closer only tags the pages, they don't handle the merge. Unfortunately, some merges can sit for a long time before an interested editor takes on the work. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:34, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
* ]
* ] (]) 00:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
== You've got mail ==
{{You've got mail|dashlesssig=] (]) 20:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)}}
== Merge ==
If AFD is not the place to seek a merge, what is a good place to seek a merge for that article? ] (]) 22:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:See ]. The process looks complicated but just follow the steps to set up a discussion on the article talk page and post the notices. Once the discussion is over, an uninvolved editor will close it for you.
:If you have other questions about where to find information on this enormous project, I recommend visiting ]. I know a few things having edited for years but at the Teahouse, you'll find the combined knowledge of all of the editors who visit it to answer questions. It's more than I can help you with with my limited experience. Good luck. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
::Hi,
::I had tried and waited over three days and never got a response.
::That's why I did the AFD as it has a more public platform.
::If I was to be honest, I feel like there should be a MFD but it has become inactive as of late and the project seems to be abandoned and if I could I would re-establish it but idk the proper procedures for it.
::I'm new to merge discussions as a whole so I would appreciate some input. ] (]) 22:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:::], what were the articles involved in this proposed merge? Maybe there is a related WikiProject where we can find interested editors. But three days is not a long time on this project, some Merge proposals are open for a month or two before they are closed. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
::::It was II Corps into the hatnote linked article which can be seen here:
::::https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/II_Corps_(Grande_Arm%C3%A9e) ] (]) 22:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
== Guild of Copy Editors December 2024 Newsletter ==
Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you no longer want this newsletter, you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our ] to your watchlist.
'''Election news:''' The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure <s>nearly</s> everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to ] (with their permission, of course) until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June.
'''Drive:''' In our ], 67 editors signed up, 39 completed at least one copy edit, and between them they edited 682,696 words comprising 507 articles. Barnstars awarded are ].
'''Blitz:''' The ] saw 16 editors sign-up, 15 of whom completed at least one copy edit. They edited 76,776 words comprising 35 articles. Barnstars awarded are ].
'''Drive:''' In our ], 432,320 words in 151 articles were copy edited. Of the 54 users who signed up, 33 copy edited at least one article. Barnstars awarded are posted ].
'''Blitz:''' The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 15 December (UTC) and will end on 21 December at 23:59. ]. Barnstars awarded will be posted ].
'''Progress report:''' As of 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 333 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,401 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, {{noping|Dhtwiki|Miniapolis|Mox Eden|Wracking}}.
{{center
| <small>To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from ].</small>
}}
|}
</div>
</div>
Message sent by ] using ] (]) 22:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC).
<!-- EdwardsBot 0634 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Baffle gab1978@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Mailing_List&oldid=1261391607 -->
== Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Eric Edem Agbana ==
Hello Liz, I will like to request the reversion of a deleted page, Eric Edem Agbana who has just being elected as a member of Parliament in the . He now qualifies for ] and ] ] (]) 12:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:It looks like you already got ] restored. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
== Liz for the win at ] ==
Looks like you're in. Like really in, top vote-getter at 81.16%. That astounding. I didn't make the cut, but that's fine, you've got a great group coming in with you. ] ] 00:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Wow, well, thanks for letting me know. I'm bummed that you didn't get in. I hope you will consider running again next year. I remember meeting you at the Misplaced Pages Conference in 2019 with "Katie" and I was looking forward to getting to work with you. I really admire you, putting yourself through a process you could expect would be adversarial. That shows grit. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, that means a lot to me. I was looking forward to it as well, but this obviously isn't really a surprise. I'm sure the team you are coming in with can ferret out whatever it is that has been making the committee so apathetic lately, perhaps just the influx of perspectives and personalities will have the desired effect. ] ] 01:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:You're going to have to read your email more often now :-) ] ] 00:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::That is an understatement, ]. I think I have to create some new email accounts to handle the load. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Yeah, I funnel all ArbCom emails into a separate folder. In just under a year it has collected over 7,000 emails. I gatger that's a significant reduction on previous years! ] | ] 11:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Liz - congratulations on your resounding win. It is clearly a sign that the community recognizes the many ways you've contributed to the project, both in your personal qualities and in the work you've done. If I may throw a word of caution out there - as an arb I found people less willing to extend me good faith than they did before. So I would suggest to the extent that you're going to continue your admin work around deletion that you follow the pledge you made at ANI not to close things early, something you've done a few times even since that thread (e.g. ]). Fortunately XfDCloser makes it easy to know when you're closing something early. You have some great new colleagues on the committee but if there are anyways I can be of assistance to you please don't hesitate to reach out. Best, ] (]) 01:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you, ], I think. You are sending a pretty mixed message. The AFD you highlight was closed 15 minutes early which I don't think is egregious. We have some NACs who close AFDs a day early. At this point, I have closed hundreds (thousands?) of AFDs so I wouldn't be surprised if I made a mistake on a few of them. And if you could spare a few hours a day to help out closing AFDs, your help would be welcomed there.
::I know that I already have editors here who don't care for me (to put it mildly), I just assumed I'd gain a few more. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I agree with you that the 10 AfDs (from a review of the close of the AFD to Dec 2) and 2 PRODs (from the review of a single day) all were 30 minutes or less early which is one reason I hadn't said anything prior to now. But also people like me who don't close early can't possibly pitch in if others close early {{smiley}} (and thanks for the note about NACs happening a day wearly; I will try to spend some time watching for that as that is far more troubling). Best, ] (]) 02:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Congratulations, Liz. I am not surprised but I am pleased. ] (]) 02:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Congratulations on your election! — ] <sub>]</sub> 02:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Felicitations! -] (]) 02:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Congratulations Liz! - ] 03:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*AMAZING. Congratulations and well deserved. FWIW, 15m early is a non issue but you know I'm one of the guilty early closers. <small>But if I may make one minor suggestion, slightly more archiving? Currently choking my admittedly four year old computer.</small> ] ] 03:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, dear ]! Believe it or not, I just archived all of the messages from September 2024 from this page, I thought having 2 months' worth of talk page messages was okay. Maybe I should reduce it to one month.
:This election result was a surprise. It almost takes the sting away from my tumultuous RFA nine years ago. I try not to reflect too much on the past but, boy, that was a brutal experience. For any talk page stalker, running for ARBCOM is much less abrasive than having an RFA. So, consider that when November 2025 comes around next year and editors ask you to consider being a candidate. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::Can confirm it's much speedier now. Perhaps my cache caught it at the wrong time or something more techy that I don't quite get. I don't think I'll have the on wiki time to ever be an Arb, but your feedback on process is reassuring. Congrats again! ] ] 00:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:Let me add to the chorus and say congrats. <span class ="nowrap vcard"><b><span class="fn">]</span> <]•]></b></span> 08:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Adding my congratulations. I am not surprised by the result. ] (]) 11:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Congrats! ] (]) 12:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
* Congratulations and good luck. ] (]) 14:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Ivmbox|1=Congratulations on your success in the elections and welcome to the 2025 Arbitration Committee. This is the first part of your induction onto the Arbitration Committee.
Please use the ] to indicate the email address you'd like to use for ArbCom and functionary business.
Before you can be subscribed to any mailing lists or assigned CheckUser or Oversight permissions, you must sign the Wikimedia Foundation's ] and the VRT users confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information (L45). Please confirm that your username is listed on the ]. If isn't, and you haven't signed the agreements, please do this promptly and let me know when you have signed them. Instructions for signing can be found ]. Again, you must sign ''both'' agreements listed in the instructions. If you have signed but your username is not listed on the noticeboard, please let me know.
Over the coming days, you will receive a small number of emails as part of the induction process. Please carefully read them. If they are registration emails, please follow any instructions in them to finalise registration. You can contact me or any other arbitrator directly if you have difficulty with the induction process.
Thank you for volunteering to serve on the committee. We very much look forward to introducing ourselves to you on the mailing list and to working with you this term.
For the Arbitration Committee, ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 01:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)}}
:Hello, ],
:Thank you for the welcome. However, first I clearly have to set up some new email accounts for this new role since my personal email account is decidedly low volume. I just found out about the results two hours ago. It also seems like this message has an incorrect link. ] is a dead page that links to and I don't see a way to actually sign any document here on this page. Thank, in advance, for pointing me to the correct place to take care of these technical details. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::Hey Liz, please use the "How to sign" link at the bottom, which can also be accessed here: ]. Please let me know if if there's anything else that'd be helpful. Thanks! ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 03:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::], this notice makes it sounds like it should be soooo easy but it took several tries to even get to the correct page. The first instruction should be "Log in". And then it took me to a general Phab ticket page. But the deed is done. But it would be great to update this notice with the correct link. Thanks again for the welcome! My email Inbox will never be the same. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::::In case it helps I did some quick math and arbs sent only 7920 emails to the main ArbCom list in 2024 (down from 10410 in 2023, 10370 in 2022, and 12098 in 2021) (though data is somewhat incomplete for this year as the year is not yet over). {{Smiley}} ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 18:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::], oh my Lord. I mean, I knew from my years as a clerk that there was a lot of email but I had no idea, numbers-wise, that it was in the thousands of messages. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 18:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::This is down. I bet we hit 20k emails in 2016. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 19:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::These numbers are only for the main ArbCom mailing list, and perhaps not all of it. There's also the -b and -c mailing list, the clerks mailing list, the functionaries mailing list, the global checkuser mailing list, the checkuser VRT queue, the oversight VRT queue, the COI/UPE VRT queue, and various direct emails that people will send you simply because you're an arb. I just looked through my own inbox, and I received 21,086 emails in 2021, and 22,433 in 2020. And people wonder why arbs don't edit much. – ] 19:16, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Well, I'm glad I created a new AC email address. I might have to buy extra storage though. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==
Liz, not sure you're going to have any time to look into this given your new responsibilities and all, but this user's AfD nomination pattern, communications in response to you, and contribution history tingles my Spidey sense like someone who's lowkey butthurt over the lack of Scott Pilgrim characters, or possibly an LTA account. I'm going to keep an eye out, but you see far more AfD's than I do. ] (]) 07:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I already ] as I don't like to see brand new accounts nominating articles for AFD discussions. But I posted that remark in November and I'll see what they have been up to lately. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 08:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
== You have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee ==
The Electoral Commission is pleased to announce that you have been appointed for a two-year term to the Arbitration Committee effective January 1, 2025. Congratulations on the appointment.
On behalf of ElectCom: —] <span style="font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 14:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Eeww! Congrats. Now you are even lamer and with more power! ] (]) 16:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::I wouldn’t call it “lame” @]; but congratulations @]. ]<sup>]</sup> 20:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::] ] (]) 20:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::::{{+1}} Congratulations, Liz! ] (]) 22:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Thank you for all of the congratulations. Yes, and I'm so lame that it has actually swung back around to being hip. You wait long enough and even workholic, rule-followers who post Welcome notices can become fashionable. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Thank you for the official notice, ] and for all of the work that you and your fellow Electoral Commissioners did to have such a smooth election in 2024 with timely results. It sounds like it was a big change from last year, in a very positive way, thanks to this year's Scrutineers. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 22:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::Some changes for sure. I think the biggest changes that made coordinating easier was all the automation I implemented a few years back. Automated watchlist notices, automated status headers, automated mass message templates, and so forth. I'd like to think that's made coordinating ACE much easier over the years. :-) —] <span style="font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 03:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::], our technologically gifted editors have made so many changes, tools and innovations that have helped out the rest of us in visible and less visible ways. I know that the committee isn't "pro-active", looking for problems to resolve, but if there is anything I can ever do to assist editors in receiving cooperation from the development team at WMF, let me (or us) know. Of course, I can't make any promises but I've been hearing about problems for years now and it would be nice if some assistance could be provided to you all. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:I also came here to say congratulations, Liz! Your responses to editors in difficulty at the various admin boards have always struck me as some of the calmest, most thoughtful and helpful comments there, and this election is well deserved. ] (]) 03:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you, ]. Unless there are just blatant violations occurring, I believe in deescalating conflict. Often, two editors in a dispute have gotten themselves in a "me vs. you" situation that makes one person a winner and the other a loser. It's much better to get other editors participating in a discussion so that a consensus can be determined so the disagreement becomes less personal. We have lost a lot of talented editors who got themselves into a feud that they just couldn't let go of. It's interesting how often difficulties becomes less about policies and guidelines and more about getting along with other editors who have different opinions from your own. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Liz, count me amongst those who are very heartened to see you take up a position on the committee. Without intended commentary on the other worthy candidates and electees, I have to say that your election to the post is, for this community member, the best news to come out of the election. I am confidently of the opinion that this community and project are about to face some of our most consequential developments, decisions, tests, and times, and knowing that you will be in such a central position to interpret and shape policy and to influence the collective community discussion and voice is a bright spot at the end of a year that has at times been largely defined by worry about both the immediate and the near future. I was confident of your success in the election and I'm even more confident of the benefit that will accrue to us in having elected you. '']]'' 06:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:Thank you, ], for your vote of confidence. But while I think the committee may help interpret policy by judging when it has been violated, I think it's debatable that they actually shape policy. I don't think that's seen as a role for the committee by the community although it might happen indirectly. I am a bit concerned about my daily routine as I've seen editors and admins who join the committee become less and less active on the project as editors and I currently have a very busy schedule. But if I have to cut back on those activities for two years, I guess that's just a price that I'll need to pay. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::Well, I largely agree with you that this is how the division of authority should work, and was originally meant to work, but let's be honest: it hasn't been that way for a long time. To take just one example from relatively recently, the last ArbCom decided it was within their authority to take such a monumental decision as to not only ban all non-registered users from editing articles in contentious topics, but indeed to ban them from even supplying perspectives on the talk pages of such articles. Rather than putting the issue to community. That's not just "shaping" policy: that's creating policy whole cloth for the entire project, via fiat.
::And apparently the larger community is just willing to let the kind of assumption of authority go unchallenged, because there was not the kind of pushback I would have expected. In that case, acceptance may have been bootstrapped by the populairty of such a move with a once small but growing (though in my opinion, ill-conceived) movement to lock down access to the editorial process more and more, especially with respect to those who choose not to (or cannot) register. But even if that's the case, it's clear that my perspective is somewhat out of step with the broader community, because I would have expected more people to oppose that kind of over-reaching of a dozen-ish users setting policy for the entire project on principle. Even if they liked that particular idea. But there was barely a squeak.
::So yeah, ArbComs power is arguably at its zenith right now. I would argue that if the consensus norms that govern this project's core functions are going to survive, we're coming up on a time when we are going to have to set some institutional limitations and clear rules on the scope of ArbComs authority, because through rulings like that, ArbCom has slowly absorbed more and more power into its remit for, frankly, decades now. It honestly bears a striking resemblance to how the Supreme Court of the U.S. established its role in the early decades following the establishment of the nation. Thankfully for democracy in that nation, jurists in that body and outside forces eventually saw the need to pause the growth of the court's powers and to adopt the much lauded (if somewhat mythologized) "checks and balances" era of governance.
::But it remains to be seen if ArbCom itself will eventually develop a sitting body of Arbs and a culture willing to self-restrain itself in that way--or in the alternative, when, if ever, the community at large will step in to better define the limits of the committee's authority. Food for thought, anyway! In the meantime, ArbCom really does have massive potential to shape policy, for better or worse, and what we should hope for so long as that is the case, is that such authority should at least be in steady and contemplative hands. That is one of the major reasons I am very happy to see you take a position in the body. '']]'' 06:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Ugh. It's hard to imagine a more thankless job, but somebody has to do it I guess. Congratulations! ~] <small>(])</small> 19:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:That's kind of what happened, ]. I find my current round of routine editing tasks really enjoyable but I thought that after 11 years as an editor, I should really help out with some more serious work on the project, to help out with the "less fun" activities and ARBCOM is at the top of that list, along with going through an editor's entire contribution history looking for copyright problems and reviewing unblock requests. So, on to consider some of those "intractable" disputes. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
*Just adding my congratulations to the congratulations pile. Congratulations! ] ''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;">]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">]</span>'' 19:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
If you have any questions about CheckUser/SPI/functionary stuff, you can send me an email anytime. The mailing lists are pretty helpful, too. ] (]) 06:16, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
*Briefly emerging from hibernation to add myself here. Way back in the day, I opposed your RFA, and ever since I've been consistently proved wrong. ‑ ] 03:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== LameNerd ==
has a nice ring. I think I'll change my user name! ] (]) 16:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:To be honest, ], anything is better than your former name which was unpronounceable. By the way, anyone who devotes their free time to work on an online encyclopedia for free is a lame nerd so you're in good company. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::1) Thanks. 2) Too true. ] (]) 23:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::I have the hardest time tracking down templates that I want to use. Right now, I'm looking for the one that advises blocked editors that they have lost talk page access and need to use UTRS. It's not in ], can you tell me where to find it? You do so much work on UTRS, I'm hoping you know. I've looked for it multiple times and have never been able to locate it. Thanks. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
::::] Among the block templates. ] ] (]) 07:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::(sigh) (I do wish we'd always lay on a block notice when blocking) ] (]) 08:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::Thanks, ], so I should have looked in ]? ] says it's for a temporary block but I guess there are parameters I can change to make it indicate an indefinite block. Before seeing your message, I found a copy of the template on a different editor's user talk page and copied it over. Not all of the information is accurate for this block but at least this notice gives a link to UTRS which is what I wanted. Thanks for pointing these out to me. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 08:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::And, yes, I get frustrated by admins who block without posting a notice on the user talk page explaining why an editor is blocked and how they can appeal the block. It's just so unnecesary if you just use Twinkle to block an editor. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Misplaced Pages has become too labyrinthine even for experienced users. ] (]) 13:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
== Question about editing the source assessment table in ] ==
Hi Liz, I'd like to ask if it's okay if I edited the source assessment table in my initial post with the updated sources I added to the AfD. My assumption was that everything above the relisting line should be left alone, but I feel like my most recent argument addresses all of the issues others have brought up so far. Thanks for the help! ] (]) 00:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I think it would be okay for you to edit a source assessment table that you created but please note this fact by putting a note like "Updated by ], December 9/10 (depending on where you live)", knowing that this last part can be replaced by your signature, <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. This note that the table has been updated will hopefully cause participants to review it again. This updating it much better than posting yet another table. Thank you for checking in about this. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==
FYI I've undone your deletion of ], which didn't even remotely qualify for G13. Did you mean to use a different speedy deletion criterion or something? ] ] 05:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:You're right, ] wasn't eligible for CSD G13 today. I often have pages/tabs open and this draft would have been eligible but I didn't notice that the article had been recently edited. I'll remove my talk page notice on the user page of the draft creator. I've deleted so many of these expiring drafts and after six months of inactivity, it's very unusual to see editing in the hours right before the expired deletion time. But I'll be more careful.
:Did this draft pop up on your "mistaken deletions" report? I use to review that to see if any pages I deleted appeared on it but I've lost the page title. I appreciate you catching this one. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Yeah. It popped up there. It's ]. You appear a few other times there but all but one of them are false positives. ] ] 05:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Interesting ] (]) 08:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
== Email sent ==
{{You've got mail|sig=] (]) 11:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}}
== Sorry ==
{{notice|image=Face-smile.svg|
{{center|<big>'''Someone has poured you ].'''</big>}}|small=yes}}
I was up for way too long when I had written what I did and I am sorry. I hope you can also understand given my age. Thank you for your query, I understand now that you were just trying to look out for the best interests of the site. Again, I am really sorry and hope we can turn a new leaf. :)
] 17:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
== 2025 Arbitration Committee ==
The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning members following their ]. Their two-year terms formally begin on 1 January 2025:
* {{userlinks|CaptainEek}}
* {{userlinks|Daniel}}
* {{userlinks|Elli}}
* {{userlinks|KrakatoaKatie}}
* {{userlinks|Liz}}
* {{userlinks|ScottishFinnishRadish}}
* {{userlinks|Theleekycauldron}}
* {{userlinks|Worm That Turned}}
The one-year terms of these members also begin on 1 January 2025:
* {{userlinks|Primefac}}
Upon meeting the Wikimedia Foundation's ] and signing ], all incoming members ] subscribed to ], assigned the CheckUser and Oversight permissions for use in office, and given access to the CheckUser and Oversight queues on the ].
We also thank our outgoing colleagues, whose terms end on 31 December 2024:
* {{userlinks|Firefly}}
* {{userlinks|Guerillero}}
* {{userlinks|L235}}
* {{userlinks|Moneytrees}}
Outgoing members are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, to remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the ] and ] mailing lists following their terms on the Arbitration Committee. To that effect:
* Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing members, who have not chosen to retain them, after 31 December 2024:
* Outgoing members are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. That will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
* All outgoing members will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list.
* All outgoing members will be unsubscribed from the ''clerks-l'' mailing list, with the exception of Firefly, Guerillero, and Moneytrees, who have chosen to remain subscribed.
On behalf of the Committee, ] (]) 02:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
: Discuss this at: '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard|2025 Arbitration Committee}}'''<!-- ] (]) 02:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes-->
== Wow, just wow! ==
Thank you for reading this section (now archived to history). There is one sentiment which I would very much like to remain:
God bless you for all you do here. ] (]) 11:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
To respond to your edit summary, this comment by Yngvaddottir (03:31, 19 November 2024) is worth repeating:
{{talkquote|ArbCom is also en.wiki's primary defence against the WMF, which also does great damage to the projects with its overreach and its misplaced priorities.}}
== Congratulations ==
Congratulations on your election to the Arbitration Committee. ] (]) 16:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
== Suspicions...A "Category" abuse case? ==
Hi L., I noted you put up a "Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Portuguese all-female bands" and posted a notice on user Kjell Knudde's Talk page. I am posting this having found you by tracing back from a number of quite odd categories recently added in bulk to the "Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle" page, e.g., . Many of these categories seem pretty dubious, and many of them were started by users that have been blocked (potentially all just one user?). I am suspicious of the situation for one, for another, a Category like "Comics about anthropomorphic deer and moose" seems a waste of time, and for another, I rather object to bloating down articles with excessive Categories. I don't quite know how to proceed, so I ask for your second opinion. This general situation seems like it might be a problem, or perhaps it is all on the up and up. It smells like the time I looked up ] and noted it stated dryly that the drink had been invented by Ernest Borgnine, that is, something that seems all on the up and up, but is in fact vandalism. Thanks! (I am just a writer...not a Misplaced Pages expert...) ] (]) 16:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:First, any time you refer to a page on the project, please provide an active link to it so it can be easily checked. Otherwise, I have to cut and paste, go to the search bar and I'm still not sure if I end up on the page you are talking about.
:Second, I'm not sure what your question to me is. You seems to have some kind of suspicions but I'm not following your comments. If you are concerned about an individual category, then mention that category, what the problem is and a link to it. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for the reply; sorry I was not clear. I have a broad suspicion that there is an malicious (?) effort to add Categories and so bloat up articles or for some other nefarious purpose. I noticed this with the recent additions of a large number of Categories by this article , and that many of the categories added had been started by users (or perhaps only a single user?) that are now blocked. User ] seems to be vigorously adding Categories to articles, in what seems to be a "sole purpose" manner, and irrespective of what seems me to be the dubious nature of many of the categories. I may be way off base in all this, but I came to you only because I saw you had posted on ] talk page about deleting one such category. As I noted, many of these categories don't seem me to have much sense or merit to them. I know of no way of ascertaining whether the problem is real, or what to do about it, whereas you seem to know what you are doing. I'll let the matter drop here; I don't have an axe to grind here (other than being somewhat annoyed at an overload of Categories on at least one article, viz. ]). Best regards, ] (]) 01:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::If you look at Kjell Knudde's user talk page, you'll see a number of messages to them about their misuse of categories. But this editor has been active for 16 years now and has over 100K edits, I don't think that this is anything malicious or "nefarious", I just don't think they fully understand how categories and subcategories work. This is really not that unusual, we have had a number of editors who don't seem to "get" how categories function as an organization tool. As for the notice I left, one of my regular tasks on the project is tagging empty categories so I post messages like that on a daily basis.
:::Overcategorization is an ongoing problem on this project in general but I can't see how it benefits any one on- or off-Misplaced Pages to add unnecessary categories. If you feel that any categorization they have done is problematic, I'd approach them on their talk page to discuss it or you can remove them from an article or category. Right now, I don't see a need to escalate things to a noticeboard-level discussion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Thanks for checking! I've regularly run across things that did not look quite right, but on further inspection turned out to be that seemingly-innocent-looking vandalism. It has given me a hint of paranoia... Happy Holidays! ] (]) 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Bri@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1262352523 -->
== 390,612 bytes ==
*A paltry shadow compared with {{ping|EEng}}'s. (860,094).
*Wouldn't you like to archive?
*😜
] (]) 13:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Well, I just archived messages from September 2024 about a week ago, I thought that would help with the size. But you're not the first person to mention this recently so I'll archive October messages this weekend. This talk page gets a lot of traffic though and it can take me a while to notice some messages in the middle of the page and respond so I like to keep at least a month's worth of messages up. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
== Overdue reply ==
I haven't been very active editing lately. Regarding , I did jump the gun there and I believe I had reverted my edits by the time you replied. Thanks. ] (]) 21:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Oh, well, thanks for letting me know. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
== Early close ==
Hi Liz, are you willing to do an early delete for this AFD (])? Every contributor has went for a '''delete'''. ] (]) 02:51, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I understand the request but I don't feel comfortable closing an AFD after it has been open only a few hours unless it qualifies for a Speedy Keep. But if the discussion continues like this, the article will clearly be deleted, if not now than soon. I know that there are other closers who wouldn't hesitate like I'm doing. Do you think it would qualify for a ]? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
::Very understandable. To answer the question, the author themself said that the article probably doesn't meet GNG in the AFD, so it could go under criteria A7. I would also just invoke ] personally, but hey, I'm not the admin here. ] (]) 06:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
== A global request ==
Hello Liz, I address you to this ] from today. It is the second request. The former ] from Nov 19, 2024 was declined. '''I have not done anything wrong.'''<br>
An additional information is ]. The essay is exist also in ]. I would suggest that as a member in the AC, you would decline the user from editing in the En WP. Thank you, <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 16:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I'm sorry that this editor is so focused on you (for unknown reasons) but our jurisdiction is the English Misplaced Pages and I have no influence on the Hebrew Misplaced Pages. Their request was rightly denied (no local admins can globally block an editor). I hope you let me know if another request happens on Meta. I also have no influence there but I can at least leave a comment on Meta while I do not have the ability to communicate in the Hebrew language on that project.
:As for the Arbitration Committee, I don't join the committee until January. It does include some additional privileges and many new responsibilities but I can't arbitrarily block an editor for what they are doing on another project. But if they violate their Interaction ban on the English Misplaced Pages, inform me or open a case on ]. I hope you can put this editor out of your mind and focus on productive editing. You don't want to let them take up residence in your head. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
== Dominic3203 and user sandboxes ==
{{u|Dominic3203}} has run Citation bot on ] along with many other user sandboxes. I thought he understood after the ] that he wasn't supposed to run the bot on user pages without asking. Could you have a word with him about this? Thanks. ] (]) 18:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
:@] I am really sorry about that. I thought the category doesn't involve anyone's sandbox, but the bot have done it anyway… ] (]) 03:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
::Sounds like ] has heard you, loud and clear. I do know other editors who run Citation bot but, Dominic3203, if you could give ] some space and be considerate about other editors' User space, it would be appreciated. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Congrats on the new ArbCom badge, Liz :) — Benison <small>(] · ])</small> 19:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I know I'm going to make you fat but just the same :-) I wanted to acknowledge your astute and succinct contributions to the Ebonites3 ArbCom evidence page. Its important to have uninvolved editors step in and give their perspective. OK.......... now eat your cupcake!! <span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 21:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
|}
|}
:Thanks, ]. It's appreciated! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Wow, thanks, ], it's appreciated. I wish I could remember how I ended up on the edge of this fierce dispute since I have no opinion about subject. I hesitated to get involved at ARBCOM because I'm more of a witness to a fight than an involved party (and this fight has lasted six years!). I've made a few comments on the Workshop page until I saw how many ideas were being put on the table and I think the Arbs need to sort this out themselves.
==New message from TheWikiToby==
But I appreciate you noticing! Have a great week! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
{{talkback|User talk:TheWikiToby|User:Salah talah/Sample page|ts=20:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC)}}
{{talkback|Ks0stm|Manning sanctions in Sexology?|ts=19:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)}}
{{white|{{big|'''''Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ ] 09:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)'''''}}}}
] <sup>(]•]•]•])</sup> 19:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
</div>
:Thank you, ]. I'm not quite in the Christmas spirit yet but the signs are that it is happening pretty soon. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
::I've been playing along to Christmas songs on piano and guitar and doing my own jazzy arrangements the last few days, I suspect that's why I am! :-) ♦ ] 19:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
== Thanks! ==
== Matt Deitsch ==
Was there a deletion discussion for Matt Deitsch? I know I don't own the article but I would have liked to comment on it as I created it {{P|grin}} ] ] 02:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Talkback|WWB Too|Hobby Lobby|ts = 23:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)}}
:Hello, ],
:Please provide me with a link to the deleted page and then I can see why it was deleted. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Thank you, ]. Article restored. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
== Whydon'tyourunforadmin ==
== A request to block an user ==
Hello, I'm ], one of the editor on Misplaced Pages. I hear that you are one of the admins on Misplaced Pages, so I want to ask you for help. In the few months before, the article ] had an user name ] was vandalism the article so many. Since the ], there was no third place match. But he always edited the third and the fourth ranking on the ], which lead to many user have to reverted the article many times. He always said that the reason was he used it from the AFC website, although there was no source about it. I have already gave him a warning for this, but he said threatly for me and always said by using CAPSLOCK to tell many user when they said to him politely. I think this user not only used incorrectly sources but he also one of the dangerous user that threaten anyone. So this message today is can you help me block this user please? Because if anyone warning to him about it, he will not change and still violated to them. Thank you for reading this message. Hope you have a good time during this week. ] (]) 07:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Greetings Liz, I saw your comments at Jimbo's page and was wondering why you don't run for RFA. Your editing history seems to support that you would do well. ] (]) 01:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
:Please read ]. This is not a good look. Hey man im josh gave sage advice when you asked him this exact same question. I suggest you take it. ] (]) 12:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
== Un renard pour vous ! ==
: That's flattering, ], thanks. But I have some strikes against me:
* Though my first Misplaced Pages account was registered in 2007, I was a sporadic Editor until July of this year. I doubt that I'd get credit for all of my edits under my other accounts (including my IP account) and there seems to be a 12 month minimum for consistent editing.
* I'm interested in the processes of how Misplaced Pages runs smoothly, assessing consensus, examining policies, voicing unpopular opinions that should be heard, dispute resolution. I don't see my forte as content creation and that's, pretty much, a basic requirement for all successful RfA. Lots of GAs, FAs and DYKs are often emphasized.
* They now require extended "tours of duty" (2 or 3 months) in a variety of areas (AfD, AfC, Vandalism, NPP, etc.) and I'd rather find something I'm good at and stick with that (along with regular Wikignome activities) then round out my resume just for the sake of an acceptable future RfA.
* Plus, I've looked at the editing stats of long-time Admins. Doing Admin grunt work, putting out fires, checking unblock requests, requests for help, and the like, seems to consume all of the time that Admins used to spend working on the encyclopedia. It's like being an engineer and getting promoted to be a manager and finding that instead of doing creative work, all of your time is spent filling out paperwork and attending meetings. Yes, you get these powerful tools, but it looks like much of Admin work is borderline unpleasant and they are constantly criticized, no matter what they do. Yeah, sign me right up! ;-)
So, for all of these reasons, I don't think I'd do very well in an RfA and I'm not sure that Admin work is the kind of work I wanted to spend hours doing. But, again, I do appreciate your encouragement! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
:You are right that usually 12 months of consistent editing and some experience in deletion/vandalism/etc. is typically a must for an admin candidate. But there are actually a number of admins who spend a lot of time writing content, like Wehwalt, Casliber, Jimfbleak, etc., so if you do become an admin you can always keep that up. ] (]) 03:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Good to know, ]. Unless my circumstances change (that is, I can unpack my library!), I don't see myself creating a lot of serious content, which is really needed right now in the sociology area. The limitations of a small apartment and not having an office any longer, everything is boxed up, especially bulky reference books. But, luckily, there are always a lot of other necessary tasks that need to be done! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:04, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
]
== Reference desk ==
liz
] (]) 15:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I am not sure if there are any admins or other well-meaning editors who 'police' the reference desk, sorry I can't really help here :( ]] 17:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both;"/>
: Well, ], you can help me if you'll indulge me in one more question: Have you seen disputes concerning the Reference Desks (regarding users, incidents or policies) posted to AN or AN/I in your tenure here at Misplaced Pages? I'm just wondering if that's where a discussion like this would happen. Thanks for your assistance! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
:Thank you, ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
::Yes, there have certainly been dispute about the RD posted at ANI - but if you're seeking more guidance then I'd try AN. ]] 18:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
::you're welcome, Good luck. ] (]) 08:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
::: Right now, it's just an observation, ]. But now I'll search the AN and AN/I archives and see if it is an issue that has come up before. Thanks again. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
== ChangestoWaelHallaq ==
== Challenging a deletion review ==
Hi Liz, I think there's been a mistake with a deletion review regarding ]. Ever since I posted the new sources on the AfD after the discussion was relisted, all of the subsequent votes have been either keep or a striking of a deletion, but the closing admin marked it as a delete instead. How can I challenge this result, and would it be appropriate to do so? Thanks! ] (]) 18:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Dear Liz,
:I saw the deletion review page and followed the steps accordingly. I hope I did everything correctly? ] (]) 18:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
I submit the following for your consideration. First, as I explained recently to Flyer22 on her talk page:
:Hello, ],
1) the identification "non-Muslim Arab" in the opening sentence, though true, has the effect of stereotyping Wael Hallaq and his academic contributions. Although the fact that he is a non-Muslim and an Arab may be of interest to some readers, stating the fact at the outset gives it undue precedence; this wrong emphasis is a disservice to the living subject of the article and to the reader, and, as I have said, comes off as a an attempt to stereotype. Imagine, for example, if the article on Reza Aslan opened with "Reza Aslan is a non-Christian Persian," or the article on Muhammad Ali opened with "Muhammad Ali is a non-Christian African."
:Well, I'd advise you to either approach ] and ask them to unclose the Deletion review or start up a second DRV to review the new closure. But you should first go to ] with your questions before opening up a new deletion review if that is what you choose to do. You should always initiate a discussion first with an AFD closer before starting up a review of a discussion closure. Sometimes, this can lead to an adjusted closure decision or change in a closure statement but it's also considered polite to inform the closer that you have some questions about how this AFD discussion was closed. Considering how divisive this discussion was and the history of this article, these questions shouldn't be a surprise. After having closed hundreds of AFD discussions, there are some that you just know will end up at DRV and no matter how this one was closed, it was easy to see that any closure with this article would be contested. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
2) For the above reason, I chose to remove "non-Muslim Arab" (which, along with its citation, had been added by another editor), and to insert the term "non-Muslim" into the third sentence of the second paragraph. In this way, the fact may be known to those who, for whatever reason, deem it important, but not in such an essentializing and stereotyping manner. As for "Arab," so much should be evident through the combination of his name and birthplace; it need not be stated at the outset as a defining characteristic--the effect, again, is stereotyping.
::I see you posted your second message while I was typing up my response but I still hope you will follow my advice. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I see, thank you for your advice. What should I do now? Is there anything that I could improve? ] (]) 19:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::In addition, if the close decision is endorsed, would it be okay to recreate the article using the new sources I found? I'm still confused by how a deletion review can be endorsed due to bad behavior even though I dug up new sources that demonstrate notability and significant coverage. ] (]) 19:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Hello, ],
::::First, slow down! Do not create a new version of an article deleted through an AFD if that closure is being reviewed at ]. What if that closure is overturned and the article is restored, then you'll have two articles existing on the same subject. So, be patient, and see how the DRV is closed.
::::Second, if the second AFD closure is endorsed and the article is kept deleted, the proper approach is to create a new draft version in Draft space and submit it to ] for review. Do not move it back to the main space of the project or it can be tagged for speedy deletion CSD G4 as a recreated article of an article deleted through an AFD decision. The only way I know to overcome an AFD Delete closure is to work on a new article in Draft space and see if an AFC reviewer will approve it. This takes time but there really is no quick way to overcome an AFD Delete closure. So, in your DRV statement, put your best foot/argument forward on why the closer overlooked some important information or didn't take some factor into account and then wait for some senior editors to assess your argument. Do not make your argument personal and DO NOT CANVASS a deletion review, this will just backfire on you. The editors who regularly participate in deletion reviews are fair and knowledgeable about policy. Having some new accounts pop up on an obscure Deletion review page will not help your cause as this isn't a vote count or a numbers game but an assessment by experienced editors on whether or not this closure was appropriate given the arguments that were presented.
::::The typical results coming out of a Deletion review are "Endorse" the closure, "Overturn" the closure, "Relist" the AFD discussion for another week or "Allow recreation" of the article in Draft space. Deletion reviews typically run one week but can be closed early if there is a ] which means that there is one outcome that all participants are arguing in favor of. I hope this helps you understand the process better. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::I'm sorry. I'm new to all this and I can't help but feel nervous that I'm doing something wrong. I felt so proud to have done all the research last week only for the discussion to be closed as a delete without warning, so I'm left thinking that I did something wrong, especially since most Wikipedians aren't very patient with my mistakes (unlike you, so thank you very much for your kindness). I'm hoping that I'd be able to at least be able to rewrite it as a draft because I do think that the discussion was closed prematurely. ] (]) 19:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
== Pandas Talk Page ==
Second, I continue to disagree that the phrase "is a prominent scholar" requires citation, and here is the argument I presented to Flyer 22 for the same:
Hello Liz. I’m not wiki literate yet so please forgive me for struggling with the wiki protocol.
3) As for my choice of the word "prominent" to replace "non-Muslim Arab," this is not POV requiring citation. The facts related in the article are eloquent testimony to Wael Hallaq's prominence in Islamic Studies: three decades in the academic field, two highly-sought-after and influential professorships, nine authored volumes, and some sixty other publications are evidence enough of prominence in an academic field. Prominence is not proven by citing a text which links the subject to the word "prominent;" rather, it is evidenced by the subject's many and influential accomplishments and publications. Scholars and students in the field of Islamic Legal Studies--my own area of study, authorship, and teaching--know the name Wael Hallaq very well.
I am trying to query an edit on the PANDAs (medical condition) page and I’m finding some of the language used by the original poster to be inflammatory and out of date.
Finally, I understand the concern you expressed as "Removing sourced material," as the opening "non-Muslim Arab" was indeed cited, and the citation removed when I removed the opening phrase.
I’ve tried to discuss on the talk page and am now seeking a “second eye” for the edit.
Seeking resolution to this persistent rolling back of my edits, I will do the following:
1) I will remove "non-Muslim Arab" for the stereotyping reasons outlined above
2) Despite my continuing disagreement, I will not replace it with anything (i.e., I will not insert "prominent" or any other descriptor)
3) I will retain the citation, and move it to the term "non-Muslim" which now occurs in the second paragraph, deemphasizing the fact so as to avoid stereotyping
The specific edit revolves around the removal of “controversial” to a more nuanced “emerging medical knowledge” and I have posted links to recent publications such as that by the APA.
Regards,
] (]) 17:41, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I can across your page whilst searching for dispute
: That sounds perfectly reasonable, ]. Note that these guidelines about language like "well-known", "accomplished", "top-ranked", "most important", "the best", "spectacular", etc. are applied to all profiles and are actually a big problem on articles about entertainers (actors and singers). It's not a standard that is being unjustly applied to this article alone. It's a constant battle on Misplaced Pages against superlative language.
resolution and you seemed the friendliest page out of some that seemed designed to keep out new posters! Please do redirect me if I am not following the correct protocol. I feel very passionately about the topic and want to ensure I am doing all I can for the clarification. ] (]) 19:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
: As for ]'s prominence, you don't have to find a reference that specifically uses that word. It can be any reference (from a reliable source) to his importance as a scholar that you can find. One source you could cite, for example, is any prominent award or honor he has received or if holds an endowed chair for his professorship. That would demonstrate his prominence.
:Hello, ],
: I think Misplaced Pages has a particularly high bar for academics...there are many scholars who I think should be listed on Misplaced Pages but there are Editors who evaluate academics and they can't have a ''regular'' record of teaching and publishing, they have demonstrate they are ''exceptional'' or notable outside of their academic discipline. Since most academics spend the their time on research and don't seek out media attention or publicity, this is a difficult standard to meet.
:I do not edit in articles about medical topics. There is a much stricter rule about sourcing requirements which you can read about at ]. It seems like you are already having a constructive discussion on the article talk page where you outline your opinions and arguments. But, especially with articles on medical conditions, Misplaced Pages only uses the highest quality secondary sources so these other sources you bring up might not be acceptable at this stage.
: I'm glad we could come to a compromise you can live with at the moment. Note that if these edits are challenged by others, we'll need to move this conversation to the article Talk Page. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
:I think the editors you are discussing PANDAs with have a much deeper knowledge about MEDRS than I do and it would be best to heed their advice. Content disputes on Misplaced Pages are resolved through the process of reaching a consensus opinion based on ] so I can not go in and "overrule" them especially when they seem familiar with the literature on this subject and I am not. You can try going to ] to get an editor who could facilitate a discussion on this disagreement. But know that medical knowledge can change over time and perhaps Misplaced Pages can adjust its language as more accepted studies are published in the future. But if mainstream scientific literature calls a condition "controversial", then that is the language that we must use as well. Misplaced Pages doesn't aspire to be "cutting edge" but to reflect the mainstream scientific perspective and is especially conservative when it comes with articles on medicine, medical subjects and treatment options. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
== Moriya Almkiass ==
== ''The Signpost'': 09 October 2013 ==
Hello Liz, I would like to write an article about Mrs. ]. She is a Deaf Israeli woman, who serves the news of the {{ill|The Israel Deaf Sports Organization|he|ארגון הספורט של החרשים בישראל}} (Asach).<ref></ref><ref></ref> She is professional and signs perfectly. She is fluent, stares at the camers, smiles and is not confused. Mr. Bar Vanunu, who is a professional Hearing interpreter, to the video: "Extra Excellent". Michael Kadosh, who is a Deaf sportsman and is shown in the video, is married to ].
She is married to Mr. Shafir Hafif, a Deaf goalkeeper of the {{ill|Ashdod Dolphins|he|דולפיני אשדוד}}, who plays vs Hearing teams, as well as in the {{ill|Deaf Champions League|he|ליגת האלופות לחירשים באירופה}} games. She also participated the ] contest in South Africa when she was single.
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 13:07, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0639 -->
:Hello, ],
== Editor Survey December 2011 ==
:Well, you definitely don't need anyone's permission to work on a draft article. Go ahead and give it a shot! Good luck. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you so much. {{tl|subst:submit}} has been placed. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 19:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
I just came across this pdf file. What is particularly interesting is Section III (pg. 18) about how Editors feel about the Misplaced Pages Community and interactions with Admins and other Editors. It dispels some common misconceptions and reveals other interesting facts. Also, in demographics, 25% of those responding were under 21 years of age, most were male, single and had no children. I imagine parents, especially of young children, have little time to devote to editing. <br>
Of course, all of the regular disclaimers apply, this was not a randomly selected group of Editors, those who are willing to take time to respond to a survey request are those individuals who tend to be more satisfied with the process. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 19:56, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
* On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
| 9,985,326,806
* Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
| --
* Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
| --
* ] will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive.
* Barnstars will also be granted for ] previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
* Interested in taking part? ''']'''.
|-
|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself ]
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=1263150419 -->
== Followed your advice but the rewritten article was nominated for speedy deletion ==
Hi Liz, I’m sorry to bother you about this, but I followed your advice above on rewriting the ] article as a draft and sending it through AfC, but someone has tagged it as a speedy delete regardless. Did I do something wrong? What can I do? ] (]) 15:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:I'm the one who tagged it. I did not retain the original article so I cannot tell the extent to which what you have is a rewrite, but as I said elsewhere, just click the link to contest the speedy deletion and an admin will compare your version to the deleted one. If they are indeed substantially different, then speedy deletion will be declined. Nothing more to that. If the articles are the same, it will go, if they are different, it will not be speedy deleted.{{pb}}As to what you did wrong: well I would say this was all a bit hasty. I gave you advice on your talk page as to how you might demonstrate notability, and keeping the article in draft for now would have been better. We could all have helped, and also identified continued issues. By submitting it at once for AfC, you have an article back in mainspace even before the deletion review is closed. Even if speedy deletion is declined, this could find itself back at AfD very quickly. It is better off in draft, which is a safe space to incubate the article. But that's up to you. ] (]) 15:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::When I was writing the draft, it said that AfC could take 8 weeks, so I figured I should submit it now and continue to edit it. I didn’t expect it to be accepted so quickly. I didn’t mean to do it in a haste. I was just following directions. ] (]) 16:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::And you can check the edit history to see the progression of the article. ] (]) 16:01, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I have restored this new passed draft, but have not been party previously so I believe this might best be settled by the discussion already at DRV. ] (]) 18:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
== Andrei Polgar ==
Greetings, the ] even before I could post my rationale. There are many reliable sources that has in-depth coverage about the person which clearly meets WP:SIGCOV such as or etc.
I strongly believe the article is salvageable so can you please be kind enough to re-open the Afd to have a more clear consensus? Thank you. ] (]) 19:30, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I'm reluctant to reopen this AFD because the discussion had already been relisted twice and you were the only participant who was arguing to Keep this article. Another editor reviewed the sources and found them not to be adequate.
:I am willing to restore this article to Draft or your User space if you wanted to continue to work on it. Please know that since this article was deleted through an AFD discussion, you won't be able to move it back to the main space of the project or it will be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4. But, when you believe it is "ready", you can submit it to ] for an editor to review. Let me know if this option is acceptable to you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 23:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::Alright, please do and thank you again. ] (]) 18:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::Still waiting for you to Draftify it. Thank you in advance. ] (]) 19:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
== Quick note regarding AN discussion on AfD closures that you may be interested in ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding AfD closure timing. The thread is ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--> — ] <sub>]</sub> 01:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Thanks for letting me know. I haven't had time to check the noticeboards lately. Seems like some of the folks with the strongest opinions are editors/admins who don't close discussions themselves or even participate in deletion discussions. We could use a little more help in AFDLand especially at some hours of the day/night, both for participants and closers. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
== Celerity BBS page ==
Liz, you removed a page a couple of weeks ago for Celerity BBS which I have involvement in. This is primarily a pre-WWW software product, but copies of it are extant and more references and details can be provided. Can you please restore it so I can improve the article? ] (]) 17:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],,
:You'll need to provide me with a link to the page so I can see why it was deleted. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Celerity_BBS (]) ] (]) 01:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
:::@] {{non-admin comment}} Since this was an expired prod, you can request undeletion at ]. <span class ="nowrap vcard"><b><span class="fn">]</span> <]•]></b></span> 02:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Thank you, I will try there. ] (]) 19:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to do about ]. It doesn't meet CSD but it is an autobiographical article by a user who is circumventing the AfC process. Already a version of this article has been draftified, but the user then just moved their sandbox into mainspace. I tagged it and removed one blatantly promotional statement but I'm not sure what else should be done in this case. ] (]) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:This article has been tagged for speedy deletion, CSD A7, as an article on a non-notable person. This is often what happens with autobiographical articles that are unfortunately moved into main space. I'm not going to delete it myself, I'd rather let another admin review it but if it is still around at the end of the day, I'll probably take action here. You have to be careful with CSD A7s as this criteria only applies to a limited range of subjects but these are outlined at ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::Yeah, someone else tagged it for A7 after I commented. I figured since there are sources, A7 doesn't apply. I figure it might not survive AfD but that is also a more laborsome step than is needed. I have left a few messages on their talk page, including a warning for logged-out editing and may take them to ANI if they persist since they are being rather disruptive and possibly showing ] behavior. ] (]) 21:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::It turns out that they were a sockpuppet of blocked account ] so I was able to delete their pages right away as CSD G5s. They make it so easy when they don't really change their username. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Yeah. Found a sandbox from the old account too that I just tagged with G11. Might keep an eye on the pages they created in case they need to be salted. ] (]) 21:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
== Can YT verified links be used for references? ==
Hi, just reviewing ] where I find many ] (published by '']'' YT channel - verified) tagged as references.
Even as per ] where videos from verified accounts can be considered, is it necessary to keep the ]? This is the only issue I'm facing right now and I need your help for clarification. Thanks. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️<sup>(] ● ] ● ])</sup> 04:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hi ], Here is another interesting chart I found on a user page (so accuracy and date of data are questions) but whats' really striking to me is that only 1658 editors have more than 3,000 edits and there are 976 administrators. So I wonder what % of users over 3,000 edits are Admins. It would seem like it could be a very high %.--<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 20:22, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!'''
{| border="1"
|+ Wiki Users
! Description !! Number !! Percentage of Active Users
|-
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" |
! Total Users
----
| 1924618 || 462.5%
'''Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this ]. Spread the ] by wishing another user a ] and a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. <br />Happy editing,'''<br />
] (]) 07:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
''{{resize|96%|Spread the love by adding {{tls|Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.}}''
|} ] (]) 07:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==
Hi Liz, could you restore ] so it can have a deletion discussion? I think he may be notable. Best, ] (]) 15:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{yo|Liz}} could you please undelete this one? Thank you, ] (]) 16:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!'''
|-
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" |
! Active Users (one edit) or more
----
|416139 || 100%
'''Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this ]. Spread the ] by wishing another user a ] and a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. <br />Happy editing,'''<br />
|-
— Benison <small>(] · ])</small> 18:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
! Users with three or more edits
|200270 || 48.1%
''{{resize|96%|Spread the love by adding {{tls|Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.}}''
|-
|}<span id="Benison:1734890677749:User_talkFTTCLNLiz" class="FTTCmt">— Benison <small>(] · ])</small> 18:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)</span>
'''Hello Liz:''' Enjoy the ''']''' and ''']''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, ] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> (]) 06:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
]{{paragraph break}}
</div>
<div style="padding-left: 2em; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 88%; font-style: italic">Spread the WikiLove; use {{tls|Season's Greetings}} to send this message</div>{{-}}
Liz, the amount of work you do for Misplaced Pages is staggering, and you do it with your signature empathy, kindness, without sacrificing any quality. You are always welcome on my talk page with your category questions. I love them because I normally learn something myself :) You didn't get NYB-esque numbers at ] for nothing, and I really look forward to working with you as a clerk during the term! Best to you and yours in the new year, and happy holidays! <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 06:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
| 50733 || 12.2%
|-
! Users with 100 or more edits
| 23709 || 5.7%
|-
! Users with 316 or more edits
| 11076 || 2.7%
|-
! Users with 1000 or more edits
| 4789 || 1.2%
|-
! Users with 3162 or more edits
| 1658 || 0.4%
|-
! Number of admins
| 976 || 0.2%
|-
! Number of users with over 10,000 edits
| 381 || 0.1%
|}
|}
*Hello, ],
: And there is a lot of interesting data here too.--<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 20:31, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
::Idon'tknowhow I missedseeing this chart, ]...thanksforsharingit!<fontface="RageItalic"size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><fontface="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:26, 28October2013 (UTC)
:Those words just touch my heart. I think that is the sweetest thing that has ever been posted on this page. You know the work keeps me busy, fills my day with purpose, but there is a reason why about 50% of my edits are to User talk pages. Most are just formal notices but I also like to check in with other editors, either when I have questions or if I see them struggling. And I know on Misplaced Pages, we prize the project over the people but I don't think I'd still be editing after 11 years if I hadn't encountered so many genuinely good-hearted and well-intentioned people of which I count you. Have a wonderful holiday, however you celebrate the end-of-the-year festivities. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:::And according to there are only 634 Admins who have made more than 15 edits per month for the past two months.--<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 01:36, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
== Encyclopedia ==
== Creatio company page ==
Hi Liz,
Hi I was just wondering if contributing to the encyclopedia itself ever interested you? What sort of topics interest you? ♦ ] 09:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your contribution to the Wiki. On October 9, you deleted the Creatio company page (]) , which had been there for many years. This page was handy for everyone who is interested in the Creatio company and its products.
: Well, ], 51.70% of my edits are to the Misplaced Pages article space so I do work on the encyclopedia itself. All sorts of topics interest me, I try to fix problems, especially regarding references, tables and categories, when I come across them...small improvements that help articles.
: But I imagine you aren't talking about merely edits but content creation itself. After seeing so many newly created articles quickly deleted, the idea of putting a lot work into writing which is then erased, well, that is completely unappealing to me. I also don't see a lot of value in creating a lot of random stub articles which, by and large, are never expanded by other Editors, just for the sake of article creation. They typically don't provide much information and are just placeholders.
: It's been interesting to me to see so many unreferenced, badly written, older articles that currently exist on Misplaced Pages and then see such a high bar set for newly created articles. I'm not saying that bad articles should be accepted, just that standards have changed a lot on Misplaced Pages regarding article creation and now a lot of articles that could improve over time are simply being deleted.
: At least, that is my perception of what is occurring. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 12:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Creatio is a worldwide company with a $1.2B valuation and a presence in 25 countries. The company is a leader in the market and well-known among different analytic agencies (we have a lot of mentions from Gartner, Forrester, Nuclear, etc.). The company's products are a new era of CRM software with no code, and they are transforming the market. Outsystems, Mendix, Appian, and many other companies from this market have pages on Wiki, but in this case, you decided to delete the page.
:::Agreed, a massive cleanup job is needed on here and it's difficult to know where to start, and shoddy new articles which go under the radar are adding to the cleanup job and workload. I just didn't recognize your name which if you're a veteran here that strikes me as odd.♦ ] 14:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: Well, I first registered in 2007 as ] but I made most of my edits logged out, as an IP. My most recent IP account seems like it is static as it only contains my edits if you check Contributions. But all I did was fix typos that I saw or run-on sentences, I didn't know much about formatting or how Misplaced Pages was organized.
:::: I decided to become more active last summer and my first comments in the Wiki space reflect my confusion and frustration over where to find information on how Wiki operates and how to edit. Now that I know my way around, it seems obvious but back in July, I kept searching for topics with Misplaced Pages's search function, not knowing that I had to go to Advanced and check the "Misplaced Pages" box in order to find pages in the Wiki space. It was very frustrating and I'm glad the Editors who staff the ] are incredibly patient.
:::: My first serious edits, of course, stepped on toes. I wish Editors and Admins who post warnings on User Talk Pages would realize that casual Editors don't even know that policy and guideline pages ''exist''...they don't know there are these articles they should read first or where they are and they couldn't find them without a direct link. So, I was labeled as "disruptive" and some of my edits were reverted because I was learning by trial and error. This scolding led to me spending a lot of time reading Wiki articles and noticeboards, in order to better understand Misplaced Pages culture and what expectations were. This is why you just started to seeing my name around the past few months and also why I also often advise against imposing blocks on new Editors because I know how much I stumbled around, ignorant of what customs and practices I was violating. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 16:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: P.S. ] still exists and if I go to other Wiki sites it logs me in under that username and when I return to en.wiki, I'm still logged in as Nwjerseyliz. So, you'll still see some edits there.
Can you help me understand how the Creatio page on Wiki can be restored (or how we as a Company, we can improve it from the content standpoint)?
::*Liz wrote: <small><i>But I imagine you aren't talking about merely edits but content creation itself. After seeing so many newly created articles quickly deleted, the idea of putting a lot work into writing which is then erased, well, that is completely unappealing to me. </i></small>
Thanks for your help, and have a good holiday! ] (]) 10:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::::I know exactly how you feel.
== ] ==
:::Liz wrote: <small><i>I also don't see a lot of value in creating a lot of random stub articles which, by and large, are never expanded by other Editors, just for the sake of article creation. They typically don't provide much information and are just placeholders. </i></small>
While we can try the redirect method again, I will point out that that has repeatedly failed multiple times in deterring past students each semester assigned to create this draft. They've removed the redirect, uploaded their work as the new draft and leave, completely unaware of how Misplaced Pages works, and ignoring the real article on Kim Abeles. They don't return after the upload and a minor edit or two right after. @]'s template was very effective this fall on this draft as no edits occurred between your June and Dec edits. Early Dec would have likely been another round of this likely assignment reappearing. This and multiple other articles have been seasonal regulars of new drafts of existing subjects from a "rogue" teacher's Misplaced Pages assignments, and while I agree that having the redirect is the normal solution, this is not a normal case, and I'm not optimistic that the teacher assigning these is yet aware of the issue (but I've not followed all draft cases, just this one).
::::Just to play devil’s advocate: Most, if not all, the articles I created were stubs, and while what you say above (still) applies to some, others have received some nice contributions. See for example ]
I don't recall if a request for page protection on these pages occurred, or if that would be appropriate in these cases with the ~6month reoccurrences, but I feel like it's been clear that having it as a redirect has not been a deterrent for recreations. Like I said at the top of this message, happy to try it with the redirect again, but I'm not optimistic. It will likely be late April/early May when the Spring finals approach when the likelihood is ripe again. Regardless of opinions, hope you have a happy, safe, and calm holidays. ] (]) 11:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Liz wrote: <small><i>It's been interesting to me to see so many unreferenced, badly written, older articles that currently exist on Misplaced Pages and then see such a high bar set for newly created articles. I'm not saying that bad articles should be accepted, just that standards have changed a lot on Misplaced Pages regarding article creation and now a lot of articles that could improve over time are simply being deleted.</i></small>
:Happy to say that per ] somebody finally managed to get in touch with the teacher responsible this year, and this seems to have stopped it. I didn't notice any activity on the usual articles, or the usual copyvios being uploaded to Commons, this October. ] (]) 11:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::::How true, sigh… X] (]) 15:03, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
::Great! I was not aware of that update and will relax on this being a redirect given the promising details of that conversation and the lack of any repeating occurrences this fall from the pages/files you were aware of. I had seen yesterday's changes as a return to a state that had not worked in the past, and was seeing your template as an effective solution so far, but still in the test phase since it had only been up for one semester. I'm glad this issue appears to be concluded now. Happy holidays to you as well, ] (]) 19:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::::: I was spending a lot of time in ] last month, ], but it could get so adversarial, it was tiring. I mean, the easiest thing is to vote '''Delete''' because it takes no effort (just like posting '''Block!''' on AN/I). But if you want to '''Keep''', you have to find policies, guidelines or logical reasons to justify why content should exist. I also felt like I needed to notify everyone who might be effected by a Delete and found that the majority of Editors are not checking in daily and decisions in Deletions wrap up quickly (usually in a week or less). So, that effort didn't pay off with much response but I'm glad I did it.
::::: I'm still finding out where I fit in to the Wiki world, where I can help out the most but also get some satisfaction.
::::: I didn't mean to knock stub authors, some that I've seen are closer to articles while others are pretty meager. I just became curious how some Editors could create 100s (or 1000s) of articles and when I looked into it, they were often just a sentence-long stubs about some obscure type of salamander or gnat that lists their scientific name and common name and a reference to some biological reference book. A decent article could take weeks or months to craft especially considering all of the other things going on in life. It's quite an investment of time and effort to track down all of the necessary references so the subject is going to have to be one I already know something about. I truly admire Editors that have the persistence to take a so-so article to GA and FA status.
::::: But like the guidelines say, this isn't a race, Misplaced Pages grows as a cumulative effort and a new article can be added today, next month or next year and still be a worthwhile addition. Sorry for rambling a bit, I tend to get a little reflective in the morning when I'm drinking my coffee. Thanks for being a Talk Page Stalker! ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 16:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::Butting in here, I wholeheartedly agree with you about how it can take a long time to find sources, particularly at present. That's probably the main reason I'm working on getting together the lists of encyclopedic articles, and also trying to add some of the older PD ones to commons. Particularly for a lot of older topics, like maybe a 19th century mayor of Berlin, some of those older sources might be among the best out there, considering the possibly greater temporary significance of the subject at the time those works came out, and more space devoted to them on that basis, and the fact that, in a lot of cases, except some involving homosexual outing, revelation of subsequent sometimes questionable sexual or other forms of behavior, etc., there won't be a lot of currently regarded information about them that won't be included in those old sources. Granted, a lot of that sort of material can also, not unreasonably, be called "boring", but it might still be significant enough for inclusion here to some degree. ] (]) 17:44, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::: You have to be very careful with old reference materials, ]. They reflect what certain scholars believed at the time they were written, but our understanding about most fields, from physics to literature to anthropology, is not even the same as it was ten years ago. I'd say that even a reference text from 1993 is out-of-date, depending on the type of information it contains.
::::::: I've seen old Catholic Encyclopedias from the turn of the 20th century and reading them gave me a good idea about what a particular group of chosen Catholic theologians (but not laypeople) believed about the saints or the sacraments in 1907. But we not only know more 100+ years later but scholarship itself has changed. Methods of research have changed, there are more academic contributions from scholars in countries outside of Europe and North America and also, gasp!, women, too. While much of academic training itself has changed little over the past 150 years (unfortunately), the individuals who are doing the research have changed, immensely, the research questions that are being asked have evolved over time and so have the conclusions drawn from that research.
::::::: Older reference materials are valuable in that they can demonstrate how understanding of a concept or event has changed over time but they are, basically, a moment encapsulated in a time capsule. I'd argue that they should only be used as a reference if a Wiki article is discussing what people at a certain moment in time believed as these works do not reflect contemporary scholarship. That doesn't make them useless, just that their use has to be qualified and it should be noted that they are dated. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::::On the matters you referred to, I actually more or less agree, which is why I mentioned the example of an older mayor of Berlin, although I suppose any older biographical article about minor figures who haven't gotten much subsequent attention might be similar. Regarding matters of religion, yeah, I have seen how in some cases like regarding Nag Hammadi, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Mani's early Christianity, and several other matters which have been significantly changed by recent discoveries would invalidate a lot of the older conclusions, but that number of topics, broad as it is, is probably still a non-majority of the total number of all the possible topics out there. Particularly starting in the era of when written sources became particularly common, say the end of the 19th century, and some works like the Chambers, Britannica, and a few other comparatively non-biased sources, the older articles on, for instance, countries which have since been merged, or conquered, or whatever, might still be among the better sources for those older topics. ] (]) 18:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
== October 2013 ==
==Happy Christmas==
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .
Hello Liz, warm wishes to you and your family throughout the holiday season. May your heart and home be filled with all of the joys the festive season brings. Here is a toast to a Merry Christmas and prosperous New Year!.
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
*<nowiki>philosophy|political]]/], and ] thereof</nowiki>{{red|''')'''}}<nowiki>, ], and philosophy in ].</nowiki>
'''Hello Liz:''' Enjoy the ''']''' and ''']''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, ] (]) 13:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
]{{paragraph break}}
</div>
<div style="padding-left: 2em; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 88%; font-style: italic">Spread the WikiLove; use {{tls|Season's Greetings}} to send this message</div>{{-}} ] (]) 13:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
== Undelete page Mudirr, I need to work on it to fix its citations ==
] says "Be sure you have a valid reason for deletion" and "provide a clear and non-generic reason" and "indicating the article's general subject area or what notability guidelines it falls under is considered good practice" and "Make sure to provide an edit summary that clearly indicates that the article has been proposed for deletion" amongst other advice on how to nominate - I'm not sure how clearer it could be. And no, you cannot re-add the tag - it now needs to go to ] I'm afraid. If you're unsure how that works please let me know. ]] 19:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks, ]. I don't take reverts personally, I try to use them as a way to understand what I did incorrectly. I think I need a short list of valid reasons for deletion because I thought that being an insubstantial article was evidence enough. I mean, it was a sentence long with all of these external links! Is "it looks like junk" a valid reason? No, that's probably too generic.
: What I find puzzling is that there are so many Editors who are a quick draw with Speedy Deletes...they seem to tag dozens of SDs all day long. And I find myself an Inclusionist and usually argue to '''Keep''' articles and categories from deletion. But when I find a delete-worthy article, I don't know the right way to get it done. Seriously, I've proposed maybe 3 AfD (over 3 months) and they were all kept. I must be doing something wrong because I wouldn't haven't proposed them unless I thought they would meet the criteria for deletion.
: Any way, thanks for explaining it to me. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::A reason as short as "Does not appear to meet notability guidelines" is more than sufficient for PROD purposes - you might also want to take a look at ]. ]] 08:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Much appreciated, ]. Thank for pointing me in the right direction. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 09:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
== Post-Arbitration Workshop Cool-down ==
I can see that a page i had create almost two years back has been deleted, i want to undelete it and update its content and references, could you please help in this regard?
Liz, you forgot to sign your comment under Pre-planned dispute: . ] (]) 22:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
: Hey, it was just that one place, right, ]? I guess you are both watching that page! <br>
: Your answers to the questions seemed a little snippy but I gather it is just coming out of exhaustion about the whole process. But that's how the text read to me. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:28, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::Sorry if I seemed a little snippy but you are right about the reason. I'm getting really tired of having my motives impugned all the time. ] (]) 22:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::: ], you can be snippy with me. ;-) But I'd advise both you and ] not to be snippy with Arbitrators who, for all I know, are all still undecided on this whole case. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::::I will try to be more tactful in the future. Btw, do you still agree with this ? You are getting a small taste of what I have been enduring for <U>3 years</U>. Maybe that is why I am a little snippy. :0) ] (]) 22:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: Well, ] had always been civil and respectful to me until now. And I, along with others, have repeatedly asked him to tone down the hostility and while he never paid any attention to us, he also never attacked me. But I think my criticism of his MOS religion guidelines offended him. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 00:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Liz, I found one more. You might want to fix it for the record. Sorry I missed this yesterday. ] (]) 17:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
: Damn! Well, there were so many proposals and suggestions to comment on. Thanks for catching my errors. My sig came after the deadline but I hope that ARBCOM can see that it was the only content that was added.
: It was time-consuming to go through each suggestion so I can only guess at how many hours you and John have invested in just this one dispute resolution process (and over 3 years, I'm sure it's 100s of hours). ] came in at the last moment with a fair evaluation, I thought, on the content aspects of this dispute which had not received as much attention as it should have. I wish Ret.Prof. and ] could have offered their perspectives (along with others who were actually involved in the debates over 2013) but they didn't so ARBCOM will just have to make an evaluation based on the evidence that they ''do'' have.
: I think it's interesting to see how few of the various parties who have been involved in this persistent discussion over the years chose to participate in ARBCOM proceedings. I think most just want to move past this. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:46, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::You can manually backdate the timestamps on the two signatures you added if you want to be more precise.
::Nishidani's comment is very helpful because I didn't want to presume to speak for him in my response to the second question. Now the Arbs can see the perspective from both sides.
::The deafening silence you detect is not a coincidence. There is an almost tragic aspect to this dispute. ] (]) 18:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::: I don't want to manually fix the timestamp as, though it is innocent, it could be interpreted as manipulation. I trust ARBCOM can see that the edit was just a matter of crossing Ts and dotting Is.
::: The tragedy is that there were ''so many times'' when this dispute could have deescalated and, well, it didn't. And my direct knowledge is just from July, I had to read up on its history on archived pages to see how long this has been going on. It was certainly a discouraging glimpse into conflict that resists resolution. But, at least now, it's out of all of your hands. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: I have a theory about why this didn't de-escalate. Maybe I'll expound on it after all of this is over, if there is any curiosity & I can keep myself from sounding too pretentious. ;-) -- ] (]) 21:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: As a student of conflict within organizations, I'd love to hear your theory, ], if you could draw abstract insights instead of grounding it in the specific personalities involved. I think it's a combination of an interpersonal relationship conflict and the sensitivity of the content area. How is that for pretentious? ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::: My thoughts treat this incident more of an example of a phenomena, than requiring me to mention any one person. I don't think it depends on specific personalities -- well, maybe it does explain mine -- but so no one thinks I'm bad-mouthing anyone, I'm waiting until this is over with before I share it. -- ] (]) 21:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::: That sounds great. The more generalized it is, the greater ease there is in applying it to a variety of similar situations (all grounded in the context of history though). Whenever you're ready, ]. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: I'm in as well. There should be lessons learned from this protracted dispute beyond the crime & punishment administered to the involved parties by ArbCom. ] (]) 21:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. ] (]) 15:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Please provide a link to the deleted page so I can see why it was deleted. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{TPW}}{{DONE}} It was ]. ] has been undeleted ] (]) 19:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Thanks, ]. It's not always clear with these requests what namespace the article was from. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 19:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Too true. It was my pleasure. ] (]) 20:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Just a reminder, ]. When you restore a draft/sandbox that has been deleted due to CSD G13, you need to make a minor edit to the page or it becomes eligible again for a G13 speedy deletion. That's something you learn if you help out at ] which is actually a more enjoyable admin task than many others I've tried. It's like you have to remove the PROD tag from restored PRODs. But thanks for being a very helpful TPS and I hope you have a great end-of-the-year holiday! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:And, if I may say so, I believe it would really be in your own best interests to review some previous arbitrations. I acknowledge that you seem to have generated in your own head a rather unsupportable conclusion about me, which is rather obvious given some of your edits. But you will find that for instance ] specifically was an instance of ArbCom requesting involvement of the kind of outside input I am requesting. Particularly for someone who seeks to be an administrator, it would really help to refrain from making statements about what can and can't and should and shouldn't be done until after you make an effort to see if it has or has not been done before. ] (]) 22:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Are you talking to me, John? Why would you assume I wanted to be an administrator? Or are you referring to My very best wishes?
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!'''
:: I'm not sure what you mean by "in my own best interests" but I reviewed the Ebionites request for arbitration and Ebionites2 case over the summer when I was trying to sort out what was happening on the Talk Pages and Noticeboards where you and Ignocrates sparred.
|-
:: As for Arbitration, the deadline is today and I've posted what I've posted. So far, the ARBCOM hasn't paid much attention to the statements I've made, so I don't think my words will have a great effect upon the proceedings, especially compared to your own words. Any further comments I make will be regarding the proposed decisions, if I choose to participate in that discussion. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" |
:::Um, at some point you said you wanted to be an administrator. And I find the borderline hysteria of the comment about how I might be talking to Mvbw laughable. I'm not sure if you have bothered to review the recent discussion on his user talk page, which you apparently haven't, between me and him, but you will find that I suggested to him maybe doing some translations of Russian material. But, I guess, you didn't review such, did you, and you have taken his declarations based on his own prejudicial views of the Falun Gong 2 arbitration at face value. If you are not planning to seek adminship, though, then perhaps you should feel free to continue to make the sort of poorly researched and judgmental comments you seem to at least in my eyes enjoy making about others. And you apparently didn't review the talk pages of Jayjg, or Dougweller, or any of the other pages I had linked to in my evidence page, where a lot of the problematic conduct took place, which is also relevant. Poor research, and drawing conclusions based on poor research, is actually something I would have not expected from an academic or a former librarian. ] (]) 22:39, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
----
:::: John, you which I try to follow. I suggest you take your own words to heart. Peace. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 16:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
'''Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this ]. Spread the ] by wishing another user a ] and a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. <br />Happy editing,'''<br />
::::: May I suggest that you perhaps read them more fully, so that you might "take to heart" the actual words I said, as opposed to a personal spin of the comments I said in applying them to situations they did not address. I note that I was referring to ''article'' talk pages, and this is not an article talk page as per ], which specifically applies to ''article'' talk pages - there is a difference, even if you don't seem to recognize it. Also, you seem to believe that my indicating you did insufficient research, and that such a statement is somehow a "personal attack," as per my own earlier comment, really can't help but call into question your research even more. Saying someone has demonstrated poor judgment is not necessarily a personal attack. I hope in time you may come to understand that. ] (]) 15:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
] (]) 21:48, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
: FWIW, Liz, based on your comments at ], I'd say you are insightful about other people & have a level head on your shoulders; you would make a fine Admin -- if you want to be one. (Nothing wrong if you don't want the mop; Misplaced Pages could use more mediators, too.) And I'm speaking as someone who has contributed to Misplaced Pages fairly regularly (except for an 18 month break) since late October 2002. -- ] (]) 18:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::I vote for mediator. Liz, you would be awesome. Imagine the concept - people getting together who actually want to work out a dispute. ] (]) 18:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Well, thanks, ] and ], for your kind words. My attempts to mediate this case over the summer were spectacularly unsuccessful but, then, I had no idea going in how longstanding this grudge was and I spent quite a few days reading over archived Talk Pages and ARBCOM decisions just trying to identify the sticking points and the "players". But I was in over my head.
::: Mediating is more appealing to me than doling out blocks, and it doesn't require Admin status. I think a problem with ARBCOM is that, like a law court, it looks for violations of conduct and hands out sanctions and admonishments, it's a very blunt tool for resolving conflict and can be scarring. I'm more interested in assessing what each party's goal is and seeing how much everyone can accommodate each other (all according WP policies and guidelines, of course). This process involves an acceptance by everyone that they won't get "their way" 100% and not every person will agree to those terms. That is why I'd bet that most conflicts on WP are resolved by one party just saying, "Enough" and leaving. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 19:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: If you wish to engage in "mediation," I believe your best option would be to actually do something you have not, so far as I can see, necessarily done, and maybe become active at the dispute resolution noticeboard or similar venues, where you can perhaps pick up some experience in mediation. ] (]) 15:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
''{{resize|96%|Spread the love by adding {{tls|Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.}}''
== Requesting comment on ] ==
|}
== ''The Signpost'': 24 December 2024 ==
Should a parenthetical comment be inserted in the bio lead saying that Swartz killed himself “just after the second anniversary of his arrest”?
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-12-24}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 18--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 00:01, 25 December 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
''Illustration'': “On January 6, 2011, Swartz was arrested.... On January 11, 2013, <u>just after the second anniversary of his arrest</u>, Swartz was found dead....”
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1263792399 -->
== Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 26 ==
(This is my first RfC.) --] (]) 09:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
: Hi, ]! I read over the article text, the remarks already posted and left a comment. It looks like this textual edit has already been made so now it is a matter of Editors arguing for a reversion and I didn't see any such comments. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 16:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
== Wikipedians willing to provide third opinions ==
Hello everyone, and welcome to the 26th issue of the Misplaced Pages ], covering all our favorite new and updated user scripts since 1 August 2024. At press time, over 94% of the world has legally fallen prey to the merry celebrations of "Christmas", and so shall you soon. It's been a quiet 4 months, and we hope to see you with way more new scripts next year. Happy holidays! ] (]) 05:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
] <small>Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script ]!</small>
Hi liz,
{{columns-start|num=3}}
I just discovered ] and immediately thought of you. I know you are busy but I doubt you will get a lot of requests if you list yourself there. Cheers, X] (]) 15:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
===] Featured script===
: Thank you for thinking of me, ]. I've wanted to get involved into some aspect of dispute resolution on Misplaced Pages. I think I could make a contribution there. But while I've been editing WP, on and off, since 2007, it's just been fixing typos, grammar mistakes and the like and I've only been exploring, in depth, Misplaced Pages itself since July. <br>
:Very useful for changelist patrollers, ''']''', by ''']''', is this edition's featured script. Taking inspiration from ]'s double-click-to-undo feature, it adds an undo button to every line of every diff from "show changes", optimizing partial reverts with your favorite magic spell and nearly fulfilling ].
: So, I'll look over 3O and maybe in a little while, I'll feel like I have the experience to be useful there. Thanks again, Ottawahitech. ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 15:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
===] Miscellaneous===
== UK in BLP ==
* ], a recent ]/]-like userscript that follows modern WMF UI design, is now ]. However, its sole maintainer has left the project, which still awaits WMF ] (among some audits) to be installed on your favorite WMF wikis.
* ], our former chief editor, has ascended to ] and the <s>greener</s><!--Yes, the usage of the <s> element to denote "things that are no longer relevant or no longer accurate" here is intentional.--> <ins>purpley</ins> pastures of ] with commits creating ] and the <syntaxhighlight inline lang="wikitext">__EXPECTUNUSEDTEMPLATE__</syntaxhighlight> magic word to exclude a template from ]! I wonder if Misplaced Pages has a templaters' newsletter...
{{column}}
Hi, thanks for taking an interest :) The discussion moved to the editor's talk page (]) but he seems to be busy at the moment and is only replying sporadically. He has not continued with his editing either, so we'll see how it progresses. Cheers, ] (]) 21:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
]
: Thanks, ]. It's frustrating when someone brings a problem to be resolved, everyone weighs with an opinion but nothing happens. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:08, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
]
::Yes, I think so too! People like to have their say but no decisions are made. Hopefully this will be resolved on the editor's talk page anyway :) ] (]) 21:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
{{column}}
===] Improve a script===
== Nothing more to say ==
* Many of our favorite scripts such as ], ], and ] haven't been updated for Vector 2022. You could be the one to change that!
* ] and ] work, yet have alien ]. Someone could improve them...
* ] needs updating to order list of pages handle lists of pages to move correctly regardless of the discussion's page, so that we may avoid repeating .
===] Requested scripts===
The Tumbleman AE is the second time I happen to see you make an astute comment as you did on Risker's talk page... Nothing to say but to support the comments in both places. Thanks for the great work.(] (]) 18:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC))
We need scripts that...
: Thanks, ]. I'm uninvolved in the Sheldrake discussion but I went over to the Talk Page several times to read through the discussion over the past three weeks. I see the polarity that I've noted in previous discussion between skeptics and sympathizers. While I didn't follow all of ]'s arguments and comments, he shouldn't be turned into a scapegoat for what is a very uncivil and heated conversation. This minor sock incident and some old message board comments from 2005 have been brought up and it's grounds for an indefinite block? Sometimes, to the casual observer, it seems like AN, AN/I and ARBCOM are just a means for driving Editors who one disagrees with off of Misplaced Pages. And the more I dig into the ARBCOM case files, well, I see the same names come up again and again and again. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
* allow you to edit {{tl|sfn}} references graphically a la ]
* copy specific named references from other pages to help with splitting and whatnot
* make adding icons/links to the top toolbar (or other portlets) much easier
* graphically generate a {{tl|source assess table}}
* award a ]
* ...and many more, all available at ]. Thanks to the editors at US/R—including ], ], ], and many more!—for their work in processing userscript requests this past year.
{{columns-end}}
::I've been participating in the chaotic mess that is the Rupert Sheldrake biography. I guess you could say that I'm a Sheldrake supporter. I got into it because someone requested it of me due to my strong subject knowledge. But it is useless there. The arguments have nothing to do with good scholarship and everything to do with turf wars. I have tried to be civil, but the abuse and bullying is just endless. I end up being terse. I have dealt with a lot of skeptics over time and these are by far some of the worst I've ever encountered.] (]) 22:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
===] Updated scripts===
::: Well, ], it's important to know that there has been an ongoing struggle on Misplaced Pages between skeptics and sympathizers since at least 2006 (that's the first Arbitration case I came across). There is one group of skeptics that targets what they judge to be pseudoscience and a similar group that targets new religious movements (like Scientology or Transcendental Meditation). The goal is to convince others, hopefully influential Editors, that a specific theory, opinion or viewpoint is "fringe". Once that is accomplished, you can ridicule it and marginalize it all you like.
* ] forks ] to add support for binary search, automatic edit summaries after generating the {{tl|unsigned}} template, support for {{tl|undated}}, and support for generating while syntax highlighting is on.
::: Since the body of the world's scientists or theologians don't gather together to debate these matters, it all becomes a race for sources that back up what you believe to be true. Instead of swords, people pull out references and duel with them. You would think the least painful resolution for all concerned would be compromise but it's become a matter of ideology so people consider this a matter of TRUTH (]) so Editors are reluctant to back down from their entrenched positions.
* Pour one out: ] forks ] to allow configuration precise to a number of days (from the original precision of years).
::: From what I can gather, the most common way for disagreements on contentious subjects to be settled on Misplaced Pages is:
* ] forks ] to automatically add CopyPatrol reports.
::# outnumber your opponent by bringing in reinforcements
* ] updates BilledMammal's classic Move+ to add automattic watchlisting of all pages—except the target page(s)—changed while processing a move.
::# overwhelm them with data/references and ask them to refute each one
::# get them kicked off of WP for 3Rs or edit warring
::# someone gets frustrated, angry and gets bounced off WP for launching a personal attack or
::# you wear your opponent down until they get tired of the fight and leave
::: Misplaced Pages is people and people have virtues and vices so Misplaced Pages does, too. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
===] Newly maintained scripts===
::::That about sizes up what I've seen so far. This is all going to blow up in Misplaced Pages's face. Liz, how long have you been editing on Misplaced Pages if I may ask?] (]) 23:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
* Administrators only! ] forks the now-broken ] to review unblock requests with a graphical interface.
::::: I don't know about that, ], Misplaced Pages has weathered full-on scandals that were pretty enormous and it still survives. That's one of the advantages of having a decentralized organization, individuals can leave (or be kicked out) while new users are just signing up. And English Misplaced Pages is just one of the hundreds of Wikis. I'm sure there are huge problems on Wikis in different languages that most of us aren't even aware of.
::::: As for me, there is a little bit of information about me on my User page. I first created a registered account in 2007 but I chose to mostly edit logged out, as an IP, because I didn't really want to engage with other users, I just wanted to fix typos and grammar mistakes when I saw them and move on. It's only since July 2013 that I've really become a full participant here but it's been quite an immersion! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 00:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
===] New scripts===
I didn't mean to imply that it would crush Misplaced Pages, only create a great deal of trouble for it. Watching the Trial of Tumbleman I can only marvel at how completely this group of ideologues has captured Misplaced Pages. That, not the Sheldrake web page, will be the main source of trouble because it's an indication that the entire system is broken.] (]) 00:14, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
<!--The current convention is to use the ] notation for scripts added by someone other than the script author and ]: ] for scripts the author adds themselves. Of course, you are always free to ignore all rules.-->
: Well, I guess my point is this is not the first time there has been a dust-up like this. I don't know if there was ever a time when the system wasn't "broken". Conflict happens every day in a collaborative environment. Most times, it is peacefully resolved through the passage of time (you make an edit, I come by a week later and edit the same page, someone else comes by later that day and edits my work) but there are occasions when an article like Sheldrake becomes a focal point for a much larger debate on what is legitimate knowledge and what is not. For the participants, the stakes are high and it goes far beyond Sheldrake himself. Right now, the article is on a 3 day lock-down, which means no one can edit it and hopefully, people talk to each other instead of warring over edits. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 00:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
* ]: ] provides a shortcut to its namesake tool, ], which helps de-] articles.
* ]]: ] (''pictured'') generates links to a limited range of ], log items, or page history. You see, it's not just ]!
* ] is a rewrite of ] that makes everything saner to configure.
* When viewing ], ] adds links to automatically insert coordinates into the article selected.
* To satiate archaeology and curiosity (the same thing, perhaps?), ] logs the time it takes for a user to review each submission to ].
* ] adds a searchable list of all Unicode characters to the 2010 source editor.
----
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Queen of Hearts@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Scripts%2B%2B/Subscribe&oldid=1265112842 -->
{{clear}}
::There is not a chance in hell of people working together. This parapsychology stuff just sets the skeptics off too much. The history of parapsychology, which dates to the late 1800's is full of this kind of behavior from detractors from the very beginning. Irrational, ideologue, rude, nasty authoritative: everything happening on the Sheldrake page is the mirror of a history that stretches back 130 years. The skeptics are all frightened by something so deep in their subconscious that they're not even aware of it and they fight like hell to keep it that way.
== Greetings of the season ==
<div class="center" style="background:darkgreen;border:no;padding:0.2em 0em;{{round corners}}"><br />] <span style="color:white;">~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~</span>{{pb}}
''<span style="color:lightyellow;">'''Hello Liz:''' Enjoy the ''']''' and ''']''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, <span style="color:OliveDrab;><small>Spread the love; use {{]:]}} to send this message.</small></span> {{pb}}{{highlight|--] (]) 07:15, 26 December 2024 (UTC)|OliveDrab}}</span>''</div>
::I know that it's tempting to view both sides as heads and tails of the same coin. It's easy and it seems to make sense until you realize one side is purely reactionary and the other side isn't reactionary at all. Misplaced Pages is like a warm, comfortable blanket for skeptics; it has boundaries; rules, authority and procedures. It's their virtual playground and prison. They can be kings here, but leaving means giving up their Misplaced Pages kingdom and starting over.
==Happy Holidays==
Hi, I hope you had a great Christmas, and have a great 2025. (bit early I know but wanted to say it anyways). ] (]) 14:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
==Removal of Draft referring to the Pony Programming Language==
::By contrast the very thing that draws them in repels the people on the other side of the debate. Unlike them, we can never stop seeing the prison bars, nor can we stay in a perpetual state of hate and fear, constantly motivated to fight the smallest battles, which is why they always win in places like this, but are slowly losing in the world at large.] (]) 04:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Is the removal of the draft on Pony too soon or can it get put back up? There are some newer books on the programming language that are out. Language appears to be relevant and seems a bit much to start from scratch again.
::: Very insightful analysis, ]. I don't judge people by their beliefs but on how they treat other people so my sympathies lie with those who can remain civil and who strive overcome any bitterness or animosity they might feel towards those who are different from them. As for the two camps in this debate, I think they have such dramatically different worldviews. But I think Misplaced Pages should reflect them both. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 15:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::::@Liz: Your idea that Tumbleman might have gone to a mediation is a good one and one that would help retain valuable editors. In my mind we should always be looking for ways to keep people rather than ways to get rid of them. The missing ingredient in this case was that Tumbleman was one of many on that talk page as you've said, and that he is a relatively inexperienced editor. How does an intelligent person react to the heated, often illogical arguments presented with out the experience to see what the outcomes can be given the Misplaced Pages environment? What do they feel they have to do in desperation as they try to have their points heard. There are those who understand and have the experience to manipulate the system in favour of a world view. I believe this encyclopedia is collaborative, that behaviours that are deliberate attempts to damage other editors and get rid of them are the most egregious and in the long run the most dangerous to the collaborative environment, and to Misplaced Pages. A friend wise friend once told me he doubted Misplaced Pages over time could sustain the kind of negatively driven environment this kind of editor created. I hope he's right.:O)(] (]) 15:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC))
** Pony Programming: The Complete Guide to Building High-Performance, Concurrent, and Secure Applications with Pony
::::: You sound like the voice of experience, ]. I don't have any magic answers to your question. I know that it is important to listen to others, hear their concerns and address the ones that you believe have merit. I think it's also important not to react out of anger but I know how hard it is to refrain from snapping back when one feels attacked or belittled. The best one can do is try and learn from ones mistakes.<br>
** Author: Corby Allen
::::: You do point out a problem I see, which seems like wikilawyering to me (although I'm not sure if that is the correct term). There are those Editors who are very smart about the way to file complaints, who have allies who are Admins, who are ready to back up any claim with a "diff" and if an inexperienced (and even some experienced) users run afoul of them, good luck! They are very effective at mustering support for whatever they propose because they know the system well while most newbies don't even know the WP jargon, what a noticeboard is or that in a defense of their actions they can't be sarcastic, flippant or angry (which, frankly, is a standard internet response). <br>
** Year: 2024
::::: They begin at a disadvantage that is difficult to overcome and becomes impossible if the complainant is able to get them labeled a "troll", "vandal", "sock", "puppet" or the nebulous "disruptive Editor". Whether these identifications are valid or invalid, these labels are almost impossible to shake and they follow a user even if they quit WP, go away for a few years and then return under a different username. If someone connects them to a maligned, previous account (and they haven't acknowledged this on their User Page), the typical response seems to be an automatic block.
::::: It's ironic for a medium that is constantly changing, second by second, edited by tens of thousands of people, that it also seems to be unable to forget and forgive. Regarding its users, WP has a long, long memory. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 16:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::Hi Liz, if you have any interest in this area you are touching on here, and have a few minutes, could you look at my essay ] and give any feedback or comments you may have, on the essay talk page? Thanks in advance. --<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 19:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I have a lot of tabs open right now, ], but I'll look over it sometime today. ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 19:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
** Pony Playbook: Mastering the Basics of Concurrent Programming
** Author: MCStone Maverick
** Year: 2023
Thanks for your consideration and advice in advance.] (]) 16:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:@]: You may wish to make a request at ]. <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:15px"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> {{pipe}} ]) </span> 04:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Joss has a lot of fans in the looser, broader sense; but he has never ever been a member of actual SF fandom. He never came to conventions, never pubbed a fanzine, etc. His contact with fandom has been as a showrunner, writer-producer, etc., ''after'' he started creating genre television; ''not'' as an actual fan. Contrast this to somebody like Harlan Ellison, Marion Zimmer Bradley, or Damon Knight, who were fans first and pros afterward. Just sayin'. --] | ] 14:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC) (This has nothing to do with my attitude towards Joss' shows; see my userboxen on that matter.)
: And ] was a big ol' fanboy, ]? <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 14:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
: P.S. Okay, I saw your User Page and see your scifi cred. ;-) L.
::Isaac was part of the original New York fan scene, certainly! He was one of the naughty leftists excluded from the ] by the Great Exclusion Act, perhaps the earliest major fan feud. Remember: the article ] is about people involved in the active culture of SF fandom, not the kind of "fan" who is a passive media culture consumer rather than a participant in a fandom. A "fanboy" might never do anything but watch a show or maybe collect action figures, a very different model of behavior. (And please, don't call it "scifi"!) --] | ] 15:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Okay, ], I tip my hat to the depth of your knowledge about SF fan culture. Thanks for being understanding about my mistake. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 15:59, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::Will do. ] (]) 05:48, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
== Regarding recent events ==
== Empty ] ==
Hello, I appreciate many of the points you made at the Tumbleman AE. I would only say that it was not the right place to make those points. I was surprised that Tumbleman had supporters at all, since I don't think he makes anyone look good. The issue of his trolling/socking history elsewhere is telling (and ), but the AE case didn't require it. It was based on activity that extended a month prior to the "event" which brought an influx of Sheldrake supporters leading to the present situation.
Saw that you tagged seasons 3,4 & 5. I agree that they could be tagged, I have a work meeting I need to attend before I can finish moving things from the supercategory to them. Is there a way that I can do this so that I don't waste your time? I'd really prefer to create them all at once, I'm not sure if there exists an equivalent of template:Underconstruction. (And I'm probably going to doing this to split the contestants in at least 3 other franchises of Drag Race. (Agreement on that at the Wikiproject.)] (]) 19:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
What was this "event"? It was ]. If you want to understand what is really going on with the Sheldrake article, that link is the place to start. One person had blogged about crazy conspiracy theories, and then Sheldrake himself bought into the conspiracies and expanded upon them on his blog. Tumbleman ] me about it on my talk page. It's all nuts.
== Misplaced Pages:Vertiport ==
And the propaganda continues. Take a look at which says, "The Tumbleman has been banned for a week supposedly for creating a sockpuppet account that never appeared on the Sheldrake page." The blogger had to have gotten that information from the ], where it plainly says that ''one'' sock had zero edits. The blogger doesn't mention the other two socks who participated in the Sheldrake page to support Tumbleman (the only thing they did as editors). This kind of brazen dishonesty continues to astound me.
Hi Liz. Could you take a look at ]? The creator has moved it back to the Misplaced Pages namespace once again. I'm not sure whether the subject meets GNG or why the creator didn't submit to AfC review, but they seem to be trying to create the article in the mainspace. -- ] (]) 04:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
I value your perspective in these Sheldrakian matters, which is why I want you to be informed about the absurd propaganda that's part of all this. ] (]) 17:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:This editor actually has some writing experience so I don't know why they thought they should move a draft to project space. I have moved it back and left them a note on their User talk page. Thanks for alerting me. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:01, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for taking a look at this. -- ] (]) 07:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
== No consensus doesn't seem quite right? ==
: Well, ], since that Sheldrake Talk Page had over 100 edits/day, I stopped keeping up with the conversation over the weekend. I appreciate you approaching me politely as I'm coming from an opposing viewpoint to yours. I will look into those comments that you're sharing. I was not aware there were other socks associated with Tumblemen who participated in the Sheldrake discussion, that wasn't indicated in Tumbleman's SPI. And I see newly created accounts arguing pro- and anti-Sheldrake so I think there are socks on both sides. Without seeing your evidence, from where I'm standing now, it looks like an united effort was made to drive off an Editor that some others found annoying. And I find that tactic chilling.
: You will prove me 100% wrong if it turns out that those who are skeptical of Sheldrake can work constructively with those who support him to come up with a biography that has a NPOV. If I see other users receiving blocks for expressing their opinions, well, I guess I called it right. But I'd be happy to be proven wrong. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
At ], even the nominator agrees that the subject is likely notable, and nobody else supported deletion: this is a keep outcome, IMO. Doesn't affect anything materially, of course, so I'm not too fussed. ] (]) 18:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Tumbleman asked me to make some sort of comment on his behalf. I'll be brief. He was cleared of sockpuppetry, so this is a non issue. He had no sockpuppets on the Sheldrake page. Rupert Sheldrake himself has been banging the drum for something to be done on Misplaced Pages for some time now, so because of his influence and reach, he is the most likely sources of new supporters. I first heard from him, not the other way around.] (]) 19:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::: I'll have to check, ], but I thought the situation sounded contrived. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::{{tps}}It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that ] does ''not'' require us to treat ] as equal in scientific regard to the mainstream of actual present-day science, be they ], ], ] or ]. --] | ] 19:37, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::: ] (and everyone else), Sheldrake's article is a ''biography'', it is not a page on Theories of Morphic Resonance. Of course the man's ideas need to be included but the bulk of the article should be factual, about Sheldrake's life and work. Within an article like this, of course, it can be stated that the science community doesn't accept certain ideas. But at most, this is a paragraph or two of the entire article. You can present someone's work without saying, "and this is TRUE" or "this is FALSE". It just '''is'''. Present who the man is and let the reader pass judgment. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
::::Liz, we do not give extra legitimacy to pseudoscience by not putting it in context with respect to the most respectable sources. That's contrary to Fringe and ] (where applicable). It's quite frankly irrelevant that its a biography. Fringe theories don't get a free ride just because they are in a biography, we aren't writing hagiographies, sourced criticism with due weight can be included. Including reliably sourced claims can never be a BLP violation. Following from your view, we would barely mention that ] work is regarded as fraudulent and that was never accepted by the scientific/medical community, or the refutations by the scientific/medical community, but rather focus on the claims he made. That would be a very dangerous way of writing that article. When a topic is not independently notable from the main protagonist (Sheldrake), then that topic is described in the persons article, as is currently done. ] (]) 12:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: It's a question of focus. A biography should be focused on the subject first, their work, second. One can present Sheldrake's ideas in the context of talking about the legacy of his work and mention that they are not highly regarded without trashing the person. I believe that encyclopedias should be descriptive, not prescriptive. I'm just arguing for this:
::::::* Tone: "BLPs should be written responsibly, cautiously, and in a dispassionate tone, avoiding both understatement and overstatement."
::::::* Balance: "Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone. Do not give disproportionate space to particular viewpoints; the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all. Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation and section headings are broadly neutral."
::::::* Where BLP applies: "BLP applies to all material about living persons anywhere on Misplaced Pages, including talk pages, edit summaries, user pages, images, categories, persondata, and article titles." ]
== Hello Liz your: Topic The deletion of my article Bruse Wane ==
::::::* Fringe: "A theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea..." (and this is a BLP article, not an article about a "mainstream idea")
::::::* Fringe: "And for writers and editors of Misplaced Pages articles to write about controversial ideas in a neutral manner, it is of vital importance that they simply restate what is said by independent secondary sources of reasonable reliability and quality."
::::::* Unwanted promotion: "The neutral point of view policy requires that all majority and significant-minority positions be included in an article."
::::::* Evaluating claims: "Such claims may contain or be followed by qualifiers to maintain neutrality....but restraint should be used with such qualifiers to avoid giving the appearance of an overly harsh or overly critical assessment. This is particularly true within articles dedicated specifically to fringe ideas: Such articles should first describe the idea clearly and objectively, then refer the reader to more accepted ideas, and avoid excessive use of point-counterpoint style refutations."
::::::* Notability versus acceptance : "Misplaced Pages is not a place to right great wrongs. Fringe theories may be excluded from articles about scientific topics when the scientific community has ignored the ideas. However, ideas should not be excluded from the encyclopedia simply because they are widely held to be wrong. By the same token, the purpose of Misplaced Pages is not to offer originally synthesized prose "debunking" notable ideas which the scientific community may consider to be absurd or unworthy." ]
Hello Liz, Happy Holidays. I'm very disheartened that you deleted the article and I created for the subject @]. The article adhered to wikipedia's neutral and non sensationalism writing structure guidelines. The article provided numerous independent 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party references/citations that were not connected at all to the subject, from various media sources. The citations validated the subjects notability in their particular field. Why was the article deleted when it was more than thoroughly sourced ? I know you have a lot on your plate, but if possible please read the article and consider my case for the deletion to be reversed. In my opinion the article was nominated for deletion for no real major legitimate grounds, and if there were grounds I addressed all of them with countless edits to bring the article up to and above par. I worked tireless to make sure this article met all of wikipedia's criteria for notability. Every editor that chimed in on the deletion discussion made comments that clearly showed they did not even read the article, or check the independent references and citations. It made me feel like a clique/ lynch mob mentality exist on wikipedia, with editors ready to pounce on anything they did not create, or fellow clique members did not create. I would like the deletion on the article talk Bruse Wane reversed. Or the ability to create it again in a draft for legitimate review. ] (]) 09:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::::: What I see here is a lot of guidance that stresses "neutrality". Editors can point out that a theory is not widely-supported by the scientific community (which is neutral) and not describe an idea as "fraudulent" or portray an individual and his theories as absurd (which is a judgment and is not neutral). What I also see is that most of the guidelines are about presenting fringe ideas ''in the context of an article on a mainstream subject''...that is not the case here when the article is about a person. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Excellent points Liz. While WP:FRINGE is an important guideline for the encyclopedia it is often misapplied as you are pointing out here. This exuberance for the skeptical point of view is becoming quite strong on WP as the skeptic movement is actively campaigning on the web to enlist and recruit WP editors to further their national agenda. --<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 19:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
: I read over the Fringe Noticeboard today, <span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif">]</span>, and found it really depressing. It's a very lop-sided discussion board, the participants seem to be in agreement that the goal is to get theories they find unacceptable to be identified as "fringe" and then they can be mocked. It seems like the view of the world is very black and white there. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
:{{tpw}} {{yo|Edward Myer}} It was deleted per the deletion discussion at ], where there was a consensus to delete. Oh, I see you were aware of that discussion. Best, ] (]) 11:23, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I have quoted you from this talk page in a recent . While I chose quotes to make a certain point, I made sure to include enough information to avoid making it appear as if you were endorsing one side or the other.] (]) 21:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
== You've got mail ==
: Well, these talk pages are all public, ], so we don't own our words and you are free to use what you find on Misplaced Pages as long as it is attributed. I appreciate you letting me know and for not misrepresenting me.
: To be a little confessional, I was trained in the social sciences so my grounding is as a skeptic (everything we studied were aspects of life which were measurable) but my personal belief system is that science can't be used to explain everything (like "meaning"). So, I understand the skeptic's need for evidence and proof but I also know that many important aspects of life are not rational, measurable or scientific. As in most things in life, I think a balance is most appropriate. Thanks again for letting me know, Craig. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
{{You've got mail|dashlesssig=] (]) 12:46, 28 December 2024 (UTC)}}
:: Interesting. You might be interested to know that my blog has drawn the attention of some psychologists. One thing I hear repeatedly from them is that researchers are on a whole different planet. In the day to day job of helping people with their issues and dealing with their emotions, it is often impossible for these health professionals to ignore their own obvious psychic intuitions which come as a result of interactions with their patients. Further, it is not at all advisable to ignore these intuitions because they are almost always extremely helpful. So those who practice are generally very open to psi, in contrast to researchers who aren't.] (]) 21:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
::: It makes a lot of sense, ], it's the difference between theory and practice. Scientists, of all kinds, use hypotheses and run experiments to test the boundaries of theories. The test results can support theory, contradict theory or be inconclusive. And this can vary according to the level of confidence the researcher has in the results. It's levels of abstraction.
::: Practice is something entirely different. A practitioner deals with the concrete, ''this'' person, ''here'', ''now'', and their own personal history. They have education and training but their goal is not to prove the truth of falsity of a theory but find a way to help a person heal. This means that, for the most part, most psychologists have an eclectic approach, they have a "toolkit" of concepts, approaches, skills and they try to find the ones that help with that individual. It's a completely different attitude, not one of finding truth but finding what will work. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
== Apology ==
== Reporting myself - why ==
You asked why I reported myself to WP:AN. It's simple: at VPT, DuncanHill was persistent in their insistence that my status as an admin meant that anything that I wrote was somehow to be interpreted differently from a similar post made by a non-admin. Plus, they were getting insulting, as may be seen from their comments and edit summaries. See also their user page edits from yesterday.
Hi Liz, I'm Andrew Cabral, the guy from Jimmy Wales' page (Hindu nationalism). I just wanted to apologize for the peevish tone with which I'd replied to you. I don't mind admitting that I was irritated just because of your anonymous IP remark. Silly, but there you have it!
I just wanted somebody to step in and explain that not everything that an admin does is necessarily an admin action. Not all admins are evil.
Anyway, I trust there are no hard feelings from your side. Shake, shake! (That's hand, not head.)
As for the post to my own talk page: that is a ''required'' action for WP:AN reports. I didn't want to be pulled up for not having followed procedure. --] 🦌 (]) 11:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Sincerely,
== Jujubinus articles ==
Andrew <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: Okay, Andrew, I was not aware of your comment but thank you for the apology. Happy editing! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
So sorry to leave you with the clear up of the categories in the many Jujubinus articles I draftified. I hadn't looked properly to see if there were any there. I will try and do better in the future! Cheers, ] (]) 18:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
You too, Liz, you too! Take care! Andrew <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:38, 19 October 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Hello, ],
:Oh, it wasn't time-consuming. We have one admin who regularly removes content categories from draft articles. There is a script that makes the process really fast. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== Requestfor comment ==
== "Early" AFD closes ==
I got super sick all last week, so I wasn't following that discussion or really anything else for a while there.
As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at ]. ] (]) 05:49, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks for alerting me, ]. Much appreciated. ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
I've realized we're probably not meaning the same thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you and some of the other regulars keep a very close eye on the exact timestamps and close based on that. I'm going by midnight UTC, when literally everything from the day is considered old. I simply don't pay that close of attention to the exact timestamps, so I think we were not exactly talking about the same thing. Which means nobody was really wrong, so ...go team? ] ] 03:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
== Wikidata weekly summary #80 ==
:Hello, ],
:We go by the UTC time clock. I think you are in the U.S. so Midnight UTC on the East Coast is at 7 pm and on the Pacific Coast it's 4 pm. But my Preferences are to show local time so I never have to do any time mathematics. I have a clock in the upper right-hand corner that shows UTC time but I use that for CSD G13s which are organized by UTC time on the list by SDZeroBot. But as for AFDs, just set your Preferences to show your local time and then you can easily see when the AFD discussion was originally posted and just close the discussion 7 days later. We do try to honor the 7 day discussion period for several reasons, one, AFDs that are closed early can be challenged at DRV based on the closure happening too soon. But also, we probably have 5 or 6 regular AFD closers and honoring the 7 day period ensures that we are not stepping on each others' toes. I will say that it's within the parameters to close with one or two hours so the discussions can be closed a little early without much complaint. But about a year ago, we had one regular admin closer who would close discussions about 10 hours too early and it just caused confusion among discussion participants and nominators.
:But just look into your Preferences settings and find a system that works for you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::P.S. I'm so sorry to hear that you were ill. You seemed to be absent for a few days and I guess this is the explanation. A lousy time of the year to be feeling unwell. I hope you are feeling better now. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Seeing as I'm here I'll poke my nose in—as a former regular AfD closer, it's always better to err on the side of delay if there's any doubt. There's nothing to be gained by closing after exactly 168 hours—if the page is so problematic that deletion is actually time-sensitive, it won't be at AfD in the first place. It's not unheard of for someone to come in right at the wire with an argument that changes the direction of the closure; a fair few editors only edit one day a week so have a {{frac|1|7}} chance of only seeing the notification just as the discussion is about to close. ‑ ] 04:08, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Hello, ],
::::I'm delighted to see you on my User talk page. Don't be a stranger! Your absence has been deeply felt. Your talk page provided a salon of sorts, where editors could come and ruminate on different subjects of concerns. But if this is a temporary visit, well, have a better than expected 2025! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Thanks—I'l try to be at least vaguely more active next year, but no promises as it depends on reality. (Unless Arbcom has changed since my day, {{em|you}} are about to have a worse than expected 2025, but if someone has to do it you're definitely one of the better choices for the job.}) ‑ ] 04:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::I'm in Alaska, so midnight UTC is three in the afternoon here, but it seems like about two hours before that almost all AFDs, except the really awful ones, are already closed. As some commented at the AN discussion, this may be one of those good problems, at least it isn't backlogged like many other processes.
::::::That flu was a bad one, i'd never experienced full-body chills and muscle spasms without even a fever before. Luckily I figured out after the first day that simple ibuprofen would stop that, and I was basically asleep most of the time for five days. I was better by Chrstmas, but I still postponed our usual seafood dinner with my Dad, as I was probably contagious and he's in his late seventies. We'll get tot hat in the next few days, got some nice crab legs in just now. ] ] 19:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.''</div>
** Lots of work carried out on the quantity datavalues
** ]: mouseover input suggestions messes up input. Fixes ]
* Open Tasks for You
** Update, expand and translate ] to make it easier for newcomers to understand what Wikidata is all about.
** ] for a property.
** Build a bot for one of the ].
** ].
** Hack on one of .
</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' · ] · ] 19:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0606 -->
Hello Liz,<br>
== ''The Signpost'': 16 October 2013 ==
Could you please RevDel 's edit summary? It appears to be grossly disgusting and of no use to the project (RD2 or RD3). {{User:TheTechie/pp}} <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:15px"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> {{pipe}} ]) </span> 01:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Writing "penis" as an edit summary is childish but I don't find it to be grossly offensive. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::I see. Thank you for looking into this quickly. <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:15px"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> {{pipe}} ]) </span> 01:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
The discussion about user Douglas1998A at the ] has gotten out of hand to the point of me getting legal threats by the user MafiaBoy123: . Is this allowed on Misplaced Pages? ] (]) 04:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
</div><!--Volume 9, Issue 41-->
:I've asked the editor to retract their threats or face a block. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
::Thanks. ] (]) 04:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
* ''']'''
* ]
== ] ==
* ]
* ] (]) 21:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Liz, can you undelete ]? Based on NY Times coverage, it appears the organization meets notability guidelines. Best, ] (]) 05:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
</div>
:Hello, ],
<!-- EdwardsBot 0644 -->
:{{done}} That article was only deleted for 9 minutes before you asked for it to be restored. How did you notice it had been deleted? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::Ha! ] is on my watchlist. Saw your edit removing the link. ] (]) 05:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::Could you also please undelete ]? It also appears notable based on NY Times reporting. ] (]) 05:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::{{done}} The editor who tagged these two articles for proposed deletion just tagged dozens of articles as PRODs over the past two weeks. You might browse their list at ] if you think you can bring some of these articles up to current standards for the project. Many of them were for small financial institutions/incubators so they may not be of interest to you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::::To be honest, I am really skeptical of that editor's understanding of notability. Based on the amount, I truly doubt they are spending any real time looking into source material before proposing them for deletion. I have removed a number of tags and will continue to look into more. Best, ] (]) 06:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::It was a little overwhelming yesterday. We had 128 PROD'd articles and even though they were not responsible for all of them, they did tag at least half. A typical day has around 30 PROD'd articles/day to review so this was a sizeable jump in quantity. I asked them to pace themselves. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::Based on what I have seen so far, I think they should just be taking these articles to afd. I think there's going to be more cleanup than needed because they have chosen not to do their due diligence in looking up source material. ] (]) 06:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::Good Morning Liz, Happy New year to you! I’m not sure if I’m messaging you at the right place but I’ll give it a go here. My name is Carlton Ubaezuonu and I’m a professional football player. I used to have a page written up on me on Misplaced Pages but for some reason it’s not there anymore? I noticed you may have worked on it so I was hoping it can be brought back? I’m not sure how it works. Thank you very much! ] (]) 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== 2025 ==
<!-- PLEASE DON'T COPY THIS TEMPLATE WORD FOR WORD - BE CREATIVE! :) -->
{{font|size=17px|Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}}, Best wishes that the new year brings peace, good health and happiness. Thank you for what you do for the encyclopedia and this community. Your work at AfD is especially appreciated. Congratulations on your newest role as an arb. Hope the year ahead is a good one.}}<br><br>
{{font|size=13px|Image: New Year's Eve Foxfires at the Changing Tree, Oji, Utagawa Hiroshige, woodcut, 1857}}<br />
<!-- PLEASE DON'T COPY THIS TEMPLATE WORD FOR WORD - BE CREATIVE! :) -->
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Happy New Year, Liz! In 2024, other editors thanked you using the ] on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the '''#5 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024'''. Congratulations and, well, ''thank you'' for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! ] (]) 19:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Well, this is quite a surprise. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:51, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
As far I remember, there were almost 500 redirects to gameplay of Pokémon, many of which had other targets in the past, were blared (they have history), or could be retargeted to other pages. What could we do about it? ] (]) 21:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==
:Also, since nominator mentioned part of the content was merged in the section, shouldn't the history be restored for ]? ] (]) 21:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
This is a message to demonstrate to ] from https://www.mediawiki.org that I "own" this username. I put in a request to change my username there. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
:The rename has been done. Have fun editing!--] ] 01:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks so much, ]! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 11:11, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
== CfD nomination at ] ==
== Welcome to STiki! ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notice--> Thank you. –] (]]) 01:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, Liz, and '''welcome to STiki'''! Thank you for ] using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
*''']''', including:
**''']'''
**''']'''
*''']'''
Here are some pages which are a little more fun:
* ''']''' - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
* ''']''' - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!
We hope you enjoy maintaining Misplaced Pages with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at ] and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! {{#if: ||] (developer) and}} <small><b><span style="border:1px solid;background:#030303"> ] </span></b></small> 06:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I could not end the year without expressing my thanks for your perfectly chosen closing words Having been the subject of that ANI, those much appreciated words greatly contributed to the positive closing of the matter. I am grateful for your kindness and extend best wishes for 2025. —] <small>] • ]</small> 02:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== You've got mail ==
Yo, Liz, I saw your reply on ANI, and decided to bring it here for further discussion, only because it's kinda off-topic from the point of the ANI thread. Anyway, I'm not really sure what your point is. I mean, anyone's edits can be deleted through page deletion; I have 2,168 deleted contribs, and you have 73. I suppose you're right in the sense that an IP address may, on some level, have fewer deleted contribs than a user account (simply because IP addresses cannot create articles in main space), but that doesn't mean they're ''immune'' to them, nor that they're ''immune'' to being blocked due to them. IPs can (and have) created articles in the Talk: namespace, and they're allowed to create articles at AfC, too, so they can still create articles that can then be deleted. Not to mention that they can make edits to articles that have been created by others that are then deleted; as one example, it's not unknown for people to contribute an obviously inappropriate article and then, when it is nominated for speedy deletion, they log out and edit the page to be deleted as an IP address, to create the illusion of support and to evade the restriction that article authors cannot remove deletion tags from their own articles. And of course, registered usernames are a whole 'nother kettle of fish.<p>By the way, in the future, if you come across one of these accounts, you can use a tool on the toolserver () to look up a user's contribution count, and this will also give you a deleted contribs count. So yeah, I'd be happy to answer any questions that I can. ] ]] 03:58, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks for the additional information, ]. That whole conversation got off-track but that's not unusual on the noticeboards. Some Editor comes in with a specific complaint and people end up debating some other point. I appreciate you addressing my question. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 13:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
== Mistake? ==
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Carlton Ubaezuonu
I hope was a mistake? --] <small>(])</small> 14:07, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
: Yes, thanks for pointing it out to me so that I could undo it, ]. I was using STiki and it doesn't give the user very much context, or mentions that I was reverting a revert. Thanks again for catching that. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 14:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
'''Liz''',<br />Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable ], and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
<br />] ] 20:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)<br /><br />
</div>
''{{resize|88%|Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.}}''
{{clear}}<!-- From template:Happy New Year fireworks --> ] ] 20:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== Recent deleted prods ==
It would be very helpful, IMHO, if you could post some sort of opinion ]. The Sheldrake talk page is short of people who know how to express opinions politely and helpfully. Anything at all from such a person could serve as an example to others. ] (]) 01:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
: Wow, ], I've already alienated so many fellow Editors when I defended Tumbleman after he was blocked, I don't think I'd be seen as neutral (despite truly, honestly, not caring about Sheldrake). My actual interest in reading through through alllllll the Talk Page comments was to see how consensus could be arrived at when there are Editors with such different points of view. I no longer think that's possible but I haven't seen what's been going on there for the past week, maybe conditions have improved...well, it's a possibility, even a slim one, right? <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 01:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
::Hey, you know how to reason, and you appear to be a Decent Human Being. Who cares whether they think you are neutral? Voice an opinion, ANY opinion, and show those who lack those attributes how it's done. ] (]) 02:01, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Well, that's the nicest thing I've heard lately. Thanks, ]! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic ]. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you.-- ] 09:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Liz -- Thanks for your message on my talk, and for suggesting looking at recently deleted prods, I hadn't realised there was a report. I see what you mean about there being a lot! Do you mind if I just undelete those I would definitely have deprodded if I'd seen them, without consulting you as the deleting admin? Cheers, ] <small>(])</small> 20:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
the section is ] -- ] 09:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:No, I have no problems with PROD restorations. You don't have to make a request but do include an edit summary. Unlike articles nominated for AFD discussions, PROD'd articles get little attention. Here are a few lists that can be helpful that you may or may not know about:
:*] (this week's PRODs, chronologically)
:*] (current PRODs organized by subject area)
:*] (last week's PRODs and whether or not they were deleted, de-PROD'd or redirected)
:*] (same but for the past two weeks)
:*] (same but for the past four weeks)
:The first two reports are updated throughout the day, the latter three reports are only updated once a week. They were last updated 12/31/24.
:::It's hard to know these folks' motivation. My working hypothesis is that they are very young, and this is a place where grownups have to listen to them. Their incessant scolding and sarcasm are probably a passing along of what they get themselves at home and school. A child learns what he lives. ] (]) 19:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:Have a happy New Year's Day! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::I will just add that some editors can be a little touchy about an article they have PROD'd being de-PROD'd or restored. You might see some of those articles later sent to AFD for full discussions. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Thanks -- I've been using the first two lists, but the SDZeroBot/PROD Watch set are new to me; I'll make a note of them.
:::I undeleted a handful of yours, but managed to click undelete on one before I'd provided a summary, sorry -- blame it on the New Year's mulled wine! (Not to mention the cat walking all over the table.) Have a great New Year's Day yourself -- Cheers, ] <small>(])</small> 22:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== J. Steven Svoboda ==
:::: They have this lame, childish "let's call everyone who disagrees with us a 'troll' and get them banned" attitude. You would think that if they were so sure of their position, they wouldn't rely on tactics to remove opponents from the discussion, that they would let their superior argument help form consensus. Instead they annoy everyone at AN/I. They seem to prefer drama over compromise.
{{You've got mail}}
:::: By the way, I've noticed at least one account seems to be a SPA who just seems to be here to edit the Sheldrake article. And several accounts have less than 1,000 edits, for what it's worth.
Hello Liz,
:::: And, since I don't know where you stand, I assume that given the people trying to get you blocked, ], that you are either sympathetic or neutral about Sheldrake? When I read over the Talk Page comments a week or two ago, I didn't notice your remarks (sorry). <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
How are you doing?
Sorry I was busy yesterday.
The latest vote on the deletion page got me thinking: was I supposed to post relevant links on this page? I thought I was just supposed to modify the article, which I did for several days. Also, I'm not sure that I understood your decision.
Here are what seem to probably be the most relevant sources to give some info about him. Although many articles, mostly academic, and two large international child genital cutting experts statements, mention his work. I hope that voters have taken the time to read them and/or find them before voting (almost all these links were already in the article)?
* {{cite book|last=Glick|first=Leonard|author-link=Leonard Glick|date=2005|title=Marked in Your Flesh|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Marked_in_Your_Flesh|publisher=]|page=384|isbn=9780198039259}} (Preface ix)
* {{cite news|last=Hebblethwaite|first=Cordelia|date=21 August 2012|title=Circumcision, the ultimate parenting dilemma|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19072761|work=]}}
* {{cite news|last=Liptak|first=Adam|date=23 January 2003|title=Opponents of Circumcision Use the Legal System and Legislatures to Combat It|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/us/opponents-of-circumcision-use-the-legal-system-and-legislatures-to-combat-it.html|work=]|url-access=subscription}}
* {{cite journal|last1=Sánchez |first1=María Viola|title=Circumcision and Regrets from the Mother of Three Sons |journal=Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics|date=2023|volume=13 |issue=2|pages=E1–E2|doi=10.1353/nib.2023.a909675|pmid=38661948|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/909675|id={{ProQuest|2884505090}}}}
* {{cite news|last=Samuels|first=Shimon|date=31 May 2020|title=Does an international campaign to ban brit mila contribute to antisemitism?|url=https://www.jpost.com/opinion/does-an-international-campaign-to-ban-brit-mila-contribute-to-antisemitism-629796|work=]}}
* {{Cite web|url=https://www.wiesenthal.com/about/news/swc-bans.html|title=Wiesenthal Centre Slams International Campaign to Ban “Brith Mila” circumcision |author=<!--Not stated-->|date=2 May 2020|publisher=]}}
* {{cite news|last=Yanover|first=Yori|date=19 March 2013|title=Human Rights Lawyer Challenging AAP Pro-Circumcision Stance|url=https://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/human-rights-lawyer-challenging-aap-pro-circumcision-stance/2013/03/19/|work=]|location=]|access-date=31 December 2024}}
* {{Cite web|url=https://www.fashionbeans.com/article/mens-rights-groups/|title=Do Men’s Rights Groups Have A Point?|last=O'Connor|first=Cillian|date=16 July 2024|publisher=FashionBeans}}
* {{cite journal|last=Brayton|first=Jerry K.|date=2008|title=My Circumcision Story As Told to J. Steven Svoboda |url=https://brill.com/view/journals/mata/37/1/article-p211_11.xml?ebody=previewpdf-130794|journal=]|volume=37|issue=1|pages=211–217|doi=10.1163/9789042030619_011}}
* {{cite magazine|last=Hutson|first=Matthew|date=1 May 2008|title=Head 2 Head: Making The Cut|url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/articles/200805/head-2-head-making-the-cut|magazine=]|publisher=Sussex Publishers, LLC|access-date=29 December 2024}}
* {{cite magazine|last=Lothian|first=Tracey|date=28 May 2019|title=Is There Any Legitimate Benefit to Newborn Circumcision?|url=https://www.ecoparent.ca/eco-parenting/there-any-legitimate-benefit-newborn-circumcision|magazine=EcoParent Magazine|publisher=EcoParent}}
* {{Cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2012/aug/15/hiv-zambia-male-circumcision|title=Bumpy ride towards reducing HIV in Zambia through male circumcision|last=Bansal|first=Sarika|date=15 August 2012|publisher=]}}
* {{cite magazine|last=Gran|first=Even|date=9 April 2015|title=– Hva, har omskjæring noe med religion å gjøre?!|url=https://fritanke.no/hva-har-omskjaring-noe-med-religion-a-gjore/19.9756|magazine=Fri tanke|publisher=]}}
* {{Cite web|url=https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2013/03/19/journal-of-medical-ethics-special-issue-on-circumcision/|title=Journal of Medical Ethics – Special Issue on Circumcision|last=Earp|first=Brian|author-link=Brian Earp|date=19 March 2013|website=Journal of Medical Ethics Forum|publisher=]}}
* {{cite journal|last1=Reeves|first1=Karli M.|last2=Mishtal|first2=Joanna|date=21 July 2022|title=Situating parents' circumcision decision-making within health research, knowledge, and experience|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321522000944/pdfft?md5=e2f84a5c0c4832e01454ea5b6cb0ed88&pid=1-s2.0-S2667321522000944-main.pdf|journal=SSM - Qualitative Research in Health|volume=2|pages=12|doi=10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100132}}{{rp|p=2}}
* {{cite journal|last=Svoboda|first=J. Steven|date=Summer 2023|title=When the Political Becomes Personal: Circumcision as a Cause and as a Parental Decision|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/909659|journal=]|volume=13|issue=2|pages=73–76|doi=10.1353/nib.2023.a909659|pmid=38661954|url-access=subscription}}{{rp|p=73}}
Please maybe more time and efforts should have been given, particularly because Svoboda writes on a very sensitive topic and I'm not used to biographical articles? Maybe I should have gotten AI help for the article and deletion page, also to avoid the copyright concern? It seems to know well the author, which likely makes sense because he's a recognized expert in his field, and apparently in children's rights in general. Should I ask for a deletion review? Thank you ] (]) 15:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:::::I think they ARE very insecure in their arguments, and thus the childish behavior. I'm basically neutral on Sheldrake. I've read some of his books and find them interesting. I'm open to all kinds of alternative ideas, but they don't loom very large in my life. On Misplaced Pages, I just want to get Sheldrake a fair BLP article, written neutrally. It's not appropriate, IMHO, when the section on his books starts off with "He has been criticized for writing books for the general public, rather than going through the peer review process," based on some critical quote from The Guardian. I REALLY dislike it when that stuff creeps into the lead. They can't just say "he challenges some basic tenets of modern science" without following it up with "he thinks perpetual motion machines are possible, and everybody knows that perpetual motion machines are impossible, the idiot" (or words to that effect). The editors think that every time something from him is said, it has to be balanced by something from the mainstream. That may be their legitimate understanding, or maybe it's just part of their crusade. My comments on the talk page are usually brief, so they tend to get drowned out by the endless blather. ] (]) 21:27, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:I assume you are contesting the closure of ]? This discussion was relisted once and I didn't see sufficient support for Keeping this article on the project and most of the arguments from longtime editors were for Deletion. Yes, it would have been worthwhile to post your newly found sources to the discussion so that other editors could evaluate them and see if they would have persuaded them to change their argument but I'm not going to revert my closure and reopen this discussion. At this point, if you want to have an article on this subject in the main space, I see two options for you:
:::::: Wow, ], you sound radically, ''radically'' neutral. Wanting to give Sheldrake a fair BLP article, now that's totally fringe and outrageous! No wonder they want you topic banned, it actually sounds like you might do something constructive like creating a better article instead of joining in with the incessant squabbling.
:*1) If you believe that I misinterpreted the consensus of the participating editors in this AFD discussion, you can file an appeal at ]. DRV is not AFD2.0, it's not a place to re-argue the AFD. It's solely focused on my action as a discussion closer and if you believe I didn't interpret consensus correctly.
:::::: Maybe we do share the same point of view. Damn, now I'm on their hit list, too. I know my dull, routine work categorizing actors and philosophers is skirting sanctions of some kind. Well, I know I'll make a mistake sooner or later that can be dressed up in bows, ribbons and diffs and taken to AN/I. And just when I was getting into an editing rhythm. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:*2) You can try to overcome the problems in the deleted article by writing a new draft. For this, I can restore the deleted article to Draft space or, what is probably a better idea, start a new article from scratch using these new sources. Please know that you can not simply move an article deleted through an AFD discussion back to main space as it will be tagged for speedy deletion ] G4. You'll need to submit your draft article to ] so that an experienced editor can review it and make sure than the new article has overcome the problems the caused the original article to be deleted.
:So, the next step is up to you and how much work you want to put into having an article on this subject on the project. I do not recommend using AI to write articles on Misplaced Pages, that is likely to lead to more problems among editors that assess new articles. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
{{You've got mail}}
::Hello Liz,
::Thank you for your answer.
::Ok, then I choose option 2.] (]) 15:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
== Friendly heads up ==
== Template:Laugh ==
can you tell me what this redirected to before you deleted it? ] (]) 16:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi Liz, just thought to mention that in you removed part of a comment you made that had already been responded to. In this instance I don't care, and likely no one else will either, but for future you may want to consider striking the comment rather than removing per ]. Cheers, --<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 15:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
: You're absolutely right, ]. I'll undo it. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 15:28, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
:{{tps}} It was a redirect to a now deleted user subpage; the only content on that page was a smiley. Since it seems like it was in use on multiple talk pages, I've recreated {{tl|laugh}}, not as a redirect, but as a smiley. I'm not emotionally invested in this solution if there's a better one. Hopefully not stepping on your toes, Liz. ] (]) 16:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
== thanks ==
:: that works! thank you! ] (]) 18:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, ],
:::I'm sorry if this page deletion caused problems. The template was a broken redirect to ] and the editor did a courtesy vanishing and in those cases, typically all User pages are deleted. I'm not sure why the template was redirected to a User page, I just saw it listed as a broken redirect that needed to be deleted.
:::Thank you to ] for fixing the problem post-deletion by recreating the template. I should know in the future to keep a wide distance from template issues as there can be unforeseen problems from transclusions that might not be apparent. I'll stick with article, draft, talk, user and category broken redirects and leave the file and template ones to admins who understand those namespaces better than I. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::: no problem, it was just a few broken talk pages and was quickly resolved. thank you. ] (]) 16:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
== Uwappa ==
Hi Liz - thanks for the cat cleanup on a lot of the philosopher articles I've put up recently. I'll make a greater effort to get them in the right set of cats from the get-go in the future. Also... your Jimbo.. your Jimbo... it's staring at me.... :p ] (]) 22:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
: LOL! Well, ] I do a lot of work with categorization. I find it satisfies my need for putting things in order, I learn a lot and there are some big projects that need to be done regarding gender categorization. For a while, I was picking a nationality and changing all of the "actors" to "male actors" since the powers that be decided to use "actresses" so we need to place men in a similar gendered category.
: I'm not sure what led me to look at philosophers but I noted there were only about 225 women philosophers currently in that category, so that is a manageable problem that I could work on. For example, there is another category change I need to get to eventually that has over 1200 articles to change and that just seems like such a large number to take on. Maybe one day!
: Regarding Jimbo, I know people hate animated gifs but I thought that one was so funny and, since you have to linger on the page a few moments before he pops in, not everyone would see it. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
: P.S. I think it is great you are working on articles on women philosophers. Some of the ones that Misplaced Pages does have are no more than stubs. I'd love to know more about ], that sounds like an interesting group. I'll see if they have an online presence. L.
::*Only 225, and I've written probably 30 of them in the recent past... kind of depressing ;) The Collegium does have some online presence, and there's been enough coverage of them in various places that they'd pass the GNG fairly easily. I'll hopefully get around to writing an article about them eventually, but decided to go ahead and start with people. Further depressing fact pulled from an article by Kathryn Gines: there are less than thirty Black women with phds in philosophy working in academia in the US today. You could, quite literally, fit all of them in a classroom together. <small>Black capitalized per Kathryn's logic in her essay about the founding of the collegium.</small> Let me know if you feel like writing about the Collegium (or anything else) and need me to pull articles for you if you don't have access to an academic library :) ] (]) 23:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: I spent half of my life in academia but right now, I'm not affiliated with a university and my own library is boxed up so references are inaccessible (and I don't have much faith in online sources unless it's news). Maybe when I get more confidence, I'll work on article creation. Even though I see hundreds of badly written, insubstantial, unreferenced articles as I traverse through Misplaced Pages, I've seen newly-created, starter articles get deleted every day. So, I want to make sure I have the necessary resources to write a decent article.
:::: But thanks for the offer! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I see that my ANI report has been archived without any response, which really doesn't surprise me. I'm not convinced by the "I don't have time right now", as ] since they urged me to "go for it"{{snd}} including even leaving 'normal' comments at my talk page as though the episode never happened. I suspect that they have realised that the evidence is just too damning: in the same circumstances I would just push my king over as there really is no credible defence. I suspect that they expected an adjudication on the content dispute, even though I told them that ANI does accept such pleas. It's a real pity that they declined to climb down the ladder when I offered. I can appreciate how they managed to paint themselves into a corner as I came very close to doing the same thing myself many years ago.
== Talkback ==
So now what? I have no demand for my pound of flesh. I don't want an apology. I just want to know that they have made a clear statement they now understand, accept and commit henceforth to comply with ], ], ] and ]. I don't really see any alternative to a block on further editing in the meantime, that responding to the ANI should be their first and only priority now.
{{Talkback|User Talk:RedWolf#List of mountains by elevation}}
I'm sorry to dump this on you. If it is of any consolation, I think that this is my first or maybe second referral to ANI in best part of 20 years. (And I've also been the accused just once, due to an astounding coincidence.) ] (]) 00:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] ==
:Hello, ],
:Yes, it looks like your complaint has been archived at ]. If you wish, you can "unarchive" it and repost it at ANI (put it at the bottom of the page) but I don't think that doing this will prompt Uwappa to participate. It might get some more attention from other editors though. I would recommend you only doing this once though.
:What I often see happening on ANI is there can be little or no response to the first complaint about an editor. Any subsequent complaints that happen months or years later will refer to the first complaint and some editors will consider that a lost opportunity to act. Or it could be that there aren't any future incidents about this editor, it's hard to predict. But it's not uncommon for complaints posted at ANI to result in no action, especially if the complaint is very complicated. I know this can be discouraging if you spent a lot of time crafting a cogent complaint but for action to be taken, it often has to be the right time and this might not have been it. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for that. No, I have no desire to pursue this to the bitter end, so I won't resubmit. My only concern really is that they may consider that there was no case to answer and that they can just do as they please without consequences. Is there any such thing as an "Administrator caution" (like a ] albeit without requiring the admission of guilt)? Something along the lines of "Due to other priorities, no further action is being taken at this time but this incident is likely to be taken into account if there is any repetition. Please ensure that you understand ], ], ] and ]." <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 11:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)</small> {{midsize|Just a sig, not a nag. No need to reply or even acknowledge. If the process doesn't already exist, an isolated incident such as this doesn't generate a pressing case to create one. }} --] (]) 01:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:::So, ], did you repost this discussion from the noticeboard archives? Because it looks like it just needed more visibility to find an acceptable closure. I think editors go way too caught up in whether or not Uwappa was making a legal threat because it seemed like they were making a joke to me but other editors took their words very seriously. Are you satisfied with how the problem was resolved? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::No, it was he who did it. His choice. The whole episode is rather odd. First, he urged me to escalate to ANI{{snd}}and then declares himself too busy to respond when I did so. Next, he declares himself ready to rumble again: now a sensible person would only repost if they had their response prepared and would include it the same posting. And they certainly wouldn't (and had no need to) include "my legal team" nonsense with it{{snd}} so we have to assume that it was deliberate. If it was a joke, why did he decline The Bushranger's invitation to confirm or deny? And then why did he respond to Malcolmxl5 by doubling down? All that said, I would be astounded it "our legal team" is anyone but himself.
::::It wasn't quite the closure I wanted (because it got side tracked by the legal threat and only marginally referred to the behaviour issue that underlay the report) but I'm content to leave it at that. My only concern is that he may appeal the block on the grounds that he never intended that the "threat" be taken seriously. I would hope that whoever evaluates the appeal will take into account the overall behaviour that led to it. ] (]) 10:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::and thank you for the follow-up. I can see that you have plenty of better things to do. --] (]) 10:54, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Hello, ],
::::::I wouldn't say better things to do, I just have a lot of things to do! It's all admin-related responsibilities. I can get discouraged when editors put together well-written reports for ANI and they just get archived with no action taken. I felt I might have dropped the ball here myself but I wasn't confident of what action was called for and I wanted to hear from other admins. And since I suggested you repost the complaint, it caught my eye when it turned up again. Why the editor chose to repost it themself when no action had been taken is a mystery. It's almost like they wanted to get blocked if you just look at their recent actions. As for if they appeal the block, they were acting rather sockish/trollish so I think it is more likely that they create a new account. Let me know if you spot a new account acting similarly. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 17:59, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Ok, his "fist" will be easy to spot. ] (]) 19:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== Redirects ], ] et al ==
Biggest problem here is the lack of ] to show ]. Plus it's a BLP, everything needs to be sourced to such sources. If the article doesn't get properly sourced, I'll be nominating it for deletion. Academics aren't automatically notable. ] (]) 19:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
: I realize that, ]. In fact, it is harder for an academic to have a Misplaced Pages article than it is for a 19 year old back-up dancer for Justin Bieber. What I was thinking is that for two days now, I've been going through dozens of BLP articles on philosophers and, I gotta say, some of them have less information on them than Iveković had on hers.
: Now, it's not in my nature or Wiki habits to tag a dozen articles on philosophers and take them to AfD, especially when every single episode of Seinfeld has its own page. I think having mediocre listings on some Continental philosophers is infinitely more valuable to the world than having a complete listing of every Pokemon character.
: So, while I'll admit that you likely have WP guidelines on your side in deleting this article, there is '''a whole lot''' of content on Misplaced Pages that is completely insignificant and insubstantial and I don't believe that having a profile of a Croatian Buddhist philosopher is even on that list. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
::Problem is, we have a very strict ] policy. And we ''should''. If she were deceased, it'd be different. ] (]) 20:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Yeah, it's a shame she isn't dead. J/K. I explained my position, ], you do what you have to do and I'll keep categorizing philosophers. I have a work to do.
::: Thanks for taking the time to come to my Talk Page and explain your side of the situation. Lots of Editors are not that thoughtful and I do appreciate it. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:00, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: Carry on... Editors who know how to do categories properly rock! ] (]) 23:15, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: Categories are quick, they are usually straight-forward and uncontroversial and there aren't people watchlisting categories, leaping to revert edits. They are not very social but sometimes, that's a blessing. Also, they can bring visibility to little known phenomena...who knew there were several noteworthy Lithuanian women philosophers? I didn't until today. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:27, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
The redirects that have been targetting ] was retargetted to the vandalised title by a double redirect correcting bot. The pagemove vandalism has been reverted, while the vandalised title was deleted, leading the redirects to target a deleted page, which you deleted(or at least some of them; I am not sure).
== RolandR ==
I am not sure how much or which redirects used to exist, but those two are the ones I was able to identify.
Hello Liz,
Can you help me with RolandR? He is wrong about all my contribs (Heidegger, Hölderlin, Benjamin and so on). Thank you! I´m Ketxus <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 01:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: ], I'm not sure what you are asking me to help you with or who RolandR is. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:15, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Don't worry Liz, it is not easy to explain. Thank you <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Can you restore the deleted redirects? (assuming you deleted the rest of the redirects as well)
== Neutral notice ==
Thanks! ] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">]</sup></i> 05:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
This is a neutral notice that an RfC has been opened at an article which you have edited within the past year. It is at ]. --] (]) 14:08, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:You can see the broken redirects at ]. Sure, I can restore them and then I guess I'll undo the edits that caused them to become broken. It wouldn't have happened if the page mover who corrected the bad page move had left behind a redirect. Are they all worth restoring? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::Hello, ],
::I expected to hear back from you before starting this process. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Sorry--I was away from my devices. I'd say they are all plausible search terms. However, I wouldnt reintroduce the Biser King and Paryss Bryanne due to ] concerns. The article has little information about those two figures. ] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">]</sup></i> 07:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::::{{done}} <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
== Tyson Apostl ==
{{ping|Tenebrae}}, thanks for letting me know. I don't recall editing that article but I'll check it out. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 15:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
I have a concern about the deletion as i feel the nominater is biased towards pages like that as he has nominated severeal pages for afd based on his opinion which goes against years of precdence as survivor winners have almost always had pages for years all to be destroyed by one editor ] (]) 21:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
== Philosophers ==
:Hello, ],
:Please provide me with a link to the deleted page so I can see the reason why it was deleted. Thank you and have a happy new year! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Tyson_Apostol&redirect=no ajd I would like to mention the nominater nominated almost every survivor winner for deletion despite them having been longstanding articles I feel it's not fair to leave it up to someone who displays hostility towards the topic he's deleting it's almost like an attempted cleansing ] (]) 21:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I feel like it was important to reach out to you because you closed most of thoae afds which also seem to be genreally not attended sometimes it was only the nominator who attended ] (]) 21:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Hello, ],
::::It seems like what you are actually upset about is my closure of ] which wasn't a deletion but a redirection. We can talk about that but please do not cast aspersions against other editors. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Well mynpoint was the mass deleltion in content as a result of the nominater i feel like there is bias there ] (]) 21:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::He had severel soruces stating his notability per notability guidelines doesnt it mention that people with significant roles in shows get pages? Not only did he win he played 4 times ] (]) 21:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
==]==
I've met a real one. A pretty important one, as I understand it: ]. ] (]) 14:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Liz. Could you please restore this page for me? I would like to work on it. Thanks. Happy New Year. ] (]) 14:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
: {{ping|Lou Sander}} I'm not familiar with Rescher. In my 20s, I studied with ] but his Misplaced Pages article is pitiful. I'm surprised his students haven't made it more substantial. I guess I'll get around to doing that one day. He's had a long career.
:Hello, ],
:I'm reluctant to restore ] as it is essentially a blank page with just the page title on it. But you are a regular content creator so assuming that this article will become more than a blank page, I'm restoring it upon your request. I know that you have many editors and allies who support all of the work that you do but I'd put in a little time on this draft in the near future as it could be tagged again as a test page. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::I don't make test edits, and I am unable to see what was in an entry once deleted. I went to work on it and found a kind editor had already written up the subject. Thank you for restoring. I think the subject is worthwhile and worth including. I hope polite requests can be honored and that it's not too much trouble to restore deleted material. I am very limited on what I can publish to mainspace or more of these subjects would be added. Thanks again. ] (]) 11:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== Responding to AFD request ==
== N94228 ==
Hello,
I think that N94228 misunderstands one of the criteria for speedy deletion. (It isn't clear whether he or she understands anything about Misplaced Pages.) Articles written by banned or blocked users can be deleted. N94228 apparently is concerned that he or she is about to be blocked, which may happen if he or she continues making idle accusations. However, the deletion rule does not apply to users who are blocked or banned after writing the articles. It only applies to users who are already blocked or banned, and so never should have written the articles, but were evading the block, typically by ]. You are an experienced editor and knew that. The original question did not have to do with the article containing racism, which it does not, but with whether the author is blocked for racism. The author is likely to be blocked for disruptive editing, a different matter. Now that another editor has properly sourced the article, the article is unlikely to be deleted for any of racism (which it does not contain), lack of notability (established by another editor), or blockage of the author (which may happen but the article was validly composed.) Maybe N94228 is a racist, or is accused of racism. That doesn't matter unless he or she points racist drivel. N94228 almost certainly is a teenager. That doesn't matter; some young teenagers, let alone adult teenagers, can edit responsibly. N94228 is a disruptive editor; that does matter. ] (]) 16:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)<br>
{{ping|Robert McClenon}} What is this about? <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that you said something about expanding on AFD requests. I am sorry for not expanding on what each article said on AFD, due to the lack of ]. I'll try not to do it again.
:At ], N94228 asked: "If I will be blocked for racism\vandalism\reason will my article be killed or they will stay in Wiki?" You answered that if the article contained racism or vandalism, it would probably be deleted. The article is not racist. However, the author is engaged in disruptive editing, is exhibiting ] behavior, and is being a ]. The author is likely to get blocked, not for racism, but for disruptive editing. Is that an answer? ] (]) 18:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
::{{Ping|Robert McClenon}}, thanks for the reference, it didn't ring a bell. Now I remember. I didn't look into the user or her/his contributions, I was just answering the question of if an Editor is blocked, are the articles they worked on deleted. It sounds like she/he might be heading for a block if they are being disruptive. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 19:01, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
] (]) 12:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, so that the question about whether the article will be deleted is the wrong question, and the right question is whether the editor will be blocked unless there is a change in behavior. ] (]) 00:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Okay, after doing some research, I think you are referring to a relisting comment on ] where I critizes your deletion rationale which was simply "Fails ]". This was an inadequate explanation for why an article should be deleted which should be an adequate explanation made up on complete sentence, not just an abbreviation, that references that a ] has been done which should be done before nominating any article for an AFD discussion. These two word deletion nominations just give the appearance that you spent about a minute on this AFD and are putting all of the responsibility for doing background research on the participants of the AFD discussion. Unfortunately, deletion rationale like yours are not uncommon but that doesn't make them any more acceptable.
:If you want to see a well put-together AFD nomination, you can see one at ] or even ] which is brief but discusses the article in a way that an editor knows it's been assessed. I hope this makes my comment more clear. And just know that no editor is perfect, we all have room for improvement. Thank you. 01:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
:::: {{Ping|Robert McClenon}} Yes, it's usually a bad sign when an Editor calls it "'''my''' article". Staying off the noticeboards today and getting so much work done! Have a good weekend. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 00:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 01:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
</div>
</div>
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
<!-- EdwardsBot 0646 -->
]
] '''Oversight changes'''
== Notice of External links noticeboard discussion ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
</div>
] This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion at ] is taking place regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ELN-notice--> Thank you.
</div>
--] (]) 18:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
] '''Guideline and policy news'''
== Categorization: redundant ‘parents’ ==
* Following ], ] was adopted as a ].
* A ] is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
] '''Technical news'''
* The Nuke feature also now ] to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.
] '''Arbitration'''
I made to the categories at ], and thought I’d drop a line to explain. I haven’t studied the categorization guidelines; this is just what seems sensible to me. Since the category ''Italian women philosophers'' is included in ''Italian philosophers'', it seems redundant to list the latter: being the ‘parent’, members of its ‘children‘ belong to it by implication. Likewise for the French. And since ''French women poets'' is included in ''French women writers'' and ''French poets'' (which I realize weren‘t among your additions—just while we’re at it), it can replace both of them.
* Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}.
] '''Miscellaneous'''
BTW, I notice you’re using HotCat: if you click the superscripted plus-sign near the beginning of the category list, you can make several changes in one edit.—]]] 19:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
* A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ]
----
: ], please read ]. Ethnic, gender, religion and sexual orientation categories are "non-diffusing" categories. That means, for example, that football wide receiver ] is listed under both ] and ]. ] is not only in ] but also ].
{{center|{{flatlist|
: Gender, race and ethnicity categories do not exclude the person from also being listed in the parent category. So, ] is both in ] and also ] (and both ], ] as well as ], too).
* ]
: This not only is general practice but there was a big media to-do about this very issue back in Spring 2013 where Misplaced Pages got a lot of bad press for segregating women into gender-only categories. So, women authors were only listed as ] and ] only contained male authors. A lot of work has been done over the past six months to rectify this. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 20:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1266956718 -->
== A kitten for you! ==
::Thanks; I hadn’t come across the “non-diffusing“ concept before. The Rand example is pertinent, but I don’t see the relevance of Bryant or Christie, because none of those categories includes the other. (Indeed, I note Bryant is ''not'' included in ''American players of American football''—an oversight?) Anyway, I’ll restore the ‘parents’ at C. de P. & tag the ‘daughter’ categories accordingly.—]]] 20:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
]
== Category:Public philosophers ==
Congratulations on ArbCom!!
] (]) 00:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
''']''', which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 20:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both;"/>
:Yes indeed! I have every confidence in you, Liz. – ] ] 21:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you, ] and ] for your good wishes. I have yet to plunge into my arbitration committee duties, another lapse on my part over this first week of January. It's so easy to get caught up with ones regular responsibilities on the project. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== Books and Bytes: The Misplaced Pages Library Newsletter ==
'''Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025! ♦ ] (]) 02:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
<big>'''Greetings ] members!'''</big> Welcome to the inaugural edition of ''Books and Bytes'', TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of ''Books and Bytes'', please add your name to ]. There's lots of news this month for the Misplaced Pages Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
<p>'''New positions:''' Sign up to be a Misplaced Pages Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Misplaced Pages Librarian
<p>'''Misplaced Pages Loves Libraries:''' Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
<p>'''New subscription donations:''' Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
<p>'''New ideas:''' OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
<p>'''News from the library world:''' Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
<p>'''Announcing WikiProject Open:''' WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
<p>'''New ways to get involved:''' Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration<br>
<p><big>]</big><br><br>
''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be '''opt-in''' only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the ]. --] 21:13, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0651 -->
:Thank you, ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== Tags ==
== ] ==
Hello Liz,
How can I remove a tag, correctly?
Thank You (] (]) 14:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC))
: ], you can go to the Edit tab at the top of the page to edit most aspects of an article.
: Can you give me an example that I can look at? Then I could give you specific advice. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 14:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
{{u|Liz}}, can you undo ] because the player is expected to debut () at ] in the ] which ], and I believe that the draft can serve as a kind of starting point for the development of the article before its debut, which after its debut will be concretized into a full article. ] (]) 02:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:: See please the article ] It has a tag about "self-published sources", so I added more independent sources. I don´t know if I can remove the tag now.(] (]) 14:40, 28 October 2013 (UTC))
:FYI, I've done several of these for BA. While the original articles were created by a sockpuppet, BA's taken the articles in hand and developed them appropriately. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{tps}}
:This was a G13, so it's an easy restore even without @]'s helpful context. @]: I'm not watching the draft so please let me or @] know if you need anything further. ] ] 00:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Hello, ],
::I'm sorry for the delay in responding, I've gotten behind in replying to messages on my user talk page. Thanks to ] and ] for stepping up while I was busy doing other tasks. It looks like your request has been addressed. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you for returning the draft article! ] (]) 00:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== A kitten for you! ==
::: You have provided links to a few websites, which is nice, but an article about an academic really needs more secondary, print material (books, journal articles, encyclopedias, newspapers, etc.). If you don't have access to a library, you can sometimes find useful material at or .
::: I don't think you have added enough to remove the tag right now. But the tag was just put on three days ago and won't lead to an immediate removal of the article. I encourage you to keep working on it...it's a challenge but it will really improve the article! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 14:50, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: Thanks, I learned a lot with you about wikipedia. You are very kind.(] (]) 22:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC))
::::: Well, I'm not sure how much I helped, ]! The thing about Misplaced Pages is that a great deal of it is rarely reviewed. There are over 4 million articles on the English Misplaced Pages alone! An article might go a year or two (or longer!) without any Editor touching it. But when an article does get scrutinized, the expected standards of writing are actually quite high, reliable sources are required to validate all claims, especially when they involve a BLP (biography of a living person). So, with your article, someone has noted that it doesn't meet the desired standards and a tag is just a notice to attract Editors to put in a little effort to improve it. But the article has not been nominated for deletion so that's acknowledgment that it's already has a lot going for it, it just could be better. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:24, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
]
== More Hispanic and Latino actor categories ==
thank you for all your edits :D
] (]) 06:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Please don't create ] unless the current discussion on ] closes as a keep. We have already seen ] upmerged after a very short existence. This will just lead to more work for people. At a minimum open a discussion on the wikiproject for actors and filmmakers and wait until you get a clear support for creating this category.] (]) 02:09, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both;"/>
: Don't worry, ]. I was just offering a contrasting perspective in that conversation. And I hope there also isn't a move to delete entire actor categories without discussion on the actors' WikiProject either. See you at CfD! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:18, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
== Sheldrake/Telekinesis ==
== Draft:SHERIF BISHARA ==
Dear Liz,
Funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlOxlSOr3_M ] (]) 02:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I have updated ] article with the relevant information. Please review and help me to move live space
== About the change to my talk page ==
Thank you very much. ] (]) 13:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Please do not that again. I left it that way, and I want the top few comments I posted to remain that way. I don't mean to be rude, but I wish for it to stay that way. Thinks anyway. --] ], 18:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
: You're not being rude, ]. You have every right to have your Talk Page appear as you wish. I apologize for my attempts to "clean up" the page. I had thought you were a new Editor and were unfamiliar with Talk Page formatting. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
:I just moved your draft to the correct name space, I don't review draft articles. But, on your behalf, I submitted it for review by an AFC reviewer who will give you feedback on your work. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Dear Liz, I wanted to bring your attention to a fraudulent company at the deletion discussion. I nominated it, because this is a fraudulent company I read about. None of the articles there are reliable. They added a bunch or irrelevant paid "research", not covered by any media. I erected a threat on my talk page, from the author of the page. The the criminal history of all the "founders" was removed by the same editor, who has been blocked 7 times.They left the same threat on the page of a[REDACTED] who added that section in April 2024 or so.
Hi Liz. Thank you for stating your opinion on the ANI. If you want, it might be helpful to restate it in the "topic ban for milesmoney tendentious editing" section. ] (]) 01:19, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Chargers include drugs, attempted murder. I had no idea my nomination is going to trigger this form of threats. This needs to be addressed. Please, take a look at the sources, when you will be closing the discussion.
== Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon! Saturday November 2 ==
There is one article they paid for themselves with BBC. Simple Google search reveals it all. I did some research. The other so-called co-founder is in the section "'''Fraud''' · Tax · Liquidations & Insolvencies · Investment · Listed Securities · '''Money Laundering''' · Bribery & Corruption · Government & Politicians"- https://www.offshorealert.com/tag/benjamin-miller/?srsltid=AfmBOoqKsOR3yQuOIaGUZeG_PFUv2QEp3YNPXuXvOxmitAhsvl_Gov9Q ] (]) 17:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:It's best to present your argument including reliable sources, not just accusations, at the AFD discussion where it can be considered by other editors. Because this message could be seen as a form of canvassing (see ]), I won't be closing this AFD discussion. I've posted a message on your User talk page to the anonymous IP editor who was asking you to withdraw the deletion nomination. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Please join ''']''' on November 2, 2013! <BR>Everyone gather at '''Jefferson Market Library''' to further Misplaced Pages's '''local outreach'''<BR>for '''Greenwich Village''' articles on '''the history and the community'''.<BR>--] (]) 21:26, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
|}
== Feelfree to drop me a note. ==
== RFC Notice ==
Hello, this notice is for everyone who took part in the ]. I have started a new RfC on the subject. If you would like to participate please follow this link: {{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not|RfC on WP:NOT and British Airways destinations}}. ] (]) 01:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
milesmoney.m2h1n3@gmail.com ] (]) 01:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I haven't looked at this RFC yet but I'd be surprised if any airline destination articles are still present on the project. Most were deleted through AFD discussions from 2023-2024. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] ==
:], I wish you wouldn't flounce away and quit, especially when you have friends here arguing on your behalf. Specifico, especially, is speaking up for you, repeatedly, arguing against your topic ban. But you seem to be resigned to quitting so I guess my words are unlikely to have any effect. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::I am willing to respond by email, but you have not registered an email address for this use. If you wish, drop me a note by email and I will respond there. ] (]) 02:34, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Yes, well, there are more people who I don't want to receive email from than people I want to correspond with. As you have learned, it's easy to get on the wrong side of people here. Thanks for trusting me with your email address. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:46, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::I have no interest in invading your privacy. I was warned that any public comment I make about the ANI would be analyzed in bad faith, taken out of context, and generally used against me, so I would have preferred to speak privately. The email account I gave out is the one I made especially for Misplaced Pages, and you could have likewise created a Misplaced Pages-specific one. For what it's worth, I recommend that you do so, regardless of me.
::::As for me, I've broken my silence on ANI, so it doesn't really matter anymore. I'll take a look at your earlier comments and see if they still need replying to. ] (]) 00:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Would it be possible to re-open this article, which was a PROD you deleted? (PS. It wasn’t one of my PRODs. 😉) ] ] 17:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
== "England, UK" vs "England" ==
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} Just a note that this was a BLPPROD, not a regular PROD, so it needs to have a citation soon or it will likely be tagged for deletion again. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
::That's fine; I'll take a look at it and it's not workable, I'll tag it myself. Thank you so much! ] ] 01:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:::], the article had nothing useful, and I wasn’t able to find any sourcing beyond the fact that he’s now a skating official. I’ve tagged it for BLPPROD. ] ] 13:18, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== Talkback ==
A discussion has been started at ] on a topic you have recently discussed elsewhere. Please have your say if you wish. Thanks, ] (]) 22:09, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
: Wow, ], is this still being discussed? Thanks for letting me know. All I want is a definite decision, one way or the other! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::The original editor brought it up again without informing me, not that he was obliged to, I suppose. The discussion seems to be alive again...! ] (]) 22:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Is the Editor who was removing UK from all England locations still doing it or did it stop? <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:54, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::He has stopped, but is basically asking if he can start again. ] (]) 22:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: I'm a little shocked that he is asking for approval since before he just "went with it", whole hog, without ever inquiring about it on a noticeboard or Talk Page. Glad he is taking a different route this time around. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 23:00, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::I'm still more than a touch surprised that no admins are even raising an eyebrow at his editing patterns. It's this kind of thing that makes Misplaced Pages look rather ridiculous. ] (]) 23:05, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Just realized you may not have pings enabled, so putting this here. I responded to the message you left on ]. I won't process ACC requests pending your response. — ] (] • ]) 21:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
== Precious ==
:Hello, ],
:Thanks for this notice, I don't watch pings but after seeing this notice, I'm responded on your User talk page. Please do not stop with your ACC work, I obviously stumbled upon an unusual case. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, busy reading editor with a pumpkin, for gnomish work sorting categories and {{diff|Rada Ivekoviić|578590207||rescuing articles}}, for inquiring about the work of admins and arbitrators (you would be good at it!), for {{diff|User talk:PumpkinSky|576306874||missing people}}, - you are an ]!
: ] wrote a children's book on ] ;) --] (]) 23:06, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
==The North American Discworld Convention==
== WikiCup 2013 October newsletter ==
Hi Liz, how can I get the info from the old, The North American Discworld Convention article folded into the ] article?] (]) 09:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi Liz, it has been a week. I went to the 'Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The North American Discworld Convention' page, and then to the WP:refund page. The opening paragraph is,
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is {{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Cwmhiraeth}}. Our final nine were as follows:
If your article was deleted through the articles for deletion process, then a request here is not the way to seek restoration. If you believe that the deletion was handled improperly or that circumstances have changed, please contact the administrator who deleted it. If such concerns are not addressed by the deleting administrator, you may seek redress at deletion review.
Can you assist here please? I think the info at The North American Discworld Convention should be folded into the International Discworld Convention.] (]) 15:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:
== You have mail ==
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Casliber}} wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
{{ygm|sig=] (]) 09:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}}
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Sturmvogel_66}} wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Another Believer}} wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Adam Cuerden}} wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Sven Manguard}} wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Hawkeye7}} wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Cwmhiraeth}} wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|ThaddeusB}} wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
*{{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Ed!}} wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
*The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to {{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|The C of E}}, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
*Finally, the judges are awarding {{Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Participant4|Cwmhiraeth}} the Geography Barnstar for her work on ], now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.
== Figure Skating FYI ==
Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!
Hi! Just mentioned and suggested that MC might contact you for the draft so wanted to give you the heads up. (The deletion is fine, no issue with that at all). Have a great day ] ] 14:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant ] will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.
== Deletion of a page I wrote ==
Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to ''']'''; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. ] remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on ], being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from ].</small> ] (] • ]) and ] (] • ]) 00:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
<!-- EdwardsBot 0654 -->
I just got a notification of deletion of a page I wrote by yourself citing some sort of reason I don't understand. The article is in reference to a defined standard and as such is self sustaining. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=PDX_(IPC-257X)&action=edit&redlink=1
== NBA awards categories ==
I may not be the best at writing original articles and I really don't recall or can see what I wrote, but given my passion for detail and accuracy together with extensive domain knowledge I expect it was as accurate as possible. ] (]) 16:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== Thank you ==
Hi, could you please add the basketball awards discussion notifications at ] as well? I would but I do not know how to do that. Thanks.] (]) 00:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:Suuuuuuure, ]. ;-) It was kind of complicated but at this point, I can copy and paste what I posted at WikiProject Basketball. Thanks for being open to hearing the voices of others. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Liz, following on from our recent exchange at ANI I just wanted to acknowledge the accuracy of what you said and my appreciation to you for having said it. You were correct in relation to the type of user that I had become over the course of recent months.
== A barnstar for you! ==
Nonetheless, with regard to {{tq|it's kind of like you are saying what you think we want to hear so it's hard to know how reflective this incident has caused you to be}} I just wanted to reiterate that everything I said in that thread was entirely genuine.
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For opposing a lengthy ban on a broad range of articles despite supporting some sort of ban. Moderation is a rare thing. ] (]) 17:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
|}
How unexpected, ]! Even though I disagree with you on, well, just almost everything, I think you offer a unique perspective to Misplaced Pages. I don't want you to quit editing, I just want you to work harder at consensus (i.e. try to play nicely with others!). Short bans can reinforce good behavior, lengthy bans or bans that basically forbid an Editor from contributing to their main subjects of interest, simply drive Editors away. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:That's exactly the point: you acted in good faith. By opposing a fatal ban, you showed that, whatever your concerns were, this wasn't just a way to get rid of me. Contrast this with the participants who've revealed through words and actions that this is their goal.
:Given how good a job Misplaced Pages does at driving away contributors, your willingness to work with even those you disagree with is the sort of reasonable attitude that, if only it were more common, might reverse the decline of this site. Or, realistically, if only admins shut down these assassination attempts instead of enabling them.
:In any case, I would have given this Barnstar to you sooner, but I wanted to wait until the report was locked down, so that it wouldn't appear as if this was an attempt to sway you. I genuinely wish the you best of luck, as you have been a Misplaced Pages rarity: an honorable opponent. ] (]) 18:25, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:: Well, I know this is heresy but, as a sociologist, the process of creating the encyclopedia is as important to me as the actual content. Wikis are a modern invention, a unique effort of group collaboration. They often succeed when they focus on a specific topic (like a TV show or a programming language) and there is a homogeneous group of like-minded individuals. But the fact that Misplaced Pages tries to take on every aspect of knowledge, well, it is a miracle that it is still up and running and hasn't imploded, especially considering that there are individuals actively trying to disrupt it through vandalism.
:: I'm not sure if you've read about ], but crowd sourcing works when there is a wide diversity of perspectives, attitudes and talents. It's not just having a large group of people, each devoting a little time to create some big project but the fact that they represent so many different points of view that it can cancel out bias, particularly cultural bias which is invisible almost everyone.
:: Thanks again for the compliment. It's a nice antidote to the rancor one comes across on the noticeboards. Have a good weekend! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:40, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:Well said Liz. Nobody can stand Miles. He's so feisty. But he's one of the best and most productive editors and knowledgeable in a broad range of content. ]] 18:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:: LOL! I wouldn't expect you to say that, ], since you are such a loyal defender. I was just reading the user page of a particularly productive editor and their main piece of advice? Stay away from AN/I! The drama boards are a time sink, they suck all of your energy and leave one with the feeling that Misplaced Pages is going to hell.
:: Meanwhile, there are thousands of Editors, making contributions and going about their business, not lodging complaints, putting in the time and effort to get the articles in better shape, reverting vandalism, finding citations, editing awkward language into smooth prose. It's definitely not as exciting as going to battle but, you know, these Editors tend to last longer on Misplaced Pages. Personally, I'm not afraid to stand my ground but I am selective about the battles I take on. It helps to be a little detached from your work...it's not easy but it helps it not to sting when someone chooses to delete something you just wrote. Still stings a little. ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
::: We are in agreement. Miles is like the young mongrel puppy who has two different ears, a bristly coat, and keeps running in circles with too much energy. However I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he's a Rhodes Scholar as well. Ciao. ]] 18:58, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:::: Liz, I appreciate how you bring empathy and subtlety to these pages. Both of those are extraordinarily rare in ANIs. ] (]) 22:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
::::: Wow, ], that's refreshing to hear. I get my share of grief (as I imagined you do, too) for defending Editors that others have written off as "disruptive". In fact, I was told that in defending one person, I was "just as bad as he was" and, according to this Editor, that was pretty damn awful! I don't think long-time users of Misplaced Pages realize the amount of insider jargon, standards, history and practices which are unknown to newer Editors. After 4, 5, 8 years of blocking vandals, even mild rabble-rousers start looking like potential vandals to some Admins (not all, but a few!).
::::: I know when I've done vast amounts of grading or copy-editing, that it's easy to ignore what is normal while ones eye is drawn to errors or whatever seems like it doesn't fit in. Whatever deviates from normal is exaggerated and, on Misplaced Pages, mild irritations become suddenly intolerable. I spent a fair amount of my academic life studying deviancy and one core concept is that once a person becomes "labeled", others treat them differently (usually negatively). So, I am really antsy when I see labels like "troll", "sock", "vandal" or "fringe" thrown around, usually just to see if they stick. They are labels that are difficult to overcome once a critical number of influential people in ones social circle accepts that it is an accurate description. <nowiki></soapbox></nowiki> Any way, have a good weekend! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Liz, as a trans woman, I am all too well acquainted with the notion of the "Other" to which you are alluding. Miles is different from most people; all too often we are threatened by those who are different and seek to banish them rather than try to understand and find a place for them. ] (]) 04:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Well, as a trans woman, ], there is all the more reason why a project like Misplaced Pages needs your participation and to hear your perspective. My hope is that none of the Three Musketeers faces a block from editing the site but I can't tell which way the wind is blowing right now among the Admin crew. They have little patience when a dispute seems persistent and unlikely to be resolved. It helps to have allies who support you in these Noticeboard disputes. But what is even better than that is for those involved in a conflict to go through Dispute Resolution and find some way to work with each other. From what I've seen, in a "Last Person Standing" battle, there are often no winners. Peace. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:11, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
I have acknowledged and apologised for my errors in great detail and have offered to moderate my future conduct in ways that far exceed even the requests of my greatest critics. For further evidence of self reflection please see my recent comment to Timtrent, here .
== ''The Signpost'': 30 October 2013 ==
My only wish now is to be allowed to move on and to put these events behind me. Earlier today I overhauled my userpage from the recent version displaying my COI-related barnstars to a rather older version setting out my previous rather modest activities in content improvement. Hopefully this gives further indication of my intentions going forward.
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 20:57, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0657 -->
Thank you again for your very perceptive input. ] (]) 16:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== The conflict ==
== I feel like this barnstar was made for you ==
If you want to cut through to the core of the dispute; it boils down to basic organization more so than any concrete policy issue. Ryulong doesn't believe there should be different articles for anime and manga. I point to Harry Potter and how the movies and books are covered; noting that despite a very faithful adaptation different articles exist. The latest issues are amongst the largest and most notable of all anime. Each one more than 100 hours long and making hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. The Wikiproject is highly aligned against adaptations and their respective cast lists, reception, non-English dubs, music, themes and production segments. These are all segments that are perfect for stand alone articles. We can't even discuss a set index or disamb for ] because Ryulong wants the manga to be page despite being part of 30+ works containing the name and a film and video game using the same name. And rather than let it take a natural form, listings of the media, even briefly, get removed as "not important". There needs to be an intervention. Arb Com or not; hundreds of articles are affected and the entire scope of the project is deeply affected by the handful of editors of A&M who follow Ryulong's lead. ] (]) 02:40, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
: ], I don't know who is right and who is wrong, I just sense that if you and Ryulong show up one more time at AN/I, you'll both get blocked. I know nothing about anime or manga and I assume most Editors don't either so the details of the dispute are lost on me. All I notice are you and Ryulong at AN/I at least once a week, for the past two months. AN/I isn't a place to settle content issues. My advice is either go back to dispute resolution or file a request at ARBCOM but these weekly visits to AN/I are going to backfire soon. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:48, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
:: I understand. I did not anticipate Knowledgekid's bring it to ANI - I was not informed or contacted prior to it. I sent a message inquiring about ArbCom yesterday, but pending response and this ANI's closure I believe I will be seeking it. Ryulong doesn't want to sit down and discuss, but Arb Com is not voluntary. These constant little battles over basic policy are disruptive to the community, but I hope you understand that repeatedly blanking and redirecting pages with 40 or more sources rightfully troubles me and my first response is to restore and state "take it to AFD per ]". This is what provoked the ANI from Knowledgekid. ] (]) 03:05, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" |
::: From what I've gleaned from participating in a recent ARBCOM case, what's important in presenting a case request is
:::*Be concise. Do not go on and on, there are strict word limits (I believe 500 words). Do not waste words in a request, you can go into details if a case is accepted. If you go on too long, you will be asked to cut down your stratement. That doesn't start the request off on a positive note.
|-
:::*Have diffs ready that are examples of the pattern of behavior or interactions that is causing a disruption.
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Lately I've seen your comments around in several discussions, and I realized that they always seem to contribute insight and understanding, and to relieve some tension in the discussion. I think I have some pages to take from you in learning how to conduct myself in heated exchanges. Best wishes. ] (]) 07:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:::*Do not use a request to make personal attacks. Stay focused on conduct, not personalities.
|}
:::*Have individuals willing to write brief statements supporting your position.
:::*It really helps to have evidence that a) you tried, repeatedly, to work things out and b) that you can work constructively with other Editors in fruitful collaborations. Otherwise, it could appear that it is a problem you have working with others.
:Hello, ],
::: Just some unasked for advice. Good luck! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 03:29, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
:Thank you for the barnstar. I have some links to some articles/essays at the top of my user talk page that have guided some of the work I do. I just try to remember that every account is a person who might be having a really bad day. I think we can be quick to just want to block editors that might cause occasional disruption when they really need is some education. But they have to be open to it and for some editors, realizing you don't know it all can be the hardest step.
:::: Thank you for the advice. I must admit that this is the last place I wanted this to go, but I suppose I should spend a few hours researching the history and running through everything. I've grown to become a better person and deal with conflict throughout this ordeal. I believe I could get it to about 250 words, but what do you mean by have people willing to write brief statements? And does this run afoul of canvassing? ] (]) 03:38, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
:But I think you'd be surprised if you looked into the early editing histories of editors who have been here for a long time and see that they didn't "get" all of our policies immediately when they first started editing. Heck, I was part of an SPI case in my first months here because a longtime editor thought I "knew too much" so I must be a sockpuppet. So, we need to realize that a) everyone makes mistakes, b) a actual human comment usually works better than a template and c) don't assume bad motivations when the truth actually lies in ignorance of specific policies. Thanks again. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Just a thought, but you might think about waiting a couple months before filing an Arbcom case. There will be a new committee then and you might have better luck getting it accepted/getting a sensible solution. ] (]) 03:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.''</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' · ] · ] 20:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
* Les Jours and East View Press join the library
* Tech tip: Newspapers.com
<big>''']'''</big>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</small>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0617 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=28051347 -->
== ] ==
== Magic Solution ==
Liz, I'm sorry to bother you as I know you are busy. When you have a minute, could you close this AFD as Speedy Keep, per a discussion that took place there. Thank you so much. ] ] 00:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
But there is a magic solution. It just exists in a different universe, one in which magic works. So ''please'' don't be so dismissive of magic solutions. At least they may be the stuff of movies. ] (]) 02:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:{{done}} I don't watch pings so thanks for posting a note here. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 00:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::I figured, at the very least, you receive lots of messages, so I'm sure it's easy to miss one. ] ] 00:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== Request for Advice ==
Now, the solution that was being proposed whose proponent thought it was so obvious that he didn't even repost it, so that an opponent had to repost it, isn't a solution to any problems of which I am aware. ] (]) 02:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
::By the way, this has to do with your comment at ] in response to an absurdly complicated reform proposal. You said that there was no magic solution. It is a magic solution in search of a problem in an alternate universe. ] (]) 02:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
As you’ve noticed, in the ANI titled Cross-wiki harassment and transphobia from ]. It has become a colossal mess and it’s all over the place with the community heavily divided as to the full ramifications. I would like to request if you in your capacity as an arbitrator could bring this up to the Committee because I think the community is so divided on this issue that it’s not gonna end well. I think the community deserves to have a final answer to this because of the crazy nature of this post and I believe if the committee was to get involved. It would resolve things. I was considering filing a request but since I’m not party to the case and I am merely an outsider I believe I have no grounds for this.
What are your thoughts on this? You mentioned I am inexperienced and I admit I am as I am wet behind the ears so to speak so I’d like advice from you as an arbitrator and experienced editor. ] (]) 00:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::: Gotcha! ;-) <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:First, always provide a link to the article or discussion you are referring to. Otherwise, the other editor has to go searching for it which is likely to decrease the possibility that they will respond.
:Secondly, I have become an arbitrator a week ago and have not done any official arbitration committee work yet. So, I don't think I have any more standing than you would. If you would like ARBCOM to consider a case, it would be more effective for you to open a case request at ] or email the committee <arbcom-en@wikimedia.org>. I don't mean to dismiss your request but this dispute seems much more important to you than it is to me. But once you provide me with a link, I'll give it a look. But just know that many complaints posted to ANI or AN never receive official closure, especially when opinion is divided. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Actually this might work better ] (]) 13:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::::If that doesn't work just go to the section that mentions darwin https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents ] (]) 13:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== Flow "user expectations" ==
== Traveen Mathew ==
I happened to see your message at ] and it sounded intriguing. However I cannot locate the subject of your comment ( "user expectations"). There is no hurry, I know you are busy, but would you please add a wiik-link in your original message at talk-Flow? Thanks in advance, X] (]) 16:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
: Hey, ], <br>
: I think I found what I was referring to last month in that discussion thread, you can see it at ]. However, I know that I also saw some other usability studies from the early- to mid-2000s cited and I can't find the list of these studies which I refer to as 5 year old studies. I hope this helps. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Good morning, afternoon or evening (whichever is correct for you). As you are the closing admin for the Traveen Mathew articles for deleting page I would like to raise your awareness of the fact that, despite what an as I write unsigned user has suggested, I am neither the original editor of this man's page nor am I paid to edit on this website or any other for that matter. I don't really see why I have to point this out but as I have been accused I thought I'd reply. The user who accused me (Cameremote) has had numerous warnings about conflict of interest and other such matters. Cheers. ] (]) 01:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== WikiSym and OpenSym ==
:Hello, ],
I came across the proceedings from August's WikiSym + OpenSym 2013 . Full papers if you are interested in research on wikis. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:03, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
:Can you provide a link to the article or to an AFD if that is what occurring? Then I can look into your concerns once I can easily check the page you are referring to. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you for the link. I've made additional comments on this AFD about this editor casting aspersions. I should also point out that they are a new editor which doesn't absolve the editor from acting poorly but they are likely unfamiliar with discussion norms on this platform. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you kindly. ] (]) 01:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== Useredits ==
== Resurrected page ==
I found this chart interesting:<br>
] <br>
<font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 18:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
: ((for the curious like myself... this is enWiki only... wonder if they have a chart for deWiki and jpWiki and frWiki and ruWiki?)) The slow decline in article-growth that eventually stabilizes is not very shocking; once you get a million articles, you have covered the *most* notable topics, even if not *every* notable topic. The decline in article-talk *is* very scary; once the articles are largely done, there should be increased article-talk, discussing the best way to word things, how to integrate that summer-2013 research without violating ], and so on. Instead, around 2008 we see the article-talkpage-bytes hit a bottleneck and dwindle slightly thereafter. The constant churn (steady level of bytes being added -- year after year after year) in both the userpage-space and especially the wikipedia-policy-page-space is what most terrifies me. Like the IRS, no regulations are ever repealed... there are just new ones, and more new ones, that gradually bury the old. ] (]) 00:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
:: So, ], what would you like to see happen instead? <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 03:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
::Half of that is probably my talk page. Terrible how some people abuse this joint like it was a social network. Misplaced Pages is a bit of a victim of its own success, of course, attracting a lot of vandals and a lot of "editors" who actually don't have much to edit but a lot to lawyer. But there are lots of other things going on as well, individual little things that maybe don't explain much but are interesting nonetheless. For instance, many of the earlier articles are built on free material like the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Brittanica. Once those wells have run dry it becomes harder to quickly generate more content. And isn't it inevitable that our best content contributors become administrators, and even though they may be brilliant admins don't write as much content anymore? Not that I would speak from personal experience of course. ] (]) 01:55, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
::: So true, ]. Maybe there is less article creation and more "polishing" what's already here, improving the quality of the articles. By the way, I've been looking at random articles of Editors when I see them list on their User Page ''hundreds'' of articles they have created and, to be honest, some are pretty modest. Since my own article creation is nil, maybe I should find a previously unheard of genus of beetle and just go stub wild! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 02:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
::::That chart is somewhat misleading for the conclusions you're drawing from it as it deals in bytes added. When I first started editing, users were welcomed with a pretty simple message. Now you've got some pretty fancy welcome and Teahouse templates along with more Project newsletters and bot "fix your screwup" messages all adding to the byte count. --] <sup>'']''</sup> 02:33, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::Not to mention that archives are usually still stored in User talkspace, so that makes things in user talk space count double. ] ]] 02:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Both good points, ] and ] ]. I know when I've come across some Editors who have 100+ subpages (it was closer to 200) and those would all be counted as User Pages, not article content. It's actually puzzling to me how some Editors have random subpages MfD (and not for copyright violations) while other Editors have hundreds, most of them dating from years ago.
:::::: As for being misleading, well any time you try to capture reality with numbers, you fail to capture the complexity of life. Can you tell I was a qualitative researcher, not a quantitative one? I don't confuse any presentation of data as "fact", I just look for trends, biases, and even a bad chart can prompt a good discussion (even if it is about its inaccuracy). I'm basically pro-analysis, that's my goal. Thanks for sharing some considerations I hadn't thought of. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I hope you are well. I was wondering if you could help me understand how failed to pass muster at an AfD and yet somehow still lives. I'm asking you as the closer, since you might have a better idea if what's going on here. ] (]) 05:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== Thank you ==
Thanks so much for speaking the truth on the edit warring noticeboard. I've now launched a complaint of my own on the NPOV noticeboard: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Bias_in_the_Rupert_Sheldrake_article. ] (]) 21:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
: I've watched, ], with growing dismay, at how discussion has proceeded on that article Talk Page. I look at who is editing the Talk Page and then look at who is editing the article, and it's clear that a few users have taken over control of it. I really thought that after 2+ months, the more attentive Editors would have moved on to work on other articles but it's clear that a few are watching it like a hawk. New editors come to participate and then quickly get burned out and leave.
: As for the NPOV noticeboard, that will be a challenge because once anything--a person, an idea, a theory, an organization--is labeled "fringe", it seems to be okay to dismiss and ridicule it. But even if some of Sheldrake's ideas are not accepted by mainstream science, they still need to be explained, in their own context, what they mean. ''Then,'' a critique can be offered. This is especially true in an article which is actually intended to be a ''biography'', not an article about the subject itself. A person's biography requires a neutral point of view.
: But thanks for the thanks! <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
:{{tpw}}{{ping|Iskandar323}} This looks like a failure of the closure/delete tool. I have manually deleted it. You may want to change all of the links to the now deleted article. - ] ] 14:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== Neuschwanstein Castle citation style ==
::Ok, thanks for clearing that up/resolving it. ] (]) 14:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello! I removed your {{tl|citation style}} tag from ] since it seems pretty consistent and clear to me. The article uses ] style, which, while not my favorite, is allowed. If you have a more specific reason why this article needs the tag, please feel free to add it back with an explanation on the talk page— maybe I missed something. Regards, <span style="font-variant:small-caps">]</span> (]) 03:01, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Hello, ] and ],
: Did you look at the reference section, <span style="font-variant:small-caps">]</span>, with all of those blaring red alerts? There is clearly a problem with the citations on this page and I don't know how to fix it. It's hideous looking. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 03:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
:::These look like two different article pages. You were concerned with ] but the AFD was for ]. I don't think that ] should have been deleted as we have other years' articles listed at ] and now the 2023 article is missing. If you wanted to do a bundled AFD nomination, I think that is where you'd start. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::Yes, I looked— and I didn't see any blaring red alerts and I don't see them now. I saw that you removed some warnings; maybe that took care of it? Having said that, I looked in the article history immediately before your edits and I didn't see any alerts there either. Maybe you have a setting which surfaces alarms (or I have a setting that hides them!)? Regards, <span style="font-variant:small-caps">]</span> (]) 03:07, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
::::Ah, my mistake. I have restored the article. - ] ] 21:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::: That is bizarre. Because they are garish and just hideous. I've seen them on a couple different articles. Maybe I have some script or option in Preferences that makes errors stand out like that. Thanks for letting me know. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 03:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
::::Sorry, I guess bamboozled me. ] (]) 05:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
== Wikinews ==
== Thank you ==
I'm interested in changing my username on Wikinews from ] to ]. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 13:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for mopping up old unreferenced pages. ] (]) 20:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== Wikiversity ==
:Hello, ],
I'm interested in changing my username on Wikiversity from ] to ]. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 13:44, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
:I'm not sure which page you are referring to but I try to help where I can. We have tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) pf old user space drafts I wish we had a way to clean up but so far they have been off-limits for decades. Some are rather promotional but so far I haven't tagged any as CSD G11s yet. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 20:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::I'm referring to your work at ]. ] (]) 21:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
==New message from JJPMaster==
== Signpost archives ==
{{talkback|User talk:JJPMaster|How to swing a baseball bat|ts=04:39, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}}
Regarding : note that the categories were not created by the Signpost editors, but by another editor. The method used by the Signpost is the ] page mentioned in the deletion proposal. ] (]) 21:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
]<sub>]<sub>]</sub></sub> (]/]) 04:39, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
: Well, my point still stands, ]....if the categories are useful to Signpost, they should be kept. If not, they can be deleted. The WikiProject, group or discussion board should make that decision, not the handful of regulars at CfD. I wish we could get more Editors to participate in discussions there. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 01:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
::I'm not sure that if the Signpost contributors said the categories were not useful then they should be deleted. So while their input is valued, it doesn't necessarily override the views of other editors on the utility of having the categories. ] (]) 02:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
==New message from DreamRimmer==
== Wikidata weekly summary #83 ==
{{talkback|User talk:DreamRimmer bot II/Reports/G13 eligible drafts|G13|ts=07:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}}
– ] <small>(])</small> 07:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.''</div>
** Wikidata IRC Office hour on Wednesday November 13th in #wikimedia-office
** On November 10th, Gerard Meijssen will discuss Wikidata at the ]
** Lydia makes a guest appearance at the ] to discuss Wikidata's growth
* Other Noteworthy Stuff
** Wikisource deployment planned to start January 13th, 2014, see the coordination page ]
**
* Did you know?
** Newest properties: ], ], ], ], ]
** Newest task forces: ]
** You can now thank users for their contributions on Wikidata
* Development
** Sitelinks in diff views now link to the article
** Bene* worked on adding a table of contents to item pages (])
** More work on badges by mlazowik
** Creating and removing claims with references and qualifiers now show full diffs
** Fixed invalid diffs which display 'diff=0' as a parameter (])
** Fixed cases where diff pages arew caches and display in incorrect languages (])
** Added ability to ignore conflicts in merge items API module
** Worked on adding the datatype in the json output
** Fix validation of wbsetreference
** Wikibase Query now listens to entity changes of Wikibase Repo
* Open Tasks for You
** Update, expand and translate ] to make it easier for newcomers to understand what Wikidata is all about.
** Improve biology, help out the ] task force.
** ] for a property.
** Build a bot for one of the ].
** Hack on one of .
</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' · ] · ] 21:50, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0628 -->
Hello @Liz Thank you for your messages on my talk page. I have replied there but thought I would post my reply here also so as to be sure you saw it. I hope that is ok?
== ''The Signpost'': 06 November 2013 ==
I read each article and each attached reference, if they open as some do not. I do a Google search for each subject matter and look at each result that comes up. I then write my response. I accept my responses are brief but I did not know they had to be any certain length. I can assure you I do not just vote without trying my best to be fully informed. I know Moscow Connection says otherwise but that is untrue and I am saddened that you have decided to take their word as fact. I have had several articles deleted and know how upsetting that is and therefore would never vote to delete something which I did not truly believe should be removed and had looked into. As you will see I often vote to keep articles or redirect. I also usually do my research on several articles then post my responses in one go which will explain why my replies often come in batches. Since my efforts are obviously not wanted and I am now receiving this thinly veiled threat from an admin, I will cease participating in AFDs other than ones involving any articles which I have started or been heavily involved in. As for blanking my talk page, I did not know there were any rules against doing so and you can check the logs to see what has previously been written. Once again thank you for your messages ] (]) 09:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 05:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0660 -->
:@] In fact on further reflection, after more than 12,000 edits (93% in the main space) and 55 articles created (excluding about 10 which were deleted), I will (with great sadness as I have enjoyed editing and as a disabled person have limited other activities I can do), quit Misplaced Pages and leave it to you, Moscow Connection and JTtheOG. I don't want to be under constant monitoring and threats. ] (]) 10:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
== A barnstar for you! ==
::@] You know what, on further, further reflection, I am not going to let you force me to give up one of the few things that I enjoy doing in life. I have done nothing wrong. I have always acted in good faith and I believe I have added a great deal to Misplaced Pages. If you want to force me to quit then go through the proper channels where at least I can defend myself publicly. I would be interested to know if you have sent similar messages to the many other people who write brief responses to AFDs? I could provide a list but I do not want to be seen as casting aspirations against anyone else in the way you have me. ] (]) 11:35, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello mate, there's an ongoing discussion about album ]s and ]es at ]. Please do stop by and leave your suggestion {{thank you}}. '''<span style="color:Purple">dxneo</span>''' (]) 18:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
== Request for Retention of the Article on Khaleedthefirst and Commitment to Improvement ==
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | You are the pride and joy of Misplaced Pages! Without people like you Misplaced Pages would not move forward! ] (]) 11:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
|}
Hello @],
Thanks very much, ]! It is very much appreciated. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 12:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
::Try telling that to the ones that are about to block me in the near future. All I want to do is encourage wikipedians.] (]) 12:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I understand that the article about "]" has been nominated for speedy deletion, and I wanted to share my thoughts with you.
::: Hard to believe someone can get banned for giving barnstars but the rules against socking are pretty absolute here. <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:23, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I am relatively new to Misplaced Pages, and I know I still have much to learn, but I am very passionate about contributing and improving my editing skills. Writing articles has always been a dream of mine, and I’m committed to making sure the information I contribute is accurate, reliable, and properly sourced.
Regarding the article on "]," I am actively working to gather better sources and factual information about the subject. I realize that more verifiable references are needed to meet Misplaced Pages’s standards, and I’m focused on finding high-quality, independent sources to support the content. I want to ensure the article is both neutral and comprehensive, and I plan to revise it accordingly.
I’m aware that the subject may not yet meet Misplaced Pages’s notability guidelines, but I ask for your understanding and support as I continue working on improving the article. It’s important to me that I contribute to Misplaced Pages in a meaningful way, and I’m eager to learn from experienced editors like yourself to ensure the content is up to standard.
I sincerely hope that you will allow me the opportunity to improve the article, and I am more than willing to collaborate with others to make sure it aligns with Misplaced Pages’s guidelines.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Kind regards,
@] ] (]) 09:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I didn't think ] demonstrated what we look for, which is ] so I tagged it for ] which is called "speedy deletion" here, but since you are new to Misplaced Pages I'll let you know that every page that is tagged for deletion is reviewed a) either by another administrator or b) discussed in an ] deletion discussion. In this case, an administrator disagreed with my evaluation and untagged the article. I think you would benefit from looking at their edit in the page history to see why they thought the article might demostrate notability.
:If you have questions about notability and editing on Misplaced Pages, I recommend you bring them to ] where experienced editors can offer you advice and support. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:I Understand and thanks so much for your Advice @] ] (]) 04:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
== Talkback at FFD ==
I've always gotten the impression you have either pings disabled or too many pings to keep track of, so here's small no-pressure to do anything notice to say I responded . Also, omg your edit notice has a kitten in it - I love it so much and I love the anti-vandal kitten. ] (]) 02:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:Your impression is correct. I guess there is a Misplaced Pages grapevine. In the past, the issue was that the majority of my edits are to User talk pages and the majority of those edits are to User talk pages for very new editors. So, I was getting a lot of pings with questions about general editing on this project, more questions than I could respond to.
:But after a few years of not paying attention to pings, I should probably try again to see if I can respond to the ones that I get. Not being responsive to pings does irritate some longtime editors who don't know to come to my own User talk page.
:I very rarely participate in FFD discussions so I'm not familiar with the norms of that deletion forum. I just happen to come across this image in an ANI discussion on the same day as you nomiated it so I thought I'd post a comment, not a vote. I will readily admit that after editing on this project for 11 1/2 years, my weakest areas of knowledge are files and templates so I usually don't butt regarding these pages. But I'll check in and see how you responded to my comment and, you know, I'll probably learn something new! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 02:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 15 January 2025 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2025-01-15}} </div><!--Volume 21, Issue 1--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 07:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1269316164 -->
== CfD nomination at ] ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notice--> Thank you. –] (]]) 16:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
== Inquiry from Germany ==
Dear Liz, I am a member of the German Misplaced Pages. A friend of mine, an investigative journalist from Germany, asked me to contact you. He has some questions regarding YoungHoon Kim's attempt to add an article to the American Misplaced Pages.
How can he get in touch with you? I'm not able to send you an email here. In any case, I can't find the function for this. The interface of the German Misplaced Pages is structured differently. Maybe you would respond to my request here? Thank you very much and kind regards... NellsPort (in GER-Wiki) ] (]) 19:31, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
You're mentioned in this article in one of the most frequented news websites in Germany. --] (]) 18:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 22:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
== Asking for advice about recent AN/I closure ==
Hi Liz! I recently raised ] that you commented on, and I just wanted a piece of third party advice about its closure, and what (if anything) I should do about it. I'm coming to you rather than the closing admin as, based on their last comment, I'm worried that if I attempt to discuss the closure with them directly they will interpret it as a personal attack on another user, which isn't my intentions.
I personally think the last comment and closing statement is incorrect, that Sro23 did not say what they are being claimed to have said at SPI ( - they say {{tq|Note: StrexcorpEmployee behaves differently from previous sockpuppets}}, which I'm sure is just Sro23 saying the SPI pages got incorrectly merged the day prior; not a response to ). The closing admin closed the AN/I topic and gave me a formal warning based on this. I feel a bit powerless here and I feel like this warning was unfairly applied and based on a misreading, especially when no other admin weighed in on Sro23's comment, and I don't feel able to go to the closing admin directly. I'm mainly asking for admin input - is this a clear cut case of me just being in the wrong? If so I'll just take it on the chin and move on. But really I think this formal warning is overly harsh, and (if appropriate) would like it struck, but I don't know how to pursue that without causing a scene. Any advice (including simply saying "Bugghost, you're in the wrong, just drop it"), would be appreciated. Thanks! ] ] 05:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] ==
Hi Liz, could you undelete that redirect? Thanks ] (]) 06:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
== Election categories ==
No worries. The trick that was complicating it for you is that the categories weren't straight declarations, but were using complex switch coding to factor for the variables in each category name (like the year, the federal, provincial or territorial distinction, etc.) — and what made it a pain for me was that because it was done the way it was done, there was no way to fix the federal categories without breaking the provincial and territorial categories at the same time.
But since the provincial and territorial categories were eventually going to get moved anyway on the same grounds, it would have made no sense to either revert all the category moves or try to get a half-measure added to the template that only fixed the federal categories only to have to undo it again a few days or weeks later — so I just went for the whole enchilada, and then buckled down and dealt with moving the provincial and territorial categories right away.
I'm not always an expert in template coding either, especially when I come across redlinks created because the category generation is sequestered off in a module I can't edit at all, but luckily this one fell inside what I knew how to fix. But thanks for the props! ] (]) 21:22, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
== I would like to create an article for Allicia Juarrero, noted theorist and philosopher ==
However, a previous draft was deleted due to inactivity:
'''A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted.'''
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below.
* ] ] ] deleted page ] (]: Abandoned draft or ] submission – If you wish to retrieve it, please see ]) ]: ] (])
] (]) 00:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] You can recreate the page, please just know that you are not allowed to recreate pages with the same content that have been deleted per a discussion. <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:1.15em"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> {{pipe}} ]) </span> 00:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
==''Creation Myth''==
Hello, and a question. I've been taken to task for commenting too much in the AfD, although I feel I'm just correcting basic mistakes in editor's comments. Now another 'merge' comment also misses the point of a museum source being counted towards GNG. Can I comment again, or does being accused of bludgeoning by those who want to delete an article carry some kind of actual weight of "don't comment again or else". Thanks. ] (]) 14:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:p.s. Seems I don't have to comment again as someone has come along with several additional good sources. Just not understanding why correcting misinformation in such a discussion can be considered bludgeoning. ] (]) 16:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
== {{-r|MediaWiki version history}} ==
Hi Liz,
Thanks for closing ] for this article :)
As you mentioned in your close that it would be a possibility, I’ve recreated the title as a redirect. Would you be opposed to undeleting its history for posterity & access by non-administrators?
All the best, <span class="skin-invert" style="color:#000"><span style="">‍—‍</span>]<sub>]]</sub></span> 16:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
==You've got mail!==
{{You've got mail|subject=|ts=23:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}}
Per your request for more details about Outting. ] ] 23:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
== Your ] close ==
About trouting @].
The afd was, briefly, closed as '''keep''' between and , there was a .
PrimeHunter's move occured which is within that c. 35h timespan. Basically because ].
Per this, I see nothing troutable about PrimeHunter's draft move. Also, all comments after the first relist (which also was the DRV-reopening) is referring to the current (mostly) article-version, which is more substantial than the '''keep''' version. ] (]) 07:24, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:This timeline is too confusing to follow. An article shouldn't be moved in the midst of an AFD discussion. If it was moved during some weird time zone when the AFD was temporarily chosed, that should have been mentioned prominently in the AFD and the AFD should have been closed at that time. There was no "right" closure with this AFD since the article changed midway through the discussion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 07:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::It wasn't moved in the midst of an AFD discussion (it's not that confusing, is it? DRV:s happen). The afd was closed '''keep''', and there was no reason at the time to think that was ''temporarily''. It was noted in the afd that there had been a DRV, though arguably not prominently (the re-opener did state "''Reverting non-admin close and relisting as an uninvolved administrator in my individual capacity.''"). Ping @] and @] if you wish to comment. ] (]) 07:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Sequence of events:
# The AfD was closed as keep. There was no indication it would be temporary.
# On a request I moved a better version of the article whose inferior version had already been kept.
# Somebody opened a DRV.
# The AfD was reopened.
I could not predict 3 and 4. The closed AfD page said as usual
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:var(--color-error, red);">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
I posted what I did to the article's talk page. There was no deletion review at the time. ] (]) 12:34, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:I'm not sure I agree with the logic that rewriting an article during the AFD invalidates the AFD. Notability is usually independent of the state or quality of the article.
:That was a weird afd because it was an nactor and gng fail, but experienced editors really wanted to keep it.
:I wouldn't have minded a keep outcome for that afd. The article is useful and encyclopedic. It doesn't hurt anything by having it. Just my two cents. –] <small>(])</small> 15:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::Experienced editors also wanted to delete. ] (]) 16:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:PS please consider archiving your user talk page. My phone is lagging really hard trying to do anything on this page. Thank you –] <small>(])</small> 15:59, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:Also, the draft had been around quite awhile, submitted several times and was waiting for review (again) when someone put the version that was taken to afd in mainspace, so the afd was going on at the same time as the old draft was waiting for assessment. ] (]) 16:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:Now at ]. —] 21:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
== "2025 TikTok refugee crisis" page move ==
You may have forgotten to revert the ] move for the article ].{{Br}} ] (]) 10:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== Mass reverts by ] ==
Hello Liz,
with respect to , also note and which I brought up for . The latter remains unresolved. I have requested independent peer review, but I'm unsure if I will get a response.
{{ping|FlightTime}}
{{ping|Mjdestroyerofworlds}} Apologies for the summoning, but this might get side-tracked if I don't.
::{{ping|FlightTime}} Thank you. I'm still concerned that you seem to be treating these as isolated incidents, just to be reverted, with no adjustments to be made to future behaviour. ] (]) 00:39, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Liz, can you please look into this user's CONTINUING reverts of my actions? This is a completely unreasonable level of preoccupation with my edits. 04:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::I reverted all my edits on the Fender article, however ] is not how to improve the article, article talk pages are not a forum and that is my rational for the removal. Do what you want to the article, if your edits are an issue going forward, then other page watcher's will handle them. Cheers, - <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">] <small>(])</small></span> 06:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== Untrout please ==
At ], you trouted a user for having moved an article in the midst of an AFD discussion. However, that's not actually what happened. What went down is:
# and included in that AFD discussion was talk about how the draft version should be used instead, with general concurrence there and elsewhere.
# The move was done
# after that being ].
(An in any case, it shouldn't matter, since the discussion was over the notability of the topic, and both versions of the article were on the same topic.)
I suggest that you at the very least undo the trouting, and consider undoing the closure altogether. -- ] (]) 14:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:Undo the trouting, yes. Undo the closing, no. ] (]) 15:31, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== Your talk page has become *very* long ==
Hello! I just wanted to request that you archive your user talk page, Liz. While it may not be bothersome to you, many editors have slow connections, and having a very large talk page can hamper communication. Cheers, ] (]) 18:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== If you have time, please help ==
Hey, @] I hope your are well, a group of editors overreacted and reverted my edits aggressively. While i was trying to improve the ] article by moving criticism out of the theology section to separate criticism section, Because i was reading similar article, ] before and the criticism section make it easy to understand.
] and ] are not the same thing, which is common sense, but I was punished for using my common sense. I even tried to discuss it with them but they are threatening on my talk page, may be they think they have some sort of ] of the article. has been blocked before for such behavior.
I only made these edits in last and , but they reverted them also, repeatedly!! ] (]) 20:23, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== ANI report ==
Re: ], to clarify I wasn't requesting an indef block, only providing commentary for context. Predominantly to dissuade an admin from a worthless 48-72 hour block, given the IP appears appears to have remained static for past 9 days already, thus gone beyond the usual DHCP average lease times. I was hoping an admin would read between the lines as occured. ] (]) 22:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== Hi Liz ==
Can you please (when you have time, and no longer feel stressed) delete ]? Thanks! See also ]. ] (]) 03:22, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:Why can't this wait for 7 day period to be up? <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::That "stressed" edit notice is from this summer after my mom died, I really have to remove that. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 03:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Sorry to hear that, my condolences. It is not time-sensitive at all. I just figured I'd mention it here because you do a ''lot'' of cleanup work. It looks like user TheTechie added that template in . ] (]) 04:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::@] Yeah, I did that after they mentioned it casually and I got permission to add it. Please ping me next time, though. <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:1.15em"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> {{pipe}} ]) </span> 00:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|TheTechie}} Why? I am not saying you did something wrong, I asssumed it was upon request, otherwise Liz would've removed it a long time ago. ] (]) 00:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Just as a courtesy, I asked. I didn't assume you accused me. <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:1.15em"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> {{pipe}} ]) </span> 00:17, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::{{ping|TheTechie}} Sorry, I am basically a goldfish suffering from memory loss, although I am worse at and . ] (]) 00:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
@], its Nelson. I would want to thank you for the matter. I am glad that you and the others helped out in this case; the matter had been affecting me personally. Still, I have a concern that he might retaliate again despite the block and might go further on.
I had not responded to him directly because I do not wish to make enemies or increase the conflict, and even gave him chances. I am shocked and saddened that he would be going after me for the photo issue when it could be easily resolved in another, perhaps an even better way and somehow, I was singled out. It was my interest in crime that made me come here years ago and he said a lot of things, whether indirect or direct, and yeah it affected me for the week throughout. ] (]) 04:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
==] has been nominated for merging==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 10:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
== CfD nomination at ] ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notice--> Thank you. –] (]) 19:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
== Raegan Revord and XFD banners ==
Have you ever noticed the difference between the banner on an article that has been nominated for deletion and the banner on a draft that has been nominated for deletion? An article says not to remove the notice until the AFD is closed. A draft or essay or whatever says not to blank, merge, or move the page, or remove the notice until the AFD is closed. I have said, for several years, that the AFD banner should contain the same notice. What happened with ] is that an editor moved the page by replacing it with another page, gumming up the AFD. A notice not to move the page would have been useful.
This was a misguided ] move that was not a good idea. What I have seen more times is a bad-faith move. An author, maybe a ] editor, or maybe just an ], creates an article. A reviewer draftifies it. The author moves it back to article space. A reviewer then writes an AFD and nominates the article. The author then moves the article back to draft space, to stop the AFD, preventing the community from reaching consensus.
This mess would have been avoided if there were a Do Not Move notice, and if it were heeded. ] (]) 21:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:The afd notice ''used'' to say exactly that - see for example . It seems to have gone missing during the cut and paste to what's now at ] in 2006, and the deletion of the old history conveniently covers it up. —] 23:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::I have raised the issue at ]. ] (]) 06:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] This subject has been in a kind of "development hell" for quite awhile. The draft was pending for review (again), and someone decided during that pending to make a new version and put it in main-space, and that version ]. Then the afd closed '''keep''', ], there was a DRV, and the afd was reopened, then closed by Liz. And now there is a new DRV. ] (]) 12:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] ==
] ] (]) 01:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, dear, ],
:Do you realize that the whole notion of "rogue admins" has been around for 18 years, back when admins would occasionally actually go rogue? Look at old ARBCOM cases and noticeboard discussions and it wasn't that uncommon for rogue admins back then to just act without any attempt to justify their actions by referring to policies. It was a wilder time but there are some longtimers who miss those days. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::That was long ago. But the misspelling of rogue is still with us. One admin deleted AfD (or was it VfD then?) and then there was the Userbox wheel war. And more. Amazing. ] (]) 01:46, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Deepfriedokra}} I recently discovered . ] (]) 04:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::How delightful ] (]) 07:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== Question about AfD ==
Hello, I am messaging you because I have seen you close multiple AfD's I have started, and no doubt countless more. I started a new AfD a couple days ago, ], and there is a brand new account that has never edited before voting in it. I wanted to know who they were after they voted to keep it without citing any specific notability guidelines the article passed or guidelines more generally that would support keeping the article, and I came to find out they were a brand new user whose account was registered six hours ago, as of writing this. I am not contacting you as an administrator to get this user in trouble, I just don't quite know how to take this, since in the interest of not ], I don't want to accuse them of sockpuppetry. But at the same time, I don't know why a brand new account would be voting in an AfD. I do want to ], but I find it kind of strange myself.
But that's just me. Do you have any thoughts on how this situation can be handled in the context of determining consensus for this discussion? ] (]) 12:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== Change?Maybeyes,maybeno ==
== Offer of help with ArbCom ==
I was reading an archived page of Jimmy Wales' talk page (being brought there by a direct link) and saw an Editor talking, with a tone of woe, about the problems on Misplaced Pages: Lack of due process in handing out blocks, a small number of articles getting intense scrutiny while the vast majority are in dismal shape, editors having to go to ARBCOM to find solutions to conflict with admins, good editors getting discouraged and leaving in frustration, users not being able to get over personal grudges, just stuff I come across every day since I've been active on Misplaced Pages.
Hi Liz. As we head into week four of the year, I have noticed that you had been inactive all year so far with ArbCom. Coming here I see you've made a couple of comments suggesting that you might be having trouble getting started. I'm sure that your colleagues are ready to be of help but sometimes it's easier to get help from someone a little removed. If I can be that person to you please don't hesitate to reach out - here or via email. Given your overwhelming trust by the community - 1100 votes! (real votes too not !votes) and 80% support! - I can't be the only one eager to see your work on the committee. But I could also see how that election result could put a lot of pressure on someone. So if it's that or anything else that I could be of assistance with, please do let me know. Best, ] (]) 05:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
So, the complaints were familiar, I found myself nodding my head saying to myself, "This is right on the nose!" But the punchline is that this was a comment posted on Wales page in 2007, more than 6 years ago. Now, this is either a sign that a) reform is nearly impossible within the Misplaced Pages structure as it is very resistant to change, b) the normal state of Misplaced Pages is dysfunctional or c) both of the above.
:Hello, ],
:Thank you for reaching out in such a polite, gentle way. I'll just say that the biggest concern I saw in the questions I faced during the pre-election process was the high level of activity I spend on this project already. It was a valid concern and it's been a challenge for me to cut back my busy admin activities to make space for arbitration work. I also have a separate email account for arbitration work that I need to start checking more regularly. And all of the arbitration wiki pages that I don't seem to be able to find links for.
:So, I think my biggest problem is not scheduling in ARBCOM work into my daily routine of tasks. I do feel a great deal of pressure though and dismay that I haven't made that job a priority in my on-wiki time. I'll try to make a fresh start tomorrow morning and if I have questions, I'll reach out to you. Thanks again. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::Glad to hear you'll reach out. I hope you'll forgive a couple of follow-up comments. As for {{tqq|And all of the arbitration wiki pages that I don't seem to be able to find links for.}} the best place to start might be {{tl|ArbComOpenTasks}} which lists all the open onwiki buisness of ArbCom and can be found on each of the three work pages (], ], ]). Diving into PIA at this point might be hard. But there is an open request for amending the scope of the American Poliltics contentious topic open at ] that might be up your ally? As for the email checking, having just started my own separate email for the U4C, I've been forwarding to my main wiki account. That way I know when there's something in there to check. This might be helpful as you establish habits and then you can easily turn it off? But so much of the important work happens in email and yes figuring out how ArbCom fits into the flow of your life and wiki work is a challenge for every new arb. Given your experience (and perhaps a little trial and error) I'm sure you'll figure it out. Best, ] (]) 05:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Hi Liz, I hope neither you nor Barkeep minds me sticking my nose in. I would suggest making emails part of your daily routine; the way I do it is I check all my notifications (work, social, Wikimedia) first thing in the morning and then every few hours as I get chance, usually on my phone just to keep abreast of anything urgent but find a workflow that works for you. Anything older than a day or two can probably safely be archived unless it's of special interest or you want to plough through. Then you can just watchlist the relevant pages on-wiki as long as you check your watchlist regularly. You don't need to worry about arbwiki on a day-to-day basis. If it helps, I give freely of my phone number to anyone who isn't a loony. :) ] | ] 21:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::{{tqq| If it helps, I give freely of my phone number to anyone who isn't a loony. :)}} ahh well that explains why I never got it. Best, ] (]) 21:40, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{small|I suppose that criterion excludes anyone who stood for election to ArbCom! But you never asked. Kevin did though. ;) ] | ] 21:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}}
== Swift Prod ==
I'm not saying that editors, admins and arbitrators shouldn't strive to be more fair and even-handed in their dealings with each other or that it isn't worth while to try to improve things such as the diversity of editors, admins and ARBCOM. But I'm saying that we (I) need to give up the Misplaced Pages myth that it represents pure collaboration, equity and meritocracy.
" It also shouldn't have been tagged for deletion FOUR minutes after it was created." It was created a week earlier (), it's not as if the creator had had no time to work on it (and they had extensively worked on it previously in the Spanish version as well). That they put it in the mainspace via a cut-and-paste move is allowed in a case like this, but that doesn't mean that it is a "new" creation where the creator needs to be given time and space to work on it. ] (]) 09:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Over and over again, I read editors reminding those they see going astray that "Misplaced Pages is about creating an encyclopedia (content), not social networking or the process." And yet, what Misplaced Pages is, is people and the things (articles, guidelines, conversations) that they create. It's inherently social, that's its strength, no one person or even small group of people could produce it, it takes tens of thousands, across the world. But because it is social, it is prone to the best and worst aspects of human nature...altruism, generosity, hard work, sacrifice and diligence but also jealousy, pride, sloth, gossip and, often, an ill temper (among its many quirks). I think new editors (and some old ones) believe that human vices can be transcended by just being true to the holy Five Pillars. But it ain't so.
:Hello, ],
:I was not aware of the article draft in User space, I was just looking at the main space version although the fact that it was cut and pasted should have been obvious to me. I was still surprised that it was tagged for an AFD discussion just a few minutes after it was created, I don't know how you even spotted it so soon after the article was published.
:I apologize if my tone was sharp, I just think that content creators should be given more time to improve a new article before deletion is considered. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:37, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
== Regarding recently speedy deleted article ==
Now, I expect seasoned editors, if they read this, will greet it all with a big ''yawn''. This is news? No, it isn't, you only have to edit a few hours before you can see things are far from perfect. But I still think that when there is conflict and editors are being judged and sanctioned, they can be seen as failing to be "the ideal" when, the fact is, that no one is the ideal, it never existed. WP is really about working within our imperfections and the fact that with so many editors involved, that can be balanced out (e.g. deletionists and inclusionists are both needed).
Hello, you recently ] ]. I had been editing that article to be in a better state than it was before, and I would to have it please be undeleted. At the time of deletion, the article would not have fallen under G12. ] (]) 01:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
A final thought: If I could make one change, it would be editors being kicked out for being "disruptive". Every edit, especially '''bold''' ones, is disruptive. Disruptive just means changing the status quo and because Misplaced Pages is in a constant state of evolution, it is in a constant state of disruption. What should be considered is whether an editor's acts are productive (adding, in a positive way to the betterment of WP and its culture) or destructive (harming WP and its culture. <nowiki></soapbox></nowiki> <font face="Rage Italic" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 22:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
:Hello, ],
:I deleted this article as a result of ] and it was the consensus opinion of he tparticipants that it was a copyright violation. I can't revert my closure because you disagree with the consensus of the other participants who all argued for Deletion. Ordinarily, upon request I would restore an article deleted through AFD to Draft space but I can't do that with content that might be a copyright violation. Admins can't restore content that has been tagged as a possible copyright violation.
:I would recommend starting a new article from scratch but if you really want this old content restored, you'll have to file an appeal at ] and argue that the closure of the discussion was incorrect. If participants in the review agree with you, they can decide to overturn my closure and restore the article to main space or draft space. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Latest revision as of 07:22, 22 January 2025
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this user asks you to take precautions:
1. Maintain social distancing by starting new posts in new sections, to avoid contaminating other users.
2. Follow the one-way system by putting new posts at the bottom.
This page was last edited or modified by C.Fred (talk).
Note: When emailing me, please also post a {{You've got mail}} template to this page. I check my Misplaced Pages email account infrequently.
Wise words given to a blocked editor: This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position. Basalisk⁄berate 4 August 2013 Well said!Liz
No matter how cute you are, expect no quarter in the cruel world of Misplaced Pages.
While Misplaced Pages's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused. Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures. Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus. (WP:NOT)
I blanked their User page. This editor made 3 edits 6+ years ago, this isn't an urgent situation. I'm not sure how you even stumbled upon them. Liz04:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Move
Hello Liz, someone moved Tyla to multiple titles and went as far as to create a duplicate titled Tyla Laura. My guess is that they were trying to get the credits for creating the Tyla article. Can you please look at the article, its talk and subpages and check if there's anything wrong? dxneo (talk) 14:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Though I'm late in responding, I actually looked into this situation when you posted about it last weekend and looked to see if any clean-up was necessary. The editor has since been blocked for disruptive editing and because it might be a compromised account. Thanaks for bringing this to my attention and I'm sorry that it's taken me a while to reply to your request. Liz20:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068
Hi Liz, could you give this a quick look please to see whether it should be procedurally closed. There is an active unclosed merge discussion and this seems to have been started as a novel means to close the merge. Thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Done I initially thought it was too late in the process for a procedural close but when I saw the nominator's deletion argument was actually an indirect request to get support for keeping the article, I decided that you were right and this was an incorrect use of AFD. Liz20:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
May I ask how this could possibly be considered a no consensus result? It's a clear keep result unless you are overriding the five keep votes and deciding for some reason that the two deleters have stronger arguments (which is a bit odd since it comes down to people claiming he meets GNG versus people claiming he doesn't). What is the justification for this? You don't say in your closing statement. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Saying that keep arguments were "people claiming he meets GNG" is a fundamental mischaracterisation of your own argument which consisted partly of "The CMG is a high honour which isn't handed out in cornflakes packets" and which made absolutely zero attempt to assess notability based on sources. That's one of the weakest arguments I've seen at AfD in a while. No closer should take it into account at all. AusLondonder (talk) 16:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Agree. I'm not sure how I would have voted, but, like OzLondoner, I hope I would have pointed out the paucity of the argument. The close was good. SerialNumber5412917:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Wait, that is Oz Londoner? I have been reading that forever as aus, as in German for out. Out of Londoner. Now I don't know what to think! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes! I added the surfer emoji partly to clarify. When I first came up with the name I had know idea furries were a thing. Furboy was my Paladin when I used to play D&D. I do actually surf - although these days I have switched to a kayak. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
I always thought "Aus" referred to Australia or, maybe Austria, but I now see from your User page, AusLondonder, that you don't seem to participate in any WikiProjects on those countries so perhaps I've been wrong all of this time. Liz19:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
I gather that you would have preferred a firmer close as a Keep rather than No consensus? Well, first, as a frequent AFD participant, I know that you know that it's not a vote count. But when you have a divided discussion like this one, with some editors arguing that WP:BASIC is met and others arguing WP:BASIC is not met, then you need to review the arguments and, I believe, the experience levels of the participants in the discussion.
I didn't think I could close as Keep without it signalling that I was ignoring the opinions of two editors who were arguing for Deletion, both of whom are very experienced in assessing articles and sources in AFD discussions. So, I closed as No consensus which is not saying that both sides were equally strong in their arguments but it acknowledges that their wasn't unanimity or agreement close to unamity in this discussion. This is not an uncommon outcome when you have experienced editors reviewing sources who come to opposing evaluations of them. It's not my job to review the sources myself because that would lead to a "supervote" so I have to rely on the arguments of the participants and, in this case, I didn't see a consensus.
Of course, you can take this to Misplaced Pages:Deletion review if you want and present your argument there. In this case, you might have a few participants who agree with your interpretation but I think the majority of opinions would be that "No consensus" was a reasonable outcome that any closer might come to. I'm occasionally willing to revert an AFD closure if an editor is asking for an additional relisting or I've made some obvious error but I don't think I did here and I don't think a third relisting would have altered the outcome of this discussion. But that's your call. Liz19:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
No, it's not a "vote count", but when you have more than twice the number of editors voting one way than the other, then not acknowledging that majority and closing in their favour does indeed look like a supervote unless they're spouting utter rubbish. I didn't think I could close as Keep without it signalling that I was ignoring the opinions of two editors who were arguing for Deletion, both of whom are very experienced in assessing articles and sources in AFD discussions. I don't think I've ever seen that argument before. It's basically saying that because two editors, both of whom have a proven track record of being very keen on deletion incidentally, say it should be deleted then their arguments should be given more weight than the other five participants because they're "experienced" and it would be somehow insulting to them to close in favour of the other participants. That's just weird, frankly, and I think goes against the spirit of Misplaced Pages. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
It's the effective same result so I'm not sure why you're complaining so much. Consensus is based on argument quality, not numbers. Maybe try and assess notability based on sources rather than tangents about cornflakes and your opinion will count for more at AfD. AusLondonder (talk) 13:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi Necrothesp, I didn't participate in that discussion, but reviewing it now, I see two editors making good source based arguments to keep, as well as two making such arguments for deletion. Two said it meets WP:BASIC but did not say how. So I think Liz evaluated that fairly. But there is also your argument that the CMG is a high honour. This was not related to any SNG, but is an SNG style of shortcut argument that many of us use in our first look at a subject to come to an initial view. For instance, today I have posted on an AfD school discussion that you also posted on, and expressed my own shortcut argument based on the age, prestige and size of a school. But such arguments are nothing more than a rebuttable supposition of notability. What always matters is whether sources exist from which the page can be written. A school can be big and old and so unremarkable that perhaps there really are no sources. A person can be an unremarkable civil servant or part of a diplomatic mission, so much in the background that sources do not exist. In such cases the assumption of notability will be rebutted by the searches that turn nothing up, and no page can be written. But certainly we can use such arguments to choose where we might be concentrating our efforts, and, when the matter is finely balanced, to argue the toss in favour of retention. Still, what really matters are the sources. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Creating a Previously Deleted Article
Hi Liz,
I created an article for the Powhatan Hotel in Galveston (sometime in early 2023), which I realized was an ill-conceived mess, so I requested speedy deletion. Thanks for your assistance with that. Now I have a new source for the article, making two expert architectural sources for the same article. Before I re-create the article, however, I would like to recall the specifics of the mess I created in order to avoid a similar mistake. I am not finding my own conversations on this and without the text of the original, I am not recalling the specifics of my errors. Do you have any tips for pulling any helpful documents? I am in no rush to re-create the article, so whatever timetable works for you also works for me.
Best regards, Oldsanfelipe2 (talk) 11:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
It sounds like I might be able to help you out but you need to provide a link to the deleted article. You know the exact name of the article you created so it would be faster if you could provide this rather than me spending time looking for it. Then I could review the reason for deletion and see if the situation is as you state it is. Thank you. Liz19:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I needed. Oh, this was from 2023! This was a CSD G7, an article creator asks for deletion so this can be reverted if that's what you are asking for. Liz23:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
SPAs POV-pushing in The Keys to the White House
I completely agree with your concern, on the AN/I thread, that the volume of material is daunting. I spent literally hours researching, drafting, and editing my request, to try to simplify it as much as possible. (I'm responding to you here instead of there precisely so as not to add to the length of the thread.) I think this was also a problem on the thread on the BLP Noticeboard. The three SPAs flooded the zone with reiterations of their position, and only one uninvolved editor was dedicated enough to wade through it all.
And speaking of wading through it -- you presumably haven't waded through Talk:The Keys to the White House. You've done more than other admins by even reading my summary. Frankly, your hope that these differences could be resolved on talk pages is, alas, completely unrealistic. If you look at that page, you'll see that I've tried and tried and tried until I'm blue in the keyboard. The SPAs will not budge.
It's a classic case of WP:SPA. In June of this year there was a blog post criticizing Lichtman. At about the same time, these three accounts showed up pushing the bloggers' position. They even insisted on citing the blog's criticisms (in a BLP!). You can see several screenfuls of text at Talk:The_Keys_to_the_White_House#Unacceptable_source as I tried to get them to adhere to WP:SPS. But even that self-evident point couldn't be resolved on the Talk page. Just to get those improper citations removed, I had to expend yet more time to create a Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard thread. Consensus-based dispute resolution just doesn't work when there are SPAs whose sole or primary purpose in editing is to push their POV. (The current, POV version doesn't directly link to the blog post, but it does quote the nonnotable bloggers as if they were experts. Coincidentally, the SPAs asserted that the bloggers were experts.)
I'm at my wits' end with these accounts. There's a limit to how much time I can spend banging my head against a brick wall in the hope of some miraculous resolution on the Talk page. If no admin will pick up a mop and do something (maybe even a 30-day article ban would send a salutary message!), then I'll probably just have to give up. The SPAs will succeed in thumbing their nose at WP:NPOV and hijacking a BLP article to promote their views. JamesMLanetc15:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry that this situation has left you so frustrated. And also that I'm not willing, at this point, to go diving into this complicated dispute to try to settle it. But most of my time editing on the project is filled up with some routine tasks that take up most of my time and I've only recently returned to even looking at cases that come up on ANI so I don't see my time freeing up any time soon.
Without coming to a conclusion on this complaint, I see that you have two problems: a) the complexity of this case that involves at least three other editors and the fact that it appears that this dispute has covered several different talk pages and noticeboards and b) that, right now, it looks like it is you against at least three editors. You'd have an outcome more to your preference if you had at least one other editor who was contributing to this discussion who supported your interpretation and could speak up. I'm sure it's maddening to see a situation you believe is inappropriate and be alone in this.
Is there a related WikiProject where you could go to their talk page and ask for uninvolved editors to offer their opinion? Or you could post an impartial request for help on the talk page of a related article. Of course, numbers don't always determine consensus on Misplaced Pages but at least you could get a second opinion on whether the way you interpret this situation is correct. I've found that in many disputes on Misplaced Pages "me vs. you" situations (or, in this case, "you vs. them") are frequently resolvable if more editors join in the discussion. Any chance of that occurring? Liz19:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Liz, thanks for your response. I completely understand the limitations on your time and energy. I have a long Misplaced Pages to-do list, with some items dating back years, and I'm not even an admin.
I wanted more editors to join in the discussion. That's why I started the RfC and then the Noticeboard thread. Each of those efforts brought a response from an experienced and previously uninvolved editor, and in each case the editor agreed with me. The three SPAs are unmoved, though. Their attitude is that their POV is correct, the article is fine the way it is, as long as they don't agree to a change there's no consensus, and as long as there's no consensus the version they prefer must remain in place.
As for WikiProjects, I did post at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia#Question about adding template. I just want the BLP template placed on the Keys article, because the SPAs wouldn't even agree that BLP standards applied. Being cautious, I thought an uninvolved editor should add the template. No one added the template or even responded to my post. I also noted the RfC on the lists for Biographies; for History and geography; and for Politics, government, and law. I assume that many WikiProject participants monitor the applicable list for their project.
My current inclination: (1) Hope that the AN/I thread gets attention from an admin who can undertake the admittedly burdensome task of addressing the problem. (2) If some time passes and no other admin responds there, I'll try starting a thread at Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. The weakness in that plan is that, even if it elicits comments from a few experienced editors, the SPAs will persist. Past comments from such editors have had no effect on the SPAs. (3) If that doesn't work, I'll consider your suggestion of WP:AE. I've never done one of them and it seems to be a lot of work by me, and then hope that some admin takes an interest. My personal opinion is that the SPAs' violations of WP:NPOV and WP:BLP are much clearer than the charge of contentious editing. If nothing can get done based on violations of two clear policies, I can't be very optimistic about AE. JamesMLanetc20:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Merge vs AfD
Hi Liz, I'm writing about the odd situation with Misplaced Pages and antisemitism. I don't believe the AfD nominator (Selfstudier) was looking for a Keep result; they supported merging while sayingMight be better just to AfD it as POVFORK. They seem okay with either merging or deletion.
From my perspective, the merge discussion seemed to effectively evolve into a deletion discussion, especially now that the destination article already has relevant content and can't really fit more. So I thought it was logical to move to AfD, and there seemed to be some agreement for that from both sides of the dispute: myself and ProfGray on one side, Selfstudier and Hemiauchenia (the merge proposer) on the other.
I suppose the merge should have been closed before an AfD, but now that the AfD had developed, would you consider reopening it to let it run to conclusion?
I realize it could appear like I'm trying to work around a consensus to merge, but FWIW I think those arguments should also be considered by a future AfD closer. I.e. I believe this should be evaluated as a deletion, but with consideration of all relevant arguments. — xDanielx /C\ 22:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, I was accommodating another editor who requested a procedural close since the merger discussion was ongoing. Since the consensus was going in the direction of Keep, it was not clear to me what a Keep would mean if a Merge was also being discussed. Would it negate a decision to Merge? If a Merge was opposed then a Keep decision would be irrelevant because a Merge would already have been rejected. And I didn't see much support for Deletion which is what AFD is typically for, to consider whether or not an article should be deleted. So, I don't see any purpose to having an AFD discussion ongoing while a Merge is being considered if the closure looks like it would just have Kept the article as it is. I don't think an AFD should occur to just see if there is widespread support for a Merge, that's what the Merge discussion is for. So, it looks like this was splintering the debate and since the Merge discussion was started first, I think it should continue.
And AFDs should never occur just to verify that an article should be Kept, they should only occur if the nominator is seeking Deletion. Sometimes the outcome for an AFD is a Merge, Redirection or Draftification, but that decision arises out the consensus of the discussion, not as an outcome sought by the nominator. Liz23:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining further. So as I understand it, there were two concerns with the AfD:
The filer might not have been seeking deletion.
It was filed during an open merge discussion.
On (1), my impression is that several editors like Selfstudier are seeking either a deletion or merge outcome, and probably don't feel strongly about the difference since there isn't really content that would be merged. The practical difference might just be a redirect. For example Tryptofish mentioned supporting "either deletion or merging"; the merge proposer Hemiauchenia also planned to file an AfD. I guess what I'm saying is, we can have someone else file if needed.
On (2), I think ideally the merge discussion should be procedural closed (but its arguments still considered) to indicate that it has been supplanted by an AfD, but the question is who should make that call. I think Hemiauchenia might be willing to. If not, we could request an uninvolved closer, where a possible close could involve recommending a change of venue to AfD. Does that sound reasonable? — xDanielx /C\ 01:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't think that is reasonable at all. The merge discussion had been open a week when the AfD started and had some 25 participants and represented a lot of editor time. The AfD was started without a deletion rationale and any outcome that overturns the merge outcome would instantly be challenged at DRV because it is out of process. It was just making a mess. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Notice of a discussion I think you'd be interested in knowing about
Hey Liz, I thought you might want to be aware of this discussion (which includes not just the linked to thread, but a much larger one further above on VP/WMF). In summary, it appears that the WMF is prepared to imminently disclose personally identifying information about volunteers in a controversial Indian court case, where a news agency is attempting to suppress Misplaced Pages's tertiary coverage of the content of secondary sources (which it considers unflattering) by going after a number of individual editors as defendants. In order to comply with court orders in the case, it seems the WMF is prepared to share this information in what a number of us consider a pretty seismically bad idea and a betrayal of community priorities and values (the WMF has also already used an office action to remove an article reporting on the case, at the direction of the court for what said court regards as legitimate sub judice reasons).
While the deletion of the article has been framed by the WMF as temporary step to preserve appeal on the overall case, and there are mixed feelings in the community response as to that so far, there is a much more uniform opposition to throwing the individual editors (at least one of whom is located in India and has profound apprehension about what this could mean for his life with regard to litigation and beyond) under the bus. And yet the WMF appears to be prepared to share the information in question, as soon as Nov. 8. Can I impose upon you to take a look at the matter and share your perspective? SnowRise00:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I've actually been following this issue for about the past 10 days. I'm always reluctant to jump into a very long discussion that I haven't been part of since the beginning because I'm sure I'll miss something important when I skim through all of the comments. But I agree that this is a very important issue so I'll check in on the current state of the discussion. I appreciate your efforts to publicize this problem. Liz07:53, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Liz: it's a novel form of project activity for me and I'm not sure my approach is optimized for exposure, but I've made such efforts as I could. SnowRise09:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
It's not a process that is easy to describe here. I would just go to SPI, look at some of the open cases listed on that page and then follow the instructions to open a new case which is pretty obvious if you review the page. As a warning to you though, Checkusers will not connect registered accounts to IP addresses because it can be an invastion of privacy, sockpuppet investigations are really to compare registered accounts with each other. So, if you just have this registered account and an IP address, I don't think it would be worth your time to go through the steps to set up a case. But I suggest you at least look over the SPI main page so you are more familiar with the process. Liz02:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
You are cool, say what you want to say, and straight forward. Mine kind of people. Lets keep on this project going on better and better, and, please, poke me for whatever you need. I had been away and only focused on football for the last decade, or so, but earlier I had been active in many more areas of Misplaced Pages because I always did and still do find this one of the most amasirog projects on the entire internet. FkpCascais (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, Crafterstar, you will have to be more specific and list the deleted drafts you want restored. You can also request restoration of a draft deleted for CSD G13 reasons at WP:REFUND. But I have deleted tens of thousands of draft articles for legitimate reasons and I'm not going to blindly restore them all because you requested this. Liz02:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Done Sorry, I didn't recognize your name and didn't know that you had been unblocked. You were quite a prolific editor and I deleted many of your drafts during the time period you were blocked as they went stale. In the page history of your User talk page, there should be a record of notices from FireflyBot so you can see which drafts were due to be deleted via CSD G13. I'm happy to restore any of those articles if you give me a list of the ones you wish to continue working on. Any way, welcome back. Liz20:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
My only advice is not to sock. There is no benefit from doing so, only risks and sanctions. If you want to have an alternate account, make it a legitimate one and put a notice on both User pages identifying it as such. I think that is where you got into trouble.
Also, among editors working on recently released films, there is some kind of rivalry on being the editor who creates the article for a new film and multiple editors in this area have been indefinitely blocked for taking shortcuts like overwriting another editors' work or tagging a page for deletion and then recreating it yourself. Don't get caught up in this nonsense because, truthfully, no one is keeping score of "who got there first". Focus on quality, not speed. Liz20:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
↑↑↑This is fantastic advice; I have been tempted many times to approach you, Crafterstar, regarding your creation, abandonment, and requested restoration of drafts. I have never seen this pattern outside of editors trying to be "first" when a draft they created becomes notable. It's not a particularly well-regarded approach to article creation.-- Ponyo20:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Ponyo, there is also one other area where I see this happen and that is with hurricanes, tropical storms and tornadoes. But luckily, there is a fairly sizeable community of editors working on storms, they have created their own norms and they generally police themselves. And this has come up with some articles on elections and current events as seen on ANI and in a recent arbitration case. But the movie business is so big, prolific and announces upcoming movies years ahead of them being made, spreading across lots of countries that it is on a different scale as those other subjects. I've seen drafts kept "alive" for 3-5 years just because a film has been announced to be produced but nothing has happened on it yet. There is a lot of anticipation surrounding them, especially some big budget films and sequels. Liz20:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
The draft work is a useful process in the situations you note as the event (whether it be political, a storm, or similar) is imminent. It's a staging area where multiple editors work together in preparation to publish an article on a soon-to-be notable topic. The mass creation of drafts based on announcements is just sort of...hoarding. It really appears, to me, as an attempt at owning the creation. -- Ponyo20:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello Liz. Sorry to bother you, but I've noticed on several occasions you have closed AfDs on North Korean footballers (as delete) and then removed links to the article. The issue is that some of the links you are removing were incorrectly linking to the footballer and should have been linking to a politician of the same name. For example, in this diff you removed a valid redlink to a member of parliament who would be deemed notable under WP:NPOLITICIAN. I wouldn't say anything if this was a one-off, but it's happened repeatedly over the past year (see the history of the 2014 North Korean election article, where this has happened at least seven times). As this seems to be specifically an issue for North Korea, could you be a bit more careful when closing AfDs on North Korean footballers if the outcome is to delete? Cheers, Number5700:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
First, you are not bothering me. Thank you for bringing this issue to me but I'm not sure exactly how to respond. You say these are links are from articles deleted through AFDs and XFDcloser removes all links to deleted articles as part of its deletion process. And I'm not the only AFD closer, where are probably half dozen regular AFD admin closers and we all behave similarly, as far as I know. So, if this problem has reoccured then it's because I'm the only closer that has handled articles about North Korean footballers. The closure process doesn't make it easy to examine links to other articles to see what they are, it's kind of an "all or none" option and most (all?) closers choose to remove all links.
I also wonder how common it is that a North Korean football player has the same name as a politican. Is this really a big issue? All I can offer you as a soljution is that I skip closures of AFDs about North Korean football players but I think you will run into the same issue with any other closer who does handle them. It's just the way XFDcloser operates and closers are dependent on this editing tool. I'm sorry that I can't offer you a more elegant solution than for me to just cease closing these AFDs. Liz02:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Are you sure that these links are all removed because of AFDs? Because we see a lot of North Korean football players in PROD'd articles and that is a different situation entirely. Liz02:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Question: when using XFDcloser, do you see a list of pages you are about to edit/just edited when removing the links? Otherwise, it might be a good idea to check your own contributions after running the script, just to verify that removing the links made sense. For example, after you closed the Ri Yong-chol AfD, you made edits to the following pages:
Knowing you just deleted an article about a football player, many of those are obviously correct. However, the ones I marked with a * above are not as obvious, so you should verify whether your edit made sense and possibly self-revert. Obviously, that's not always necessary, only when the name of the deleted article could be ambiguous. And looking at your contributions, most deleted articles have far fewer incoming links, so checking if the removals made sense is even less work.
(note: in this case, Number 57 already fixed the two election pages, I fixed four others, and the last one is a list of people with that given name, so it's a correct removal.) --rchard2scout (talk) 13:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Apologies, I didn't realise it was automatically done by XFDcloser rather than you doing it. It's not a massive problem, but just as it had happened so often I thought it would be worth bringing to your attention. Perhaps it's an issue for XFDcloser and tweaking that so closers can examine the incoming links to make sure they are all relevant? I've never used it, so not sure how it works. Number5715:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Retrieving my draft titled "The Jackson 5 Us Tour"
I request for this draft titled "The Jackson 5 US Tour" that was taken down by you on October 4, 2024. I wasn't aware until now that it was lacking editing and that it was taken. I'd like my draft back. 1Skywriter (talk) 03:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Please provide a link to the deleted page. Then I can see why it was deleted. That will determine whether or not it can be restored. Thank you. Liz03:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
I was almost certain I added a reference and deproded this article. Could you check in the history to see if I did, or am I not remembering right? Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:58, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
You are right, I was wrong. Sometimes, I open up articles, each in a tab, that are due to be deleted. I saw in the page history that you added content but I didn't note that you had removed the PROD tag, this is often noted in an edit summary. But I should have refreshed my screen. Thanks for being on top of this and your work on PROD'd articles. Liz19:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Altenmann's doubling down
Hey Liz,
Thanks for attempting to intervene with @Altenmann:, who I have pinged for transparency. Unfortunately, they are clearly not getting the message that they're deep into battleground behavior. And insulting my coding ability, telling me I should be shamed by my behavior, and frankly, just throwing a temper tantrum instead of trying to actually engage in the issue, is not helping them achieve their desired outcome. Frankly, I'm surprised that they have so many edits (200k+) and think that this kind of behavior is acceptable. I think that they should be embarrassed by their behavior. I'd rather not waste ANI's time if it can be prevented. MasonGarrison01:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Sure thing, politely revert warring with cosmonauts in the category of Russian Empire is a nice and pleasant behavior. Surely you are not ashamed of your WP:OWN attitude. Your coding creates a mess in[REDACTED] category, and it is a fact, not an insult. Yes with my 200k+ non-automated edits have brought me in a contact with plenty of bullies and sometimes I am losing temper. --Altenmann>talk01:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
This is typical of my experience with this editor over the years. Every once in a while, they will post here IRATE, not displeased but seriously angry, over some random edit I made that is just typical of the editing I do, nothing out of the ordinary at all. But it drew their attention and they were not happy about it.
When I tried to discuss the situation, they might have made some parting shot but then they just moved back to continue editing like nothing had ever happened. I'm sure given their MO over their long tenure here, there is enough for an ANI complaint about civility but it would take a lot of time to track down all of the diffs and I'm sure you'd rather be editing categories. If I were you, I'd try to just shake it off and know that you are just the latest target of their displeasure and they are unlikely to be hounding you. I think especially among editors who been editing here for a long-time, they just learn to avoid disputes by keeping their distance from editors who push their buttons. No one at Misplaced Pages gets along with everyone. Liz01:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Liz, it's good to know that this is just what they do. I assume that after the CFD closes with a rename, they'll move on to their corner of the internet. And yep, you're right, I'd much rather be futzing around with categories :) MasonGarrison01:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't see a strong reason to reopen that AFD. Besides, the article hasn't been deleted, just moved to Draft space. You can work on it at Draft:E-Safety Authority and submit it to AFC. No content has been deleted. Liz04:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, RoySmith and CFA. I had a pretty grueling RFA but that was 9 years ago so maybe this wouldn't be a repeat of that experience. Liz19:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't understand, Timtrent. I didn't see any indication of a changed username and generally, when a username is changed the renamer moves their user pages to those corresponding to the new username. Liz19:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure. If it is the same one then a polite enquiry might bear fruit. I don't get very close to arcane things like renaming, I'm afraid 🇺🇦 FiddleFaddle 🇺🇦 21:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Radka Zelníčková
Hello @Liz I thought I'd answer your question here rather than on the AFD discussion as it isn't relevant to whether the article is deleted or not (it'll be not by the way). Shrug02 (talk) 00:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to my User talk page. But I don't see an answer here. And because I edit so much, I've forgotten what the question was. Liz03:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello again @Liz I've now left an answer on the page in question. I've had enough of all this business and would like to be left alone now. I will not be participating in any further AFD matters after the current ones are closed as 1 I started doing Misplaced Pages for fun not hassle and 2 the process is a biased farce based on who says what rather than facts and rule adherence. Have a great day 🙂 Shrug02 (talk) 11:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, MolecularPilot, I've never seen this barnstar before. You must have created it. There's about half a dozen of us regular AFD discussion closers, happy to play a part. Liz03:58, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
You're welcome! Yes, I did create it, because it must take so much effort for you (and the other closers) to do the pretty thankless task of reviewing ALL the AfDs that close every day and I thought a little recognition was in order. I thanked you first because from what I've you always throughly evaluate the consensus and close with reasonable ATDs that might not have been considered. So, thanks I guess! MolecularPilot05:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, if I have a bias in closing AFDs, MolecularPilot, It's not for "Keep" or "Delete", it's for a valid ATD. But I found out early on when I first started that I can't introduce an ATD, it has to come out of the discussion. So, hopefully, a participant can find a relevant article to redirect to and bring it up in the discussion. Liz05:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Deleted redirect from student mis-merging
Hi Liz,
Mülbach had been a bare stub in mainspace. Then a student-project began working on it in draft-space. It was recommended they merge the stub with the draft, which they did. But they did "stub merge+redirect to draft", rather than leaving the stub existing until the draft was ready to move to mainspace. Should the mainspace be undeleted and returned to the stub state, rather than losing mainspace content? DMacks (talk) 05:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Feel free to do whatever you think is appropriate. It was just deleted as an CSD R2, cross-namespace redirect, not because of the content. Liz06:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, DMacks, I"m trying to turn over a new leaf. I have been remiss in not replying to messages on my talk page very promptly. I was waiting until the end of the day to respond to them all and then something would come up. I'm trying a new way of responding to messages soon after they are posted. Wish me luck. Liz06:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
"Good luck!" If you're in the northern hemisphere at the moment, perhaps you can find some nice autumn leaves for turning-over or shuffling-through. DMacks (talk) 06:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
An editor you blocked
Hello Liz, you recently blocked this editor from category namespace for improper editing there, and it appears they have now transferred that same behavior to file namespace. Can you please take a look and consider taking additional administrative action? Thanks. Left guide (talk) 09:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello Liz
Dr. D. presents his compliments, respecting you to be one of the (alas, now very few) sensible and rational administrators of this community.
Since Dr. D's group members do not edit Misplaced Pages article space, he requests yous to kindly arrange with like minded admins to Revdel all references to his bodies on this project, for which he shall be obliged.
PS: that's a really cute kitten(meister).
PPS: The medium is the message SumoAvocado (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to my User talk page. First, I have no idea who Dr. D is so I wouldn't know how to search for references to him on this enormous project. If there aer specific edits you are concerned about, please provide a "diff" or link to an individual edit and I'll see whether or not it fits in with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. There usually has to be a good reason to remove content from an article (unsourced claim, BLP violation, copyright infringement, etc.) so if you could provide a reason why these mentions are unsuitable, that would be helpful. But first, you really have to first provide a real name before any action can be considered.
If you have any general questions about editing on Misplaced Pages or its policies and guidelines, please bring them to the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you advice and support. I'm not always available but there is almost always someone available at the Teahouse to address any concerns you have. Liz18:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Many thanks for the prompt revert. Here's the diff. and here's Dr.D in conversation with famous journalist and author Iftikhar Gilani. Since we presently have no intention to edit in mainspace, your welcome offer of the Teahouse is politely postponed to a future date. (Sorry for any misunderstands, English is not my first language).SumoAvocado (talk) 19:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, I see no reason to revert my comment on WP:ANI but I'm not sure that's even what you are asking of me. And you still haven't provided a name for who is this "Dr. D". I read through that link you shared and I didn't see anyone who is a "Dr." who had a last name that started with "D". Your intentions for your contributions on Misplaced Pages are unclear to me so I don't know how to respond to you. You are being very indirect and not spelling out what you want to happen. But discussions on Misplaced Pages are public and not censored as long as they don't violate our guidelines and policies. So, I guess, for the moment, this discussion is over. Liz03:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Dr. R.S. Dalvi, CEO of Hindu Raksha Dal requests Administrators of Misplaced Pages (English version) to delete all references to Hindu Raksha Dal and "Hindu News" / "Hindunews.stream" from WMF hosted computer servers. Specifically, for the present, Hindu Raksha Dal desires that the following threads be REVDELed 1 and 2 as they contain unacceptable, derogatory language and ignorant opinions about the organisation and its projects. SumoAvocado (talk) 03:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I figured out you were referring to "Rajendra Singh Dalvi". I did a search on Misplaced Pages and he is not mentioned in any article on the project. I'm not going to delete entire discussions about the Hindu News and no other admin would either. That would be censorship. Just because a discussion can contain criticism does not make it defamatory. Discussing subjects in detail is how editors come to a consensus on how to treat sources and come to decisions.
Certain privileged confidential material criminally misappropriated from a private website of Hindu News is being discussed on your website by strangers to the Hindu Raksha Dal/HRA. In these discussions highly disparaging and derogatory remarks are being made about Hindu Raksha Dal (an intensely private body) and its projects. Your editors have no cause to discuss HRD / HRA (private bodies) or its private projects, it's a blatant violation of your CoC. When an HRD rep visits your website to protest he gets blocked. When we approach WMF (in the past) they say they have no editorial control over this website. Having previously gotten these matters escalated all the way up to the Supreme Court of India (where WMF was severely rapped for its selfsame stand) on the 2024 Kolkata rape/murder victim naming issue, HRD is now left with limited options (incl. but not limited to enforcing its own CoC in place of WMF's). If complaints to Senior Administrators of this website go unheeded it only spirals the situation, especially since HRD/HRA is not your typical "rule of law abiding" aggrieved stranger coming here to complain. NB: When WMF pleaded "no censorship" to the Supreme Court of India, they were told categorically WMF would be blocked in India. Its a slippery slope. If legally ill informed Misplaced Pages editors generate content about a private Indian organisation that contravenes India's cyber, media and criminal laws , we should not be told that only US law and Misplaced Pages (English) policies like "no censorship" apply. SumoAvocado (talk) 07:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
SumoAvocado, I've already advised you to go to the Teahouse if you want to get in touch with WMF. Additional comments here, trying to itimidate me into doing what you ask, will have no effect so I see reason to continue this conversation. I do not know anything about the Indian courts, I'm just an administrator, taking care of my daily tasks and my concern is the health of the project, not your organization. I advise you not to make any legal threats which would result in a swift block of your account. Since your interest seems to be into debating and not actually contributing to this project, I'll ask you politely to move on from my User talk page and find something more productive to do with your time. Good bye. Liz07:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
We have more than one email communication from WMF Legal (eg. from WMF erstwhile counsel Michelle Paulson -Date: Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 12:27 AM-, and/or jpgordon, and/or legal@wikimedia.org "On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation") asking us to reach out directly to Misplaced Pages (English) admins in such situation. Because you are an Admin who has posted multiple messages on the Administrators Notice Board thread we are concerned with and in accordance with the afore described WMF communications to us, we are reaching out to you, and you specifically, to get those 2 threads entirely redacted / revdelled IN GOOD FAITH as contrary to US Law in addition to Indian law, as well as WMF's CoC and ToU. We are puzzled why you feel intimidated. As an Administrator of this website and its policies, surely you are obliged to follow the policies of your website and those of your media hosts which we are approaching you to enforce with the administrative tools at your disposal which are not available to us. SumoAvocado (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Invitation for Your Insight and Guidance
Hello Liz,
I am Muhammad, and while you don’t know me, I’ve noticed and greatly admire your work on improving Misplaced Pages. I’m reaching out because I’ve recently been given a 72-hour block (that's now expired), but I’m still not entirely clear on the reason behind it.
I saw your comment on my prior talk page , and it seems you may be familiar with my actions. I’m open to discussing the situation further in case there has been any misunderstanding or if I missed something. Any insight you have to help me understand the reasons behind the block would be truly appreciated.
I’ve written a response here and would be grateful if you could take a moment to review it. I’m more than willing to engage in a constructive conversation to clarify things and if I had indeed done something wrong to get 72 hours, I will take responsibility for those actions. But it's hard to take responsibility when you don't even understand the error.
If you are evading a block, please stop editing right now. Wait for your block to end and then we can talk. Block evasion can result in a much longer block for your original account, lasting weeks and months, not 72 hours. This is a short block and don't do anything to jeopardize your original account. Liz23:49, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, I'm glad to hear that your original block is over. I have posted a response to you on the User talk page of your original account, the one that got blocked. I'm sure you won't be satisfied by my comments but it's the best advice I can offer you. I'm not saying that your block wasn't a "big deal", every block is a big deal to the person who has been blocked. But if you want to continue to edit here in harmony with the community, you need to move past this block and work on improving the articles and other productive work you could do. Think less of the past and more about the positive ways you can contribute from here on out. Liz03:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I know you are more than capable of handling this incident yourself, as you have been. Sometimes, though, the protector needs protection. I hope I have not overstepped the mark here. If I have, and if I have upset you in any manner over this, first please accept my apologies, and second please ask me to withdraw the ANI report. 🇺🇦 FiddleFaddle 🇺🇦 09:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I actually only came by to thank you for offering bludgeoning advice to the Gerard Gertoux editor. The SumoAvocado behaviour offended me greatly. 🇺🇦 FiddleFaddle 🇺🇦 09:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
To be honest, Timtrent, I wasn't pleased that you brought this discussion to ANI because while I, in general, agree with removing vandals, I didn't think I need "protecting" from this particular conversation. And also I was wondering how far this editor was going to go with their demands. But I didn't object here, or at ANI, because I had ended the discussion here and I thought that this subject of threats against Misplaced Pages is bigger than me and this User talk page and my interactions with this editor. I was considering sharing this discussion on AN but that was just to inform other administrators about the revision deletion demands, not to take action against the editor. But now that NRP has identified the editor as a probable sock, if I had known that earlier, I would have blocked them myself. But I see you had good intentions when you took your action. Liz20:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Oh, no, Timtrent, no apologies are necessary. I know that you do what you do for the benefit from the project and clearly this was an attempt to exert undue influence over our discussions and content. As a woman, the language of "protection" probably strikes me differently than if I was male or gender fluid.
But I also appreciate having editors watch my user talk page because, for some reason, I seem to have a lot of socks and bad actors reach out to me, maybe it's because I'm female, I don't know. Additionally, I do try to engage with some blocked editors to help them understand why they have been blocked and perhaps that is an unwise use of my time and I should rethink that activity. Liz22:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
You may not believe this, but I had not considered your gender, your username notwithstanding. I see you as a valued colleague, no more and no less. I consider Misplaced Pages editors to be equal in every respect with each other. I think I need to stop digging this hole now!
I know there is usually a last-minute rush but at the moment we don't even have enough candidates to fill the open spots. And although several former arbs are running, the committee needs people who aren't as jaded and prone to burnout. I think you could bring the perspective of a very hard-working admin who knows what it is like to be in the trenches to the committee, something that it may be a bit thin on right now. I'm also more or less positive you'd get in if you ran.
The process really isn't so bad, you answer a bunch of questions, maybe a few people comment on your discussion page, that's pretty much it, the rest is just waiting. I expect it will be considerably easier for you than it is going to be for me. Just Step Sideways00:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I actually just posted my statement but had some glitches so if you could double-check it, that would be awesome. I noticed during the same half hour, that two other admins also posted their statements so maybe this is the beginning of the last minute rush. But thanks for the encouragement. Liz00:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Good luck, Liz! Though I'm sure JSS is right and you don't need much extra luck. There's lots of folks on standby ready to pick up the slack if you have to drop some of that hard work you do to handle ArbCom business instead. :) -- asilvering (talk) 02:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
asilvering, you know, besides repeating the horrendous experience that was my RFA, the other reason I was hesitating to file was because I greatly enjoy the work I do as an admin and it keeps me very, very busy. I'm reluctant to let that go as it provides me with little boosts of energy throughout the day. But, if I am elected, we'll talk more and maybe I can start delegating some of the projects that I spend time on to other competent administrators who might have some time on their hands (just/kidding) Liz02:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I look forward to supporting both of your candidacies @Just Step Sideways @Liz (and full disclosure, a root vegetable of whom I'm quite fond). You are exactly what ArbComm needs to move this project forward in its next decade but also amid this world mess which will lead to more CTs and not less. Good luck! StarMississippi02:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Liz. You have semiprotected ANI from editing indefinitely, which is very unique and surely not desirable. Usually it gets protected for 6 or 12 hours or a few days at most. Did you perhaps misclick and mean to semi moving the page indefinitely, which is usual, and from editing for 3 days? Bishonen | tålk09:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC).
Oh, never mind, I see you changed it as I was posting, with ECR protection for 3 hours. Mind you, I still think moving the page should be indefinitely limited to admins. Basically, nobody needs to move it. Bishonen | tålk09:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC).
That was a mistake, I meant to semi-protect it for 3 days but it sounds like even that would be too long. I'm not sure why the default duration of protection is "infinite". I didn't want to protect for only extended confirmed editors but this troll seemed to have an infinite number of accounts and reverting them was burning up our supply of editors. But it's just for 3 hours, hopefully, long enough for him to get bored and move on. But sorry for my mistake. Liz09:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
No problem, and I see you caught it yourself. The short ECR protection is novel but seems a good idea in this situation. (But, sorry to go on about it, what about the move protection? Move vandalism is quite popular, if the trolls get a chance with a major page.) Bishonen | tålk10:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC).
Books & Bytes – Issue 65
The Misplaced Pages Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024
Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Misplaced Pages Library
Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research
Hello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Hi Liz! I hope it's ok to reach out with this suggestion, you know so much more about Misplaced Pages than I do but I'm wondering if I might be able to help a little with blocked editors, considering what you've said?
I've been working on getting more experience with editing (specifically with the Typo Team) as you kindly suggested, along with some basic copy editing of random articles. I've come across editors who were otherwise decent, but became embroiled in a dispute to the point that they lost perspective & wouldn't drop the stick.
They were angry because they cared about their work but let it get the best of them & just needed someone to acknowledge their feelings, so I continued on their Talk page to say if I could help. I'm glad to say that it definitely did and the stick was dropped - you can see the discussion link in the Barnstar on my Talk page if you want to see an example, or I can post a direct link for you?
If you come across someone who you think might benefit from a similar positive message on their Talk, feel free to let me know and I'll be happy to do so! I realise how busy you are (and will be, I can see everyone's rooting for you for Arb!). Needless to say, I'm too inexperienced to discuss the reasons for a block, policies, other people's actions etc., so I absolutely will not discuss that. If things go awry I'll immediately stop and seek advice.
TLDR: If you come across someone who might need a positive post please let me know; similarly if you don't think this is a good idea then I completely understand, I just wanted to throw this out there to see if I can help 🙂 Blue-Sonnet (talk) 05:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
I moved your comment to start a new discussion as it had nothing to do with the rather intense conversation that you placed this in the middle of. Please do not insert content that is not relevant to a discussion, especially in the middle of an ongoing conversation. I don't think you have enough editing experience to be advising other editors (maybe when you are extended confirmed) but I encourage your efforts to deescalate situations. We always need more peacemakers as long as they aren't telling other, more experienced editors what to do. That will not be appreciated. Liz05:56, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Bojan Ilievski (deleted page)
Hello,
Two years ago I created a page for Bojan Ilievski after his debut for the Macedonia National Team. You deleted it, saying he is irrelevant and it was only one friendly game. He is now summoned again by the national team for the upcoming UEFA National League fixtures. Is there a possibility to bring back his page?
I assume you are talking about the article that was deleted through Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Bojan Ilievski? First, I didn't say anything about the quality of the article or the notability of the subject, I just assessed the consensus arising out of the discussion and closed it. I have no opinion on the subject.
Secondly, I'm willing to restore this article to Draft space or User space but you MUST submit the draft to Articles for Creation for review. If you just move it back to main space, it will be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4 which is for articles deleted through AFD that have been recreated. It will then be much, much more difficult to restore it a second time. Are you willing to do this? If not, then it is better to write a new article in Draft space from scratch. Thank you. Liz19:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Restoration of Ivy Wolk
Hi Liz. Still wondering if you could possibly restore my userspace draft for Ivy Wolk so that I could get a look at it and possibly move some things to the page that exists there now. Thanks! benǝʇᴉɯ18:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
First, sorry that I didn't follow up your original request that is somewhere in the middle of this User talk page. I typically just look at the bottom of this page and can miss updates to older discussions.
Secondly, as you mention, there is an article, Ivy Wolk, in main space that was moved from Draft space. Is there yet another version of this article that was deleted? Please provide me with a link to the page of the deleted article so I can look into the circumstances of its deletion. Thank you. Liz19:03, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Totally fine! The draft I'm talking about was located at User:Benmite/Ivy Wolk. I moved it to mainspace before it got deleted so I'm not sure if the page's history will still be intact, but let me know if it is. benǝʇᴉɯ19:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, I've been busy with other work on the project. Here's what I can see, there is only one deleted edit at User:Benmite/Ivy Wolk so there is no content on that page. However, there was content that you made at Ivy Wolk which had gotten deleted when the article was tagged for speedy deletion CSD A7, G4. I have restored your edits now that this article has gone through a deletion review. I did not restore deleted content that was removed through an AFD discussion deletion and I don't think I could, but that is not what you are asking for. However, even though this content has been returned to the page history, do not revert this article back to your original edits. The edits remain there as a source of content you could draw from to add to the new version of this article but do not just restore this article back to a version of the one you created. That would erase all of the work that has been done since this new version was created. Make sense? Thank you. Liz23:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Recent revert
Hi Liz,
There has been major disruption in the article and the version you restored for maintaining the Afd tag is about a different politician. It was earlier about a different person who is serving as a minister in Government of Bihar. But, now the version you restored is about a poltician, who is not notable.Adamantine123 (talk) 16:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
The AFD might have the same outcome that you were trying to achieve with this article. It's just that once an AFD has been opened, it can't be bypassed. Tags should not be removed or the article redirected, moved to Draft space or blanked until the AFD is closed. Your best bet is to go to the AFD discussion, if you haven't already, and make your case there. If it is persuasive, you'll probably achieve the results you want. But the decision has to come out of the AFD discussion consensus. Liz00:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
I was surprised, too, so I inquired about the block at Primefac's User talk page even though I expected the reply that I did receive. But Star Mississippi is correct, ArbCom blocks are not discussed publicly so we'll just have to accept what is as reality. But know, if Saqib wants to be unblocked, they can appeal their block, also, to ArbCom for review. Liz00:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Re , I think it was clear enough there wasn't going to be any more bickering, so I wonder about your comment. I'll take minor offense to the half of it directed at me. No big deal. The main point there was that GoodDay was in the wrong from the start of that issue, and never said as much (nor did anyone else). Cheers, ―Mandruss☎12:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Mandruss, I apologize if you found the word "bickering" as implying that you didn't have a valid reason for opening a complaint. That's not what I meant. By bickering, what I typically mean is a discussion that goes back and forth between two editors who disagree, that is not moving towards a resolution. I closed the discussion because I've found is that, often, on ANI, the longer a complaint stays open, the more frequently it receives unhelpful comments from the peanut gallery that watches noticeboards. I also see that the longer a complaint is open, the more likely it is that sanctions will be imposed on one or both of the editors involved and I did see that as an appropriate outcome to this dispute. You outlined your disagreement, there was a response, GoodDay withdrew from participating on that article which seemed like it resolved the problems you cited. If it instead continues on a different article, you are welcome to open a new complaint and cite this one for reference.
I see my job as an administrator on ANI as trying to resolve and deescalate disputes and so this was my mindset when I closed this discussion. Liz23:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. I thought you were referring to bickering between me and GoodDay, which had clearly ended some time before your closure. withdrew from participating on that article which seemed like it resolved the problems you cited No, the problem was resolved (far too late) by GoodDay's self-revert. Their participation at the article was never an issue—as I said in the ANI thread. ―Mandruss☎00:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Except that you invented a new header that I didn't add. I don't think of this as a "controversy", other editors are just sharing their opinions. Look at any long-term editor's User talk page and you'll see a mixture of compliments and complaints. And, believe me, this is not a "scolding" and I definitely didn't start anything. You moved my comment down from the middle of the page, where no one would have noticed it, to its place at the bottom of the page, where editors are trained to look for new messages.
You seem to be ignoring the advice that experienced editors are offering you which is to focus more on improving articles and less on the "discussion" aspects of Misplaced Pages. We are an encyclopedia, not a forum or social media channel. Please focus less on socializing and more on article improvement. Liz02:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
I can not restore an article that was deleted through the AFD deletion discussion process. Your best bet is to start a new article in Draft space. If you think my closure was an incorrect reading of the consensus of participants, you can make an appeal at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. Liz06:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, thank you for sharing your DRN experience on the ANI complaint. I've been reading over the pages related to this subject and it seems like folks are basically in agreement now. It helps when you remove sockpuppets from the conversation. Liz18:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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.
It's not like there is a big red button that an admin or arbitrator can push to cause a blackout to happen. Actually, any admin with the interface-administrator bit could do this, in various ways, depending exactly on what was meant by "blackout", like what level of blacking out the community intended. If the idea were extreme, to literally make the content unavailable except to technical experts, then changing the CSS of most of the important divs and other elements to display: none; would do the trick. If it were to visually hide the content at first but still make it accessible with a little effort (and have no effect on users of screen readers), a common means, used for spoilers and such at various websites, is to make the text the same color as the background so that it has to be selected with the mouse (causing a highlight color) before it can be read. A third approach is simply visible effect; the original web blackouts (which I helped originate back in the '90s) did not render the page unreadable at all, but simply changed content and most other site elements to black with light-colored text on top, so it was stark and a major change (well, except maybe for some goth scene and horror film and death-metal music sites, heh). The usual approach is then to provide a message spelling out why things have gone black, to raise awareness about whatever the issue is.
I argued in the RfC why this was a poor idea for something like this in particular (complicated legal questions few would understand, yet an activism method designed to generate an immediate "no!" reaction, with a target, which in this case would basically be a WMF hand attacking to cut off WMF's own nose to spite its face). — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 12:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate the technical explanation. It is disconcerting to me that one admin, with a certain degree of privileges, could cause a blackout to happen. This is like blanking the main page, there should be safeguards in place. I don't think this is how things should work, that one person could unilaterally make this happen. Liz04:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, they could do it and then get immediately desysopped for vandalism or something akin to it (mega-POINT?). Ultimately, for any "big deal" there will be some gatekeepers whom we have to trust. Someone somewhere has to be able to edit the "interface" pages including our CSS specifications, just as a technical matter. I suppose that the "pending changes" system or something like it could be bent to putting any such change on hold until another interface-admin approved it, but I'm not sure how much that would impede interface-admins' normal workflow. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 05:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
cand q
Thank you for standing for arbitrator. I am far away from it all (travel, mourning), not in the mood, so just an informal question you can answer or ignore:
Oh, Gerda! You are one of my favorite editors and are such a positive presence on the project. But I really do not have strong opinions on infoboxes and I don't really know what your take is on that long-ago arbitration case. Sometimes, infoboxes can provide a useful summary of information for biographical or historical articles and sometimes, they are completely unnecessary. ARBCOM doesn't rule on content decisions or MOS issues but on disruption caused by editors so I just hope that if there are still disputes about infoboxes, they can be resolved at the appropriate noticeboard or policy talk page and not erupt into a dispute that finds its way to an arbitration case request.
I'm sorry I can't give you a more definitive answer but I really am neutral on infoboxes and would support whatever decision a consensus of editors has come to on an article talk page. But I support content creators all the way! Liz05:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, but sorry, I don't think you got the question. There was an arbcase in 2013, but the "contentious topic" came in a later one. Do we still need it? Look at discussions on the talk of 5 composers and tell me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
November was rich in sadness and happiness for me, expressed in music. Regarding my question, I found one so far who looked into the matter and didn't stay at the surface, Simonm223. There are two composers on the Main page today, Siegfried Thiele and Aaron Copland. I find the response of my friend Jerome Kohl to a question on Copland's article talk promising. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Today's story comes from a DYK about a concert that fascinated me, and you can listen! For my taste, the hook has too little music - I miss the unusual scoring and the specific dedication - but it comes instead with a name good for viewcount. I'd still like to know what you think about the Copland posts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. - I can report happily that the Barber situation was resolved. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
@Liz I emailed you hours ago explaining the situation, and have just had to go to Oversight again to request suppression of the ANI thread where you and @Explicit disclosed the supressed username. Utterly stupid behaviour. qcne(talk)13:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
I published an article about an academic journal, Functional Diamond, almost a year ago, which you deleted in Jan this year for the reason that the journal is not notable enough. After a year's progress, now the journal has been indexed in ESCI. So, I think it has reached the requirements and hope you could restore the article. Thank you very much :)
Can you provide me with a link to the deleted article? Then I can look into the circumstances of the deletion which will impact how or if I can help you. Just write ]. Thank you. Liz18:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
DoneFunctional Diamond was deleted as a Proposed deletion which can be restored upon editor request so I have done so. However, I know the editor who tagged this article for proposed deletion and they are likely to start an AFD deletion discussion on this article in the near future. I recommend editing it in order to improve the article and address any problems stated in the PROD tag which you can see in the page history. Good luck! Liz02:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I just saw this only now. Indexing in ESCI is not enough to pass NJournals (and GNG even less). I am therefore taking this to AfD. --Randykitty (talk) 12:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz
Just a quick note to say I hope you're ok after those inappropriate and disrespectful comments at ANI. I want to put on the record that I and many others appreciate your work here, particularly in AfD, PRODs and categorisation. Explicit also does important work which is why it was pretty disappointing to see that whole mess at ANI. AusLondonder (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, actually, I'm just getting up and I haven't looked at ANI since the complaint was posted so I haven't seen anything new that was added to it. But this has been simmering a while, at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review, several times they have called for me to resign and they were so vitriolic on my User talk page years ago, that I asked them to stop posting here except for required messages. After 11 years, they are the only person I've asked to stop posting here and that includes trolls! But, my mistake, I haven't been collecting diffs over the years so depending on what they say, it could take a while for me to defend myself. I'll head over there in a few minutes. Thanks though for your support. Liz18:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
a social work book collection
i recently found a website started by a social worker academic which is a database of open source (freely available) social work textbooks on every course a social worker would need to take from entry all the way to an advanced practice degree. will be useful for building Misplaced Pages articles. also please spread the word if any social workers you know would benefit. URL: https://opensocialwork.org/textbooks/RJJ4y7 (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Thanks DreamRimmer. We generally make useful of the lists created by SDZeroBot but it always helps to have multiple sources of information plus you list the drafts last edited by a bot which is invaluable. Thank you for your work and for letting me know about it. Liz09:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/1993 in Croatian television
Okay, well thanks for letting me know. I've been editing for over 11 years now and have so many scripts installed that I am not always cognizant of how my view of a page is different from another editor's. But it's amazing how often editors will suggest a target page for a redirect that is also a redirect. I guess they don't go and check it out first. Liz20:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't patrol RFPP much but I don't really see vandalism occurring, just overlinking some words. Is there more that I'm not seeing here? Liz20:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Oh, this is very embarrassing to me. For CSD G13s, we use lists produced by SDZeroBot that, a week ahead of time, produces a list of upcoming stale deletes. See User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon. I regularly keep 7 tabs open for the subsequent days of the week that are coming up. Accidentally, last night, I started deleting stale drafts that were due to expire on 11/25 UTC, instead of 11/24 UTC. I was a day off because I had closed one of the tabs. After a couple of hours, I realized my mistake and just restored all of the drafts I deleted a day early. It probably makes no difference at all, I mean, no one has edited these pages in 6 months but you should always check the page history to make sure there are no recent edits to the drafts.
Given the discussion on ANI last week, I didn't want to delete any page early since that was mentioned as a problem. So, go ahead, there is no reason not to delete these pages now that it actually IS 11/25 UTC. But I appreciate you checking in with me. Over the past 5 years I've been working with CSD G13s, this has only happened to me one other time so I don't expect this to be a regular occurrence. Liz03:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
That GalaxyBot report is very, very new. It's only been around for a day or two and you can see DreamRimmer announcing it right here. It was originally a list to report drafts whose last edit was by a bot, that wouldn't show up on the SDZeroBot report, but it's turning out to be useful in other ways, too. Liz03:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
HI Liz, My Self Sujit Kumar Mishra, I'm author and actor. Last time year I have created wiki page for me. but that time lot's of mistake and my profile was deleted by you I think. So Now I want to create my new wiki pages. How Can I Start Pls. Guide me, Thanks Advance. Sujit0601 (talk) 14:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Sujit0601, can you give me a link to the deleted page? Perhaps it can be restored. As for advice on editing on Misplaced Pages, I'd recommend bringing your questions to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is a forum to help new editors with learning about editing here. I don't really spend time advising editors on content creation. Liz02:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Quarry help
Hi Liz. You seem to be familiar with Quarry? I'm rather hopeless with SQL. Could this be used to produce a list of articles created (excl redirects) by an individual user? I got a bit carried away trimming my watchlist and want to make sure I have them all captured. xtools.wmcloud.org doesn't work due to edit count and I can't find any other way. If not, are you aware of any other tools? No urgency at all for this .. only if/when you have time. Thanks. Jevansen (talk) 23:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to my user talk page. Am I familiar with Quarry? Well, yes and no. I run queries on Quarry throughout the day and so I make use of it a lot. But as for the queries themselves, the ones I use were all written by more technically-savvy editors than I. That happens a lot on Quarry, an editor will find a query that produces some report they are interested in and then they "fork" it or make their own copy.
One way to find editors that might know more about writing queries than I, is by looking at a list of recently run queries and see which editors are using Quarry. If you are friends with one of the editors who appear, you might try approaching them. But from looking at this list, I see DreamRimmer who just wrote an awesome query that helped us find expiring draft that had last been edited by a bot. Perhaps they would be able to whip up a query to help you.
You also might try Misplaced Pages:Request a query. I once wanted to find out how many Teahouse invitations I had posted (which was in the tens of thousands) and someone there helped me with it.
As for Watchlists, I'm the LAST editor to give advice there as I have over 200,000 pages on my Watchlist. I made the mistake of checking off a box that added every page I edit to my Watchlist which makes it practically useless to me now. I'm not even sure how to get it down to a manageable 10-20,000 page list.
Hi @ Liz. I hope you’re doing well. Recently I created this article about a Radhikaraje Gaekwad is one of the most progressive Maharani of India. Can you please review it? This has gone unnoticed for a while.Can you please tell me when and how will this article appear as the top search result when someone will search the topic? Radhikaraje Gaekwaddsrprj (talk) 20:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you are asking for here. Radhikaraje Gaekwad has been a main space article since July 2024. When editors ask for a "review", it's typically of a draft article and they are asking if it is ready to move to main space. Main space articles are only reviewed by our New Page Patrollers and it doesn't look like any have examined it yet. But after all of these months that have passed, it's unlikely to be reviewed by a NPP now because they review recently created articles.
As for Google search results, that's nothing Misplaced Pages has control over. But you might get better advice than I can offer if you pose your question at the Teahouse, there are a lot of experienced editors there and maybe one of them knows more than I about search engine results.
If the problem is you want this article deleted, I suggest looking at WP:PROD or WP:AFD which can give you guidance on tagging an article for deletion. Liz02:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
response
it IS relevant.[REDACTED] has a shortage of articles on many important concepts in the social work profession.
my purpose in sharing the link was to jumpstart the building of[REDACTED] articles in this aria.
and since the "wikiproject social work" is pretty much dead, I'm enlisting the help of wikiprojects sociology and psychology which are the closest academic disciplines to social work.
what else should i do ? RJJ4y7 (talk) 19:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Is it necessary to promptly and systematically remove all links to articles deleted at PROD? E.g. It makes it much harder to fully restore these articles in the event they are deleted in error (which happens frequently at PROD IME). ~Kvng (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
I hope you are having a good week. This is a more complicated question than it appears. It started when I first became an admin in 2015 and I was instructed that when I deleted a page, I should remove all of the red links. So, that's been my practice for the past 9 years. But lately, for PROD deletions (it doesn't seem to come up with AFD deletions), I've been asked to not just leave the red links but to go to each article and remove all of the references to the deleted article completely. Since some articles are linked to dozens of related articles, this could be very time-intensive additional work to do when you are focused on admin tasks, like I am.
I'd question you on two points: Is it really that hard, if a PROD'd article is restored, to undo my edits? Is it that they are hard to find amidst my long Contributions list? They are usually mentioned in my edit summaries and my guesstimate is that only about 1 out or 20 PROD'd articles is later restored. Secondly, I'm not sure what you mean by "deleted in error" for a PROD'd article. Are you simply asserting that, if you had known about these tagged articles you would have removed the PROD tag? Because all admins I know who review PROD'd articles make sure they have not been PROD'd or to AFD before so I'm not sure what you are referring to as an "error". Additionally, I'm not the only admin who reviews and deletes PROD'd articles so if you want this unlinking behavior to end, it should probably be discussed at Misplaced Pages talk:Proposed deletion.
Can you tell me where you receive these directions to delete links and mentions as part of deletion?
By error I mostly mean that WP:ATD has not been respected as I believe was the case with 8-N-1 recently. I have suspended my WP:PRODPATROL activities because it is not a workload I can sustain. When I have been active, I tend to deprod over 30% of proposals. Your assessment is 5%. I wonder why there is such a big discrepancy here. ~Kvng (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
First, I appreciate the work you do with PROD'd articles. They don't get the kind of attention that articles nominated for AFD discussions receive. CSD-tagged articles and pages receive even less attention and are more difficult to restore than PRODs but that's another discussion that can occur at WT:CSD one day. I'm sorry you can't sustain your PROD patrolling as we only have a few other editors who keep up with PROD'd articles and then tend to focus on specific types of articles like ones about Olympians or films. Unfortunately, we don't have many "generalists" like yourself.
As for numbers, we are talking about apples and oranges here. Your figure is the number of tagged articles that you have de-PROD'd. I was talking about the number of articles and files that are deleted through Proposed deletion that are end up being restored through WP:REFUND or through a request to the deleting administrator. Also, I said my figure was a guesstimate that is just based on how many articles I delete as PRODs vs. how many articles I'm asked to restore. So, I wouldn't put any money on my figure.
That makes sense. I've never tried to assess how many prodded articles are restored (not an easy task for a non-administrator). I'm surprised it is 1 in 20. That means that as many as 1 in 6 iffy prods are being restored. I assumed that having to make a REFUND request and the near cloak of invisibility on deleted articles would provide a higher barrier than that. I don't know whether to be encouraged or discouraged by this information. ~Kvng (talk) 15:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Done An editor can appeal to the admin who deleted the page but also, as Kvng advises, WP:REFUND is possible and you might get a quicker response there. Liz20:57, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
I know, that's why I removed the speedy deletion tag. It still needs some "parent" categories added to it. Our categories are in a hierarchy so what would be the logical categories that it would be a "child" or? It shouldn't be too difficult as species/genus also are sorted into hierarchies themselves. Liz21:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Greetings, Talk page stalkers!
Hello, all,
I seem to have quite a few editors who have this User talk page on their Watchlists and you often help me out by supplying answers to queries either before I can get to them or when I don't know the exact answer to the question. But now I'm writing directly to you to encourage your participation in an annual election on the English Misplaced Pages.
This is the last weekend of Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024. Please take a moment to review the prospective candidates' statements, scan over the candidates' answers to questions posed to them, if you want, browse through some of the voter guides created by your fellow editors and, if you have formed any opinions, cast your vote. Your options for each candidates are "Support", "Oppose" or "Abstain"...Abstains are not included in determining the level of support for a candidate. Voting is open until 23:59 UTC, 2 December 2024, this Monday (3 days from now). Depending on where you live, this UTC time could correspond to 4 pm, 7 pm or 10 pm (Monday) or even 3 am, 6 am or 9 am (Tuesday) so check your time zone and clocks.
But here is your annual chance to cast your vote for the future arbitration committee members. Voter eligibility is outlined right here. Typically, I think elections draw between 1,000-2,000 participating editors so it's a fraction of our active editors. Consider your options and if you choose to participate, than please do so before Monday, midnight UTC, Dec. 2nd. Thank you for reading, now return to your regularly scheduled editing routine. Liz22:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Just curious, I dream of horses, is this election just a distraction from the editing work you prefer to spend your time on or is not voting a "protest vote" because you think the whole thing is political? And if you don't want to answer, that's fine, too. Liz02:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
It's not a matter of "wasting space", it is just not an urgent matter than needs the attention of the entire admin community. If this had been persistent vandalism, then it would have been suitable for you to report it at WP:AIV, if it was an incidence of edit-warring, go to WP:ANEW, if you believe it was a case of sockpuppetry, file a case at WP:SPI, if it was an ongoing dispute that you cannot seem to resolve, then WP:ANI might have been appropriate if talking to another editor hadn't worked. But WP:AN is for issues affecting the admin corps or for certain other issues like a request from a banned editor to be unbanned from the project. Like many areas of this project, it takes a while to figure out where to go to find an answer to a problem.
This incident, however, was just 2 rather odd edits from a new editor but they weren't disruptive or damaging to the project. Instead of coming to AN, you could have tried talking to the editor or alerting an admin on their User talk page. But it definitely wasn't urgent and it's likely that this editor won't return to edit on Misplaced Pages. We get a lot of new accounts that are created, make one or two edits, and then leave. And, surprisingly, most accounts that are created don't make any edits at all!
You might want to look over Misplaced Pages:Noticeboards to see the variety of places you can go for help. I'm sorry if it seems a bit overwhelming but we have a lot of noticeboards broken down by the nature of the problem that is being discussed. Finally, any time you bring a complaint to a noticeboard about another editor, you have to notify them of the discussion. On the noticeboard, a code should be displayed that you can use or you can just leave a personal note that you write.
If you have any other questions about noticeboards and when you should use them, please bring them to the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you advice, support and a second opinion. Have a good weekend. Liz21:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz. I see you removed the PROD from David Prager. I used to think it was for one-time use, but when I've recently double-checked, I'm not finding such restrictions, only restrictions on reverting and edit warring. Am I missing something? - Hipal (talk) 20:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
According to WP:PROD, PROD is one-shot only: It must not be used for pages PRODed before or previously discussed at AfD or FfD.. This article was PROD'd (see here, and then de-PROD'd (see here), in May 2007 so the article is not eligible to be re-PROD'd. In fact, no article can be PROD'd more than once unless the tag used is actually a BLPPROD which is for BLPs that have no references, citations or external links. I hope this explains my decision to remove the tag. This only means that, if you wish to see this article deleted, you must nominate it for a discussion at WP:AFD. Liz21:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
@Hipal (talk page watcher) Just to add in my opinion, PROD is good for checking if a low-quality, abandoned article is actually abandoned. If it is, it gets refundably deleted. If it isn't, it goes through AfD.
This is why I am so eager to convince editors to use Twinkle to tag pages for deletion, because Twinkle will leave a relevant edit summary stating that it was posting a PROD tag. It's easy to see when you are looking at the page history. But we have some senior editors who like to manually tag pages for deletion and they do not always leave a helpful edit summary stating what they did so sometimes you have to check all edits that are of a certain size to see if they were PROD-taggings. Liz23:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
I've been meaning to set up a better editing environment for myself that includes Twinkle. (Yes, I still use WikiBlame and I miss reFill and it's predecessors.) I'm fairly good with the edit summaries at least. --Hipal (talk) 19:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Raleigh Memorial Auditorium
Hi! I saw that you are the editor that deleted the Raleigh Memorial Auditorium article. I was wondering if you would be able to undo that, or provide the old body from the previous article so that I can add that in when making a new article under the auditorium's new name "Martin Marietta Center for the Performing Arts"? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 04:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Liz. Willthacheerleader18, you are better off starting from scratch. Since its creation, the page has been almost entirely lacking in independent verifiable sources or any real facts to show that it meets the notability criteria. It's also promotional in tone (recently enhancing the space to blend state-of-the-art technical amenities with traditional theatre traditions... a unique experience perfect for ballet, opera, concerts, and comedy... this space is also the idea blank slate for video shoots, meetings, and corporate luncheons) and a substantial copyright violation of the theatre's website. In any case, the G12 precludes restoration as a draft. Jimfbleak - talk to me?13:46, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Maybe you can explain WP:REDLINK and MOS:BIRTHDATE to Robin82346? They won't listen to me, and they've been deleting red links with the editsummary Fixed dead link. Many of their edits are subpar, and many of them should be reverted. Polygnotus (talk) 01:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
About the categories of North Indian and South Indian descent.
Greetings,
I noticed that you placed a speedy deletion tag on the categories Category:American people of South Indian descent and Category:American people of North Indian descent. I would like to offer some reasons why these categories should be retained, as they highlight important aspects of diversity within the broader Indian-American community:
Recognition of Cultural and Regional Diversity:
India is an incredibly diverse country with distinct regional identities, languages, cuisines, traditions, and cultural practices. Categorizing individuals of South Indian and North Indian descent helps acknowledge these unique aspects within the diaspora, which otherwise might be overlooked in broader, generalized categories.
Better Representation:
These categories allow for a more granular understanding of how various communities contribute to American society. For example, South Indian Americans have made significant contributions in fields like technology and classical arts, while North Indian Americans are prominent in areas like politics and Bollywood-inspired media.
Facilitating Research and Accessibility:
Scholars, journalists, and readers looking to explore specific contributions or experiences of South Indian or North Indian communities in the U.S. will find such categorization invaluable. It ensures that resources and information are easier to locate and study.
Reflecting Diaspora Identity:
Many Indian Americans identify strongly with their regional heritage (e.g., Tamil, Kannada, Punjabi, or Gujarati). These categories validate and reflect the lived experiences and identities of people within the diaspora.
Consistency with Other Ethnic Subcategories:
Misplaced Pages frequently recognizes subcategories for other ethnic or national groups, such as Category:American people of Basque descent or Category:American people of Scots-Irish descent. The proposed categories are consistent with this practice of nuanced representation.
I believe these categories enrich Misplaced Pages’s diversity and inclusivity by acknowledging the varied and vibrant backgrounds within the Indian-American community. I hope this perspective provides a reason to reconsider the deletion proposal.
Looking forward to your response! SavetheSouthofIndia (talk) 16:19, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
I have no idea what this message is supposed to mean. Why are reposting a message from May 2024 on my User talk page? What are you asking for? Liz02:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
I have no idea either; you can contact the original commenter. I was just moving a message that had been misplaced on the wrong page in case it meant anything. Passengerpigeon (talk)03:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Deletion of Jayson Sherlock on Misplaced Pages
Hi there Liz! My name is Jayson Sherlock and I'm a musical artist and have been on Misplaced Pages for many years, I have many fans worldwide who use Misplaced Pages to find out information about me. I have no offensive material on my page and would never accept anything of that nature. I hope you will reinstate my page so my fans can continue to learn more about me. Thank you so very much. Blessings, Jayson. 115.64.107.101 (talk) 07:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Before I can say yes or no, I need to see why the article was deleted. Please provide me with a link to the deleted page. THank yuo. Liz07:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Regarding that EE fellow over at ANI
Would you be willing to entertain the notion that it's someone related to the recent ArbCom case? I have filed an SPI request yesterday (under a different IP, as my home IP granted by my ISP is dynamic), but it seems that the request was shot down by an admin before it could have been reviewed.
I have been detailing that account for a while now and with their recent harassment by copypasting a CTOP warning (intended for themselves) to their victim (which is reminiscent of their behaviour on the Japanese wiki), I am confident to say that it is the very same person behind it, from the topics involved to the account they're (currently) harassing, as well as the edit timelines between the 2 (1 has been active, while the other has stopped completely). I have also sent an email with updated info regarding this to the CU team, perhaps you should ring them up regarding this.
On a final note, previously I was told off by users with something along the lines of "that misconduct on non-EN wikis aren't indicative of a user's behaviour on EN", I would like to think otherwise, misconduct is misconduct and a leopard never changes its spots. 14.192.215.18 (talk) 11:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Liz! I was wondering if you could RevDel this diff that I made to my userpage (and the first edit of my userpage) in November of 2020, it unfortunately has my real name in it and I don't want to be self-doxxed on Misplaced Pages, especially since I'd assume people go to "first diffs" of pages just to see how they've changed over time. Thanks! EF17:15, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Hey there, I saw that you handled one of these for EF5, and I was wondering if you could get everything from this diff back to the beginning of the user page, and for the same reasons.
Done And I took care of 2 edits on your User talk page, too. But there is a message in your talk page archives you're going to want to remove as well. Liz19:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
I'll get that one; is there anyway to RD the name from my talk page history or am I just going to have to live with it?
And what about the redirect from your previous account? Do you want that deleted as a CSD G7? Liz21:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Yes. The reason I didn't say anything is because of the renaming policy, where it says something about linking to previous names. As long as it's OK to delete that, I would love to.
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Liz! I saw you made edits on the Simple Misplaced Pages. I have no idea what site is that, but you said it is your name. This is a famous convicted scammer with the fake agency for bots and fake accounts online.All the articles there are paid and fake and you can see that when you check them. https://simple.wikipedia.org/Michael_Graziano
I am really not well acquained with the Simple English Misplaced Pages and how to nominate articles for deletion. Every Wikimedia project has their own system. But I do know that Vermont is an administrator on the Simple English Misplaced Pages. I'd recommend posting a request on their Simple User talk page] and see if they can look into this matter for you. But admin privileges are not transferable so I am just a basic editor on that project and I don't visit it very often. Good luck! Liz20:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
I have to be careful when discussing this editor as we have had conflicts in the past. It's not an accident that they happened across this draft deletion. I'm sure they will be reading this discussion, too.
I'll just say, thank you for addressing the mistake so quickly. All systems like bots have errors and the important element is to note when they happen and fix them promptly which it looks like you did. Thank you for your efforts to be responsive and for creating GalaxyBot. Liz02:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
Hey. You left some comments in this discussion in November 2024. That discussion was eventually archived and no actions were taken. However, that same editor wrote this edit summary yesterday, which is once again targeted at me. Actions by administrators must be taken, because this has been going on for far too long. – sbaio20:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
That wasn't a polite edit summary, I'll admit, but why on Earth are you editing a draft that this editor created when you have a history of disputes with them? Stop looking at their contribution history and just keep distance between the two of you. I'm not going to sanction this editor for snapping at you when you came to a draft they created and were working on and chose to edit it, given the past history between you two. Don't monitor each other. Just work on your own projects. Liz22:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
First of all, that draft was largely abandoned about five months. In addition, that draft is a WP:CFORK of multiple pages that have all that information. And I see that editor's contributions, because there are some pages on my watchlist that are sometimes edited by that particular editor. The "snapping" has been going on for more than a year and it all started when I tried to explain about WP:DATERET, which that editor ignored. So yes, I have a very good reason to look at history, because someone is getting away by constantly making personal attacks and breaking guidelines/policies. – sbaio22:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I PRODded this article on November 26 and then the page creator proceeded to remove the PROD template, which led to the category for the proposed deletion being deleted (by you). What should I do here? Cutlass23:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm going to need more information here. The category for the day's proposed deletions (like Category:Proposed deletion as of 27 November 2024 for today) is deleted at the end of the UTC day when all tagged articles and files have either been deleted or de-PROD'd. It's a maintenance category and the day has passed. You must mean a different category. Can you provide a link to the category you are concerned about? Liz23:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Cutlass, once an article has been de-PROD'd, you can't PROD it again. A PROD happens only once. An editor removing the PROD tag doesn't need a good reason to remove the tag or offer any reason at all. You'll need to bring this article to WP:AFD if you are still seeking its deletion. Liz01:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Anyone can remove a PROD tag, the article creator, a registered editor, a random IP editor. I think you are thinking of CSD Speedy deletion, for CSDs, the page creator can not remove a CSD tag. And no one can remove an AFD/RFD/CFD/etc. tag until the discussion is closed. I hope this clear things up. Liz01:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
@Cutlass: Prod is for deletions which are relatively uncontroversial–if anyone disagrees with the tag, then by definition the deletion is not uncontroversial. --Finngall06:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Muhabbat Gumshuda Meri
Seeking some direction on this deletion discussion. The main reference being argued for showing notability was discussed here where even one of the keep votes suggested it needs additional consideration, and here where there is clear consensus that it is not reliable. CNMall41 (talk) 07:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
I also did not want to taint the discussion but this user who voted keep is awaiting behavioral review at SPI. Was hoping they would have been blocked before the end of the discussion but SPI appears to be busy. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you are asking me to do here. Reconsider the AFD closure? Even if Sunuraju is judged to be a sock, I don't know if they would be a sockmaster or a sockpuppet and that would affect whether or not their AFD argument was struck. I'm not going to judge evidence on an SPI when a checkuser has been requested and, unfortunately, SPI is usually backlogged. And I wouldn't be surprised if there are some open cases from October that haven't been closed yet! And Sunuraju wasn't identified as a sock in the first two instances of this SPI in November that were closed so it is far from clear whether they would be identified as a sock in the current open investigation.
But even if Sunuraju's AFD argument was struck (and it wasn't even an argument so I didn't give it any weight), then I still think there was enough support for a Keep of this article or, at the least, a No consensus closure and the Keep arguments relied on more than the Youlin Magazine reference. Are you considering taking this to Deletion review? Liz19:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, Liz. I am not asking based on the SOCK. I think I am mentioning it because of the SOCK activity that we see in these pages and don't want one of their keep votes to influence others to vote keep. The SPI was just re-opened which is a separate issue so please disregard me even mentioning it.
I don't feel like wasting time with a deletion review. You made the best decision based on the information presented so not questioning why you closed it. I think that I should have at least left a comment prior to close about the discussion with Youlin not being considered reliable by the film taskforce. This could have possibly led to a no-consensus at the least but not sure. So no, I won't be at DRV as you made the decision based on the information presented. Maybe hoping you could turn it into a no-consensus based on the new information about the source being unreliable. If not, that is fine as well. Cheers! --CNMall41 (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Currently empty category
Hi Liz,
you put a speedy deletion tag on Category:Peruvian companies established in 2011 because it's currently empty. The problem is: I've detected that someone created Cosco Shipping Ports Chancay Perú S.A.. I then created this category according to the model of other already existing categories Peruvian companies established in yyyy, and added the 2011 category to this new article. After this, another fellow wikipedian moved the new article from mainspace to draftspace where it's now awaiting revision: Draft:Cosco Shipping Ports Chancay Perú S.A.. So that emptied my category.
So what should I do? Wait whether the revision will be successful and then create my speedy-deleted category again? Remove the speedy deletion tag because I assume the new article will be moved to mainspace again soon?
Empty categories are easy! You can only remove the CSD C1 speedy deletion tag from an empty category if it is no longer empty. We don't keep empty categories because they might be needed in the future. But here's the thing about CSD C1s...if the category is ever needed in the future, it can just be recreated! Either by an editor or you can go to the admin who deleted it or go to WP:REFUND and ask that it be restored. No problem. So, don't worry about a category that you might need when your draft is in main space, the category might not be deleted yet but even if it is, poof! we'll just restore it. Sound good? Liz08:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good! Thank you! (I also created a copy on my local PC, so I don't even need to bother an admin, though.) --Cyfal (talk) 09:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello Liz. I nominated the European Cricket League 2023 for deletion with the suggestion it could be merged with the overall league page. You kindly agreed with this and closed the AFD today. But I checked and the page is still there. I'm still quite new to this process so could you explain how the merging happens and do I need to do anything as the AFD nominator? Thanks for your time reading this. Best wishes.
Hello again Liz. After lots of reading into page merging, I've made sure the relevant content has been included and set up a redirect. Hopefully I did it correctly. Anyway you can ignore my question now. Sorry to trouble you. All the best, Shrug02 (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
No problem with asking questions although it can take me a while to respond. Who actually takes care of a merge is really up to whomever wants to take on the project or which editors if more than one person wants to be involved. The AFD closer only tags the pages, they don't handle the merge. Unfortunately, some merges can sit for a long time before an interested editor takes on the work. Liz22:34, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
See Misplaced Pages:Merging#Proposing a merge. The process looks complicated but just follow the steps to set up a discussion on the article talk page and post the notices. Once the discussion is over, an uninvolved editor will close it for you.
If you have other questions about where to find information on this enormous project, I recommend visiting the Teahouse. I know a few things having edited for years but at the Teahouse, you'll find the combined knowledge of all of the editors who visit it to answer questions. It's more than I can help you with with my limited experience. Good luck. Liz22:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi,
I had tried and waited over three days and never got a response.
That's why I did the AFD as it has a more public platform.
If I was to be honest, I feel like there should be a MFD but it has become inactive as of late and the project seems to be abandoned and if I could I would re-establish it but idk the proper procedures for it.
Reader of Information, what were the articles involved in this proposed merge? Maybe there is a related WikiProject where we can find interested editors. But three days is not a long time on this project, some Merge proposals are open for a month or two before they are closed. Liz22:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
It was II Corps into the hatnote linked article which can be seen here:
Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you no longer want this newsletter, you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist.
Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor to be a Guild coordinator (with their permission, of course) until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June.
Drive: In our September Backlog Elimination Drive, 67 editors signed up, 39 completed at least one copy edit, and between them they edited 682,696 words comprising 507 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: The October Copy Editing Blitz saw 16 editors sign-up, 15 of whom completed at least one copy edit. They edited 76,776 words comprising 35 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: In our November Backlog Elimination Drive, 432,320 words in 151 articles were copy edited. Of the 54 users who signed up, 33 copy edited at least one article. Barnstars awarded are posted here.
Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 15 December (UTC) and will end on 21 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 333 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,401 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.
To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Looks like you're in. Like really in, top vote-getter at 81.16%. That astounding. I didn't make the cut, but that's fine, you've got a great group coming in with you. Just Step Sideways00:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Wow, well, thanks for letting me know. I'm bummed that you didn't get in. I hope you will consider running again next year. I remember meeting you at the Misplaced Pages Conference in 2019 with "Katie" and I was looking forward to getting to work with you. I really admire you, putting yourself through a process you could expect would be adversarial. That shows grit. Liz00:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, that means a lot to me. I was looking forward to it as well, but this obviously isn't really a surprise. I'm sure the team you are coming in with can ferret out whatever it is that has been making the committee so apathetic lately, perhaps just the influx of perspectives and personalities will have the desired effect. Just Step Sideways01:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Liz - congratulations on your resounding win. It is clearly a sign that the community recognizes the many ways you've contributed to the project, both in your personal qualities and in the work you've done. If I may throw a word of caution out there - as an arb I found people less willing to extend me good faith than they did before. So I would suggest to the extent that you're going to continue your admin work around deletion that you follow the pledge you made at ANI not to close things early, something you've done a few times even since that thread (e.g. Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Flag_of_Pichincha). Fortunately XfDCloser makes it easy to know when you're closing something early. You have some great new colleagues on the committee but if there are anyways I can be of assistance to you please don't hesitate to reach out. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, Barkeep49, I think. You are sending a pretty mixed message. The AFD you highlight was closed 15 minutes early which I don't think is egregious. We have some NACs who close AFDs a day early. At this point, I have closed hundreds (thousands?) of AFDs so I wouldn't be surprised if I made a mistake on a few of them. And if you could spare a few hours a day to help out closing AFDs, your help would be welcomed there.
I know that I already have editors here who don't care for me (to put it mildly), I just assumed I'd gain a few more. Liz01:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
I agree with you that the 10 AfDs (from a review of the close of the AFD to Dec 2) and 2 PRODs (from the review of a single day) all were 30 minutes or less early which is one reason I hadn't said anything prior to now. But also people like me who don't close early can't possibly pitch in if others close early (and thanks for the note about NACs happening a day wearly; I will try to spend some time watching for that as that is far more troubling). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
AMAZING. Congratulations and well deserved. FWIW, 15m early is a non issue but you know I'm one of the guilty early closers. But if I may make one minor suggestion, slightly more archiving? Currently choking my admittedly four year old computer. StarMississippi03:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello, dear Star Mississippi! Believe it or not, I just archived all of the messages from September 2024 from this page, I thought having 2 months' worth of talk page messages was okay. Maybe I should reduce it to one month.
This election result was a surprise. It almost takes the sting away from my tumultuous RFA nine years ago. I try not to reflect too much on the past but, boy, that was a brutal experience. For any talk page stalker, running for ARBCOM is much less abrasive than having an RFA. So, consider that when November 2025 comes around next year and editors ask you to consider being a candidate. Liz03:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Can confirm it's much speedier now. Perhaps my cache caught it at the wrong time or something more techy that I don't quite get. I don't think I'll have the on wiki time to ever be an Arb, but your feedback on process is reassuring. Congrats again! StarMississippi00:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Congratulations on your success in the elections and welcome to the 2025 Arbitration Committee. This is the first part of your induction onto the Arbitration Committee.
Please use the EmailUser function to indicate the email address you'd like to use for ArbCom and functionary business.
Before you can be subscribed to any mailing lists or assigned CheckUser or Oversight permissions, you must sign the Wikimedia Foundation's confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information (L37) and the VRT users confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information (L45). Please confirm that your username is listed on the Access to nonpublic personal data policy/Noticeboard. If isn't, and you haven't signed the agreements, please do this promptly and let me know when you have signed them. Instructions for signing can be found here. Again, you must sign both agreements listed in the instructions. If you have signed but your username is not listed on the noticeboard, please let me know.
Over the coming days, you will receive a small number of emails as part of the induction process. Please carefully read them. If they are registration emails, please follow any instructions in them to finalise registration. You can contact me or any other arbitrator directly if you have difficulty with the induction process.
Thank you for volunteering to serve on the committee. We very much look forward to introducing ourselves to you on the mailing list and to working with you this term.
L235, this notice makes it sounds like it should be soooo easy but it took several tries to even get to the correct page. The first instruction should be "Log in". And then it took me to a general Phab ticket page. But the deed is done. But it would be great to update this notice with the correct link. Thanks again for the welcome! My email Inbox will never be the same. Liz04:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
In case it helps I did some quick math and arbs sent only 7920 emails to the main ArbCom list in 2024 (down from 10410 in 2023, 10370 in 2022, and 12098 in 2021) (though data is somewhat incomplete for this year as the year is not yet over). KevinL (aka L235·t·c) 18:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
L235, oh my Lord. I mean, I knew from my years as a clerk that there was a lot of email but I had no idea, numbers-wise, that it was in the thousands of messages. Liz18:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
These numbers are only for the main ArbCom mailing list, and perhaps not all of it. There's also the -b and -c mailing list, the clerks mailing list, the functionaries mailing list, the global checkuser mailing list, the checkuser VRT queue, the oversight VRT queue, the COI/UPE VRT queue, and various direct emails that people will send you simply because you're an arb. I just looked through my own inbox, and I received 21,086 emails in 2021, and 22,433 in 2020. And people wonder why arbs don't edit much. – bradv19:16, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Liz, not sure you're going to have any time to look into this given your new responsibilities and all, but this user's AfD nomination pattern, communications in response to you, and contribution history tingles my Spidey sense like someone who's lowkey butthurt over the lack of Scott Pilgrim characters, or possibly an LTA account. I'm going to keep an eye out, but you see far more AfD's than I do. Jclemens (talk) 07:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
You have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee
The Electoral Commission is pleased to announce that you have been appointed for a two-year term to the Arbitration Committee effective January 1, 2025. Congratulations on the appointment.
Thank you for all of the congratulations. Yes, and I'm so lame that it has actually swung back around to being hip. You wait long enough and even workholic, rule-followers who post Welcome notices can become fashionable. Liz22:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the official notice, Cyberpower678 and for all of the work that you and your fellow Electoral Commissioners did to have such a smooth election in 2024 with timely results. It sounds like it was a big change from last year, in a very positive way, thanks to this year's Scrutineers. Liz22:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Some changes for sure. I think the biggest changes that made coordinating easier was all the automation I implemented a few years back. Automated watchlist notices, automated status headers, automated mass message templates, and so forth. I'd like to think that's made coordinating ACE much easier over the years. :-) —CYBERPOWER (Merry Christmas) 03:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Cyberpower678, our technologically gifted editors have made so many changes, tools and innovations that have helped out the rest of us in visible and less visible ways. I know that the committee isn't "pro-active", looking for problems to resolve, but if there is anything I can ever do to assist editors in receiving cooperation from the development team at WMF, let me (or us) know. Of course, I can't make any promises but I've been hearing about problems for years now and it would be nice if some assistance could be provided to you all. Liz03:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I also came here to say congratulations, Liz! Your responses to editors in difficulty at the various admin boards have always struck me as some of the calmest, most thoughtful and helpful comments there, and this election is well deserved. StartGrammarTime (talk) 03:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, StartGrammarTime. Unless there are just blatant violations occurring, I believe in deescalating conflict. Often, two editors in a dispute have gotten themselves in a "me vs. you" situation that makes one person a winner and the other a loser. It's much better to get other editors participating in a discussion so that a consensus can be determined so the disagreement becomes less personal. We have lost a lot of talented editors who got themselves into a feud that they just couldn't let go of. It's interesting how often difficulties becomes less about policies and guidelines and more about getting along with other editors who have different opinions from your own. Liz04:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Liz, count me amongst those who are very heartened to see you take up a position on the committee. Without intended commentary on the other worthy candidates and electees, I have to say that your election to the post is, for this community member, the best news to come out of the election. I am confidently of the opinion that this community and project are about to face some of our most consequential developments, decisions, tests, and times, and knowing that you will be in such a central position to interpret and shape policy and to influence the collective community discussion and voice is a bright spot at the end of a year that has at times been largely defined by worry about both the immediate and the near future. I was confident of your success in the election and I'm even more confident of the benefit that will accrue to us in having elected you. SnowRise06:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, Snow Rise, for your vote of confidence. But while I think the committee may help interpret policy by judging when it has been violated, I think it's debatable that they actually shape policy. I don't think that's seen as a role for the committee by the community although it might happen indirectly. I am a bit concerned about my daily routine as I've seen editors and admins who join the committee become less and less active on the project as editors and I currently have a very busy schedule. But if I have to cut back on those activities for two years, I guess that's just a price that I'll need to pay. Liz19:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Well, I largely agree with you that this is how the division of authority should work, and was originally meant to work, but let's be honest: it hasn't been that way for a long time. To take just one example from relatively recently, the last ArbCom decided it was within their authority to take such a monumental decision as to not only ban all non-registered users from editing articles in contentious topics, but indeed to ban them from even supplying perspectives on the talk pages of such articles. Rather than putting the issue to community. That's not just "shaping" policy: that's creating policy whole cloth for the entire project, via fiat.
And apparently the larger community is just willing to let the kind of assumption of authority go unchallenged, because there was not the kind of pushback I would have expected. In that case, acceptance may have been bootstrapped by the populairty of such a move with a once small but growing (though in my opinion, ill-conceived) movement to lock down access to the editorial process more and more, especially with respect to those who choose not to (or cannot) register. But even if that's the case, it's clear that my perspective is somewhat out of step with the broader community, because I would have expected more people to oppose that kind of over-reaching of a dozen-ish users setting policy for the entire project on principle. Even if they liked that particular idea. But there was barely a squeak.
So yeah, ArbComs power is arguably at its zenith right now. I would argue that if the consensus norms that govern this project's core functions are going to survive, we're coming up on a time when we are going to have to set some institutional limitations and clear rules on the scope of ArbComs authority, because through rulings like that, ArbCom has slowly absorbed more and more power into its remit for, frankly, decades now. It honestly bears a striking resemblance to how the Supreme Court of the U.S. established its role in the early decades following the establishment of the nation. Thankfully for democracy in that nation, jurists in that body and outside forces eventually saw the need to pause the growth of the court's powers and to adopt the much lauded (if somewhat mythologized) "checks and balances" era of governance.
But it remains to be seen if ArbCom itself will eventually develop a sitting body of Arbs and a culture willing to self-restrain itself in that way--or in the alternative, when, if ever, the community at large will step in to better define the limits of the committee's authority. Food for thought, anyway! In the meantime, ArbCom really does have massive potential to shape policy, for better or worse, and what we should hope for so long as that is the case, is that such authority should at least be in steady and contemplative hands. That is one of the major reasons I am very happy to see you take a position in the body. SnowRise06:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
That's kind of what happened, Anachronist. I find my current round of routine editing tasks really enjoyable but I thought that after 11 years as an editor, I should really help out with some more serious work on the project, to help out with the "less fun" activities and ARBCOM is at the top of that list, along with going through an editor's entire contribution history looking for copyright problems and reviewing unblock requests. So, on to consider some of those "intractable" disputes. Liz19:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Briefly emerging from hibernation to add myself here. Way back in the day, I opposed your RFA, and ever since I've been consistently proved wrong. ‑ Iridescent03:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
To be honest, DFO, anything is better than your former name which was unpronounceable. By the way, anyone who devotes their free time to work on an online encyclopedia for free is a lame nerd so you're in good company. Liz23:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
I have the hardest time tracking down templates that I want to use. Right now, I'm looking for the one that advises blocked editors that they have lost talk page access and need to use UTRS. It's not in Category:Misplaced Pages administration templates, can you tell me where to find it? You do so much work on UTRS, I'm hoping you know. I've looked for it multiple times and have never been able to locate it. Thanks. Liz02:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, Deepfriedokra, so I should have looked in Category:User block templates? Template:Uw-blocknotalk says it's for a temporary block but I guess there are parameters I can change to make it indicate an indefinite block. Before seeing your message, I found a copy of the template on a different editor's user talk page and copied it over. Not all of the information is accurate for this block but at least this notice gives a link to UTRS which is what I wanted. Thanks for pointing these out to me. Liz08:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
And, yes, I get frustrated by admins who block without posting a notice on the user talk page explaining why an editor is blocked and how they can appeal the block. It's just so unnecesary if you just use Twinkle to block an editor. Liz08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I'd like to ask if it's okay if I edited the source assessment table in my initial post with the updated sources I added to the AfD. My assumption was that everything above the relisting line should be left alone, but I feel like my most recent argument addresses all of the issues others have brought up so far. Thanks for the help! GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 00:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I think it would be okay for you to edit a source assessment table that you created but please note this fact by putting a note like "Updated by GregariousMadness, December 9/10 (depending on where you live)", knowing that this last part can be replaced by your signature, ~~~~. This note that the table has been updated will hopefully cause participants to review it again. This updating it much better than posting yet another table. Thank you for checking in about this. Liz00:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
You're right, Draft:Wole Olusola wasn't eligible for CSD G13 today. I often have pages/tabs open and this draft would have been eligible but I didn't notice that the article had been recently edited. I'll remove my talk page notice on the user page of the draft creator. I've deleted so many of these expiring drafts and after six months of inactivity, it's very unusual to see editing in the hours right before the expired deletion time. But I'll be more careful.
Did this draft pop up on your "mistaken deletions" report? I use to review that to see if any pages I deleted appeared on it but I've lost the page title. I appreciate you catching this one. Liz05:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I was up for way too long when I had written what I did and I am sorry. I hope you can also understand given my age. Thank you for your query, I understand now that you were just trying to look out for the best interests of the site. Again, I am really sorry and hope we can turn a new leaf. :)
The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning members following their election by the community. Their two-year terms formally begin on 1 January 2025:
Outgoing members are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, to remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the functionaries' and arbitration clerks' mailing lists following their terms on the Arbitration Committee. To that effect:
Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing members, who have not chosen to retain them, after 31 December 2024:
CheckUser: Firefly, L235
Oversight: Firefly, Guerillero, L235, Moneytrees
Outgoing members are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. That will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
All outgoing members will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list.
All outgoing members will be unsubscribed from the clerks-l mailing list, with the exception of Firefly, Guerillero, and Moneytrees, who have chosen to remain subscribed.
To respond to your edit summary, this comment by Yngvaddottir (03:31, 19 November 2024) is worth repeating:
ArbCom is also en.wiki's primary defence against the WMF, which also does great damage to the projects with its overreach and its misplaced priorities.
Hi L., I noted you put up a "Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Portuguese all-female bands" and posted a notice on user Kjell Knudde's Talk page. I am posting this having found you by tracing back from a number of quite odd categories recently added in bulk to the "Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle" page, e.g., diff. Many of these categories seem pretty dubious, and many of them were started by users that have been blocked (potentially all just one user?). I am suspicious of the situation for one, for another, a Category like "Comics about anthropomorphic deer and moose" seems a waste of time, and for another, I rather object to bloating down articles with excessive Categories. I don't quite know how to proceed, so I ask for your second opinion. This general situation seems like it might be a problem, or perhaps it is all on the up and up. It smells like the time I looked up Hurricane (cocktail) and noted it stated dryly that the drink had been invented by Ernest Borgnine, that is, something that seems all on the up and up, but is in fact vandalism. Thanks! (I am just a writer...not a Misplaced Pages expert...) Bdushaw (talk) 16:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
First, any time you refer to a page on the project, please provide an active link to it so it can be easily checked. Otherwise, I have to cut and paste, go to the search bar and I'm still not sure if I end up on the page you are talking about.
Second, I'm not sure what your question to me is. You seems to have some kind of suspicions but I'm not following your comments. If you are concerned about an individual category, then mention that category, what the problem is and a link to it. Liz01:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply; sorry I was not clear. I have a broad suspicion that there is an malicious (?) effort to add Categories and so bloat up articles or for some other nefarious purpose. I noticed this with the recent additions of a large number of Categories by this article diff, and that many of the categories added had been started by users (or perhaps only a single user?) that are now blocked. User Special:Contributions/Kjell_Knudde seems to be vigorously adding Categories to articles, in what seems to be a "sole purpose" manner, and irrespective of what seems me to be the dubious nature of many of the categories. I may be way off base in all this, but I came to you only because I saw you had posted on User_talk:Kjell_Knudde talk page about deleting one such category. As I noted, many of these categories don't seem me to have much sense or merit to them. I know of no way of ascertaining whether the problem is real, or what to do about it, whereas you seem to know what you are doing. I'll let the matter drop here; I don't have an axe to grind here (other than being somewhat annoyed at an overload of Categories on at least one article, viz. The_Adventures_of_Rocky_and_Bullwinkle_and_Friends). Best regards, Bdushaw (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
If you look at Kjell Knudde's user talk page, you'll see a number of messages to them about their misuse of categories. But this editor has been active for 16 years now and has over 100K edits, I don't think that this is anything malicious or "nefarious", I just don't think they fully understand how categories and subcategories work. This is really not that unusual, we have had a number of editors who don't seem to "get" how categories function as an organization tool. As for the notice I left, one of my regular tasks on the project is tagging empty categories so I post messages like that on a daily basis.
Overcategorization is an ongoing problem on this project in general but I can't see how it benefits any one on- or off-Misplaced Pages to add unnecessary categories. If you feel that any categorization they have done is problematic, I'd approach them on their talk page to discuss it or you can remove them from an article or category. Right now, I don't see a need to escalate things to a noticeboard-level discussion. Liz02:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for checking! I've regularly run across things that did not look quite right, but on further inspection turned out to be that seemingly-innocent-looking vandalism. It has given me a hint of paranoia... Happy Holidays! Bdushaw (talk) 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Well, I just archived messages from September 2024 about a week ago, I thought that would help with the size. But you're not the first person to mention this recently so I'll archive October messages this weekend. This talk page gets a lot of traffic though and it can take me a while to notice some messages in the middle of the page and respond so I like to keep at least a month's worth of messages up. Liz06:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Overdue reply
I haven't been very active editing lately. Regarding , I did jump the gun there and I believe I had reverted my edits by the time you replied. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 21:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
I understand the request but I don't feel comfortable closing an AFD after it has been open only a few hours unless it qualifies for a Speedy Keep. But if the discussion continues like this, the article will clearly be deleted, if not now than soon. I know that there are other closers who wouldn't hesitate like I'm doing. Do you think it would qualify for a Speedy deletion criteria? Liz06:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Very understandable. To answer the question, the author themself said that the article probably doesn't meet GNG in the AFD, so it could go under criteria A7. I would also just invoke WP:IAR personally, but hey, I'm not the admin here. TheWikiToby (talk) 06:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
A global request
Hello Liz, I address you to this request from today. It is the second request. The former request from Nov 19, 2024 was declined. I have not done anything wrong.
An additional information is here. The essay is exist also in Hebrew. I would suggest that as a member in the AC, you would decline the user from editing in the En WP. Thank you, Dgw|Talk16:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry that this editor is so focused on you (for unknown reasons) but our jurisdiction is the English Misplaced Pages and I have no influence on the Hebrew Misplaced Pages. Their request was rightly denied (no local admins can globally block an editor). I hope you let me know if another request happens on Meta. I also have no influence there but I can at least leave a comment on Meta while I do not have the ability to communicate in the Hebrew language on that project.
As for the Arbitration Committee, I don't join the committee until January. It does include some additional privileges and many new responsibilities but I can't arbitrarily block an editor for what they are doing on another project. But if they violate their Interaction ban on the English Misplaced Pages, inform me or open a case on ANI. I hope you can put this editor out of your mind and focus on productive editing. You don't want to let them take up residence in your head. Liz03:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Sounds like Dominic3203 has heard you, loud and clear. I do know other editors who run Citation bot but, Dominic3203, if you could give StarryGrandma some space and be considerate about other editors' User space, it would be appreciated. Liz03:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld09:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
I've been playing along to Christmas songs on piano and guitar and doing my own jazzy arrangements the last few days, I suspect that's why I am! :-) ♦ Dr. Blofeld19:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Quangminhvilla, one of the editor on Misplaced Pages. I hear that you are one of the admins on Misplaced Pages, so I want to ask you for help. In the few months before, the article 2023 AFC Asian Cup had an user name RealLifed was vandalism the article so many. Since the 2019 AFC Asian Cup, there was no third place match. But he always edited the third and the fourth ranking on the 2023 article, which lead to many user have to reverted the article many times. He always said that the reason was he used it from the AFC website, although there was no source about it. I have already gave him a warning for this, but he said threatly for me and always said by using CAPSLOCK to tell many user when they said to him politely. I think this user not only used incorrectly sources but he also one of the dangerous user that threaten anyone. So this message today is can you help me block this user please? Because if anyone warning to him about it, he will not change and still violated to them. Thank you for reading this message. Hope you have a good time during this week. Quangminhvilla (talk) 07:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I think there's been a mistake with a deletion review regarding 15.ai. Ever since I posted the new sources on the AfD after the discussion was relisted, all of the subsequent votes have been either keep or a striking of a deletion, but the closing admin marked it as a delete instead. How can I challenge this result, and would it be appropriate to do so? Thanks! GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 18:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Well, I'd advise you to either approach User:Cryptic and ask them to unclose the Deletion review or start up a second DRV to review the new closure. But you should first go to User:Barkeep49 with your questions before opening up a new deletion review if that is what you choose to do. You should always initiate a discussion first with an AFD closer before starting up a review of a discussion closure. Sometimes, this can lead to an adjusted closure decision or change in a closure statement but it's also considered polite to inform the closer that you have some questions about how this AFD discussion was closed. Considering how divisive this discussion was and the history of this article, these questions shouldn't be a surprise. After having closed hundreds of AFD discussions, there are some that you just know will end up at DRV and no matter how this one was closed, it was easy to see that any closure with this article would be contested. Liz19:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
I see you posted your second message while I was typing up my response but I still hope you will follow my advice. Liz19:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
In addition, if the close decision is endorsed, would it be okay to recreate the article using the new sources I found? I'm still confused by how a deletion review can be endorsed due to bad behavior even though I dug up new sources that demonstrate notability and significant coverage. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 19:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
First, slow down! Do not create a new version of an article deleted through an AFD if that closure is being reviewed at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. What if that closure is overturned and the article is restored, then you'll have two articles existing on the same subject. So, be patient, and see how the DRV is closed.
Second, if the second AFD closure is endorsed and the article is kept deleted, the proper approach is to create a new draft version in Draft space and submit it to WP:AFC for review. Do not move it back to the main space of the project or it can be tagged for speedy deletion CSD G4 as a recreated article of an article deleted through an AFD decision. The only way I know to overcome an AFD Delete closure is to work on a new article in Draft space and see if an AFC reviewer will approve it. This takes time but there really is no quick way to overcome an AFD Delete closure. So, in your DRV statement, put your best foot/argument forward on why the closer overlooked some important information or didn't take some factor into account and then wait for some senior editors to assess your argument. Do not make your argument personal and DO NOT CANVASS a deletion review, this will just backfire on you. The editors who regularly participate in deletion reviews are fair and knowledgeable about policy. Having some new accounts pop up on an obscure Deletion review page will not help your cause as this isn't a vote count or a numbers game but an assessment by experienced editors on whether or not this closure was appropriate given the arguments that were presented.
The typical results coming out of a Deletion review are "Endorse" the closure, "Overturn" the closure, "Relist" the AFD discussion for another week or "Allow recreation" of the article in Draft space. Deletion reviews typically run one week but can be closed early if there is a Snow closure which means that there is one outcome that all participants are arguing in favor of. I hope this helps you understand the process better. Liz19:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I'm new to all this and I can't help but feel nervous that I'm doing something wrong. I felt so proud to have done all the research last week only for the discussion to be closed as a delete without warning, so I'm left thinking that I did something wrong, especially since most Wikipedians aren't very patient with my mistakes (unlike you, so thank you very much for your kindness). I'm hoping that I'd be able to at least be able to rewrite it as a draft because I do think that the discussion was closed prematurely. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 19:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Pandas Talk Page
Hello Liz. I’m not wiki literate yet so please forgive me for struggling with the wiki protocol.
I am trying to query an edit on the PANDAs (medical condition) page and I’m finding some of the language used by the original poster to be inflammatory and out of date.
I’ve tried to discuss on the talk page and am now seeking a “second eye” for the edit.
The specific edit revolves around the removal of “controversial” to a more nuanced “emerging medical knowledge” and I have posted links to recent publications such as that by the APA.
I can across your page whilst searching for dispute
resolution and you seemed the friendliest page out of some that seemed designed to keep out new posters! Please do redirect me if I am not following the correct protocol. I feel very passionately about the topic and want to ensure I am doing all I can for the clarification. BeccaW1986 (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
I do not edit in articles about medical topics. There is a much stricter rule about sourcing requirements which you can read about at Misplaced Pages:MEDRS. It seems like you are already having a constructive discussion on the article talk page where you outline your opinions and arguments. But, especially with articles on medical conditions, Misplaced Pages only uses the highest quality secondary sources so these other sources you bring up might not be acceptable at this stage.
I think the editors you are discussing PANDAs with have a much deeper knowledge about MEDRS than I do and it would be best to heed their advice. Content disputes on Misplaced Pages are resolved through the process of reaching a consensus opinion based on reliable sources so I can not go in and "overrule" them especially when they seem familiar with the literature on this subject and I am not. You can try going to the Dispute Resolution board to get an editor who could facilitate a discussion on this disagreement. But know that medical knowledge can change over time and perhaps Misplaced Pages can adjust its language as more accepted studies are published in the future. But if mainstream scientific literature calls a condition "controversial", then that is the language that we must use as well. Misplaced Pages doesn't aspire to be "cutting edge" but to reflect the mainstream scientific perspective and is especially conservative when it comes with articles on medicine, medical subjects and treatment options. Liz21:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Moriya Almkiass
Hello Liz, I would like to write an article about Mrs. Moriya Almkiass. She is a Deaf Israeli woman, who serves the news of the The Israel Deaf Sports Organization (Asach). She is professional and signs perfectly. She is fluent, stares at the camers, smiles and is not confused. Mr. Bar Vanunu, who is a professional Hearing interpreter, responded to the video: "Extra Excellent". Michael Kadosh, who is a Deaf sportsman and is shown in the video, is married to Shirly Pinto.
She is married to Mr. Shafir Hafif, a Deaf goalkeeper of the Ashdod Dolphins , who plays vs Hearing teams, as well as in the Deaf Champions League games. She also participated the Miss & Mister Deaf World contest in South Africa when she was single.
Well, you definitely don't need anyone's permission to work on a draft article. Go ahead and give it a shot! Good luck. Liz01:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Followed your advice but the rewritten article was nominated for speedy deletion
Hi Liz, I’m sorry to bother you about this, but I followed your advice above on rewriting the 15.ai article as a draft and sending it through AfC, but someone has tagged it as a speedy delete regardless. Did I do something wrong? What can I do? GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 15:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm the one who tagged it. I did not retain the original article so I cannot tell the extent to which what you have is a rewrite, but as I said elsewhere, just click the link to contest the speedy deletion and an admin will compare your version to the deleted one. If they are indeed substantially different, then speedy deletion will be declined. Nothing more to that. If the articles are the same, it will go, if they are different, it will not be speedy deleted.As to what you did wrong: well I would say this was all a bit hasty. I gave you advice on your talk page as to how you might demonstrate notability, and keeping the article in draft for now would have been better. We could all have helped, and also identified continued issues. By submitting it at once for AfC, you have an article back in mainspace even before the deletion review is closed. Even if speedy deletion is declined, this could find itself back at AfD very quickly. It is better off in draft, which is a safe space to incubate the article. But that's up to you. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
When I was writing the draft, it said that AfC could take 8 weeks, so I figured I should submit it now and continue to edit it. I didn’t expect it to be accepted so quickly. I didn’t mean to do it in a haste. I was just following directions. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 16:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
I have restored this new passed draft, but have not been party previously so I believe this might best be settled by the discussion already at DRV. BusterD (talk) 18:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Andrei Polgar
Greetings, the article was deleted even before I could post my rationale. There are many reliable sources that has in-depth coverage about the person which clearly meets WP:SIGCOV such as or etc.
I strongly believe the article is salvageable so can you please be kind enough to re-open the Afd to have a more clear consensus? Thank you. Herinalian (talk) 19:30, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm reluctant to reopen this AFD because the discussion had already been relisted twice and you were the only participant who was arguing to Keep this article. Another editor reviewed the sources and found them not to be adequate.
I am willing to restore this article to Draft or your User space if you wanted to continue to work on it. Please know that since this article was deleted through an AFD discussion, you won't be able to move it back to the main space of the project or it will be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4. But, when you believe it is "ready", you can submit it to AFC for an editor to review. Let me know if this option is acceptable to you. Liz23:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I haven't had time to check the noticeboards lately. Seems like some of the folks with the strongest opinions are editors/admins who don't close discussions themselves or even participate in deletion discussions. We could use a little more help in AFDLand especially at some hours of the day/night, both for participants and closers. Liz01:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Celerity BBS page
Liz, you removed a page a couple of weeks ago for Celerity BBS which I have involvement in. This is primarily a pre-WWW software product, but copies of it are extant and more references and details can be provided. Can you please restore it so I can improve the article? Bytre (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to do about this page. It doesn't meet CSD but it is an autobiographical article by a user who is circumventing the AfC process. Already a version of this article has been draftified, but the user then just moved their sandbox into mainspace. I tagged it and removed one blatantly promotional statement but I'm not sure what else should be done in this case. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
This article has been tagged for speedy deletion, CSD A7, as an article on a non-notable person. This is often what happens with autobiographical articles that are unfortunately moved into main space. I'm not going to delete it myself, I'd rather let another admin review it but if it is still around at the end of the day, I'll probably take action here. You have to be careful with CSD A7s as this criteria only applies to a limited range of subjects but these are outlined at WP:CSD. Liz21:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, someone else tagged it for A7 after I commented. I figured since there are sources, A7 doesn't apply. I figure it might not survive AfD but that is also a more laborsome step than is needed. I have left a few messages on their talk page, including a warning for logged-out editing and may take them to ANI if they persist since they are being rather disruptive and possibly showing WP:NOTHERE behavior. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
It turns out that they were a sockpuppet of blocked account User:Amardeep Choudhary so I was able to delete their pages right away as CSD G5s. They make it so easy when they don't really change their username. Liz21:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Yeah. Found a sandbox from the old account too that I just tagged with G11. Might keep an eye on the pages they created in case they need to be salted. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, ★Trekker (talk) 07:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing,
— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Liz, the amount of work you do for Misplaced Pages is staggering, and you do it with your signature empathy, kindness, without sacrificing any quality. You are always welcome on my talk page with your category questions. I love them because I normally learn something myself :) You didn't get NYB-esque numbers at WP:ACE2024 for nothing, and I really look forward to working with you as a clerk during the term! Best to you and yours in the new year, and happy holidays! HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Those words just touch my heart. I think that is the sweetest thing that has ever been posted on this page. You know the work keeps me busy, fills my day with purpose, but there is a reason why about 50% of my edits are to User talk pages. Most are just formal notices but I also like to check in with other editors, either when I have questions or if I see them struggling. And I know on Misplaced Pages, we prize the project over the people but I don't think I'd still be editing after 11 years if I hadn't encountered so many genuinely good-hearted and well-intentioned people of which I count you. Have a wonderful holiday, however you celebrate the end-of-the-year festivities. Liz06:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Creatio company page
Hi Liz,
Thank you for your contribution to the Wiki. On October 9, you deleted the Creatio company page (Creatio) , which had been there for many years. This page was handy for everyone who is interested in the Creatio company and its products.
Creatio is a worldwide company with a $1.2B valuation and a presence in 25 countries. The company is a leader in the market and well-known among different analytic agencies (we have a lot of mentions from Gartner, Forrester, Nuclear, etc.). The company's products are a new era of CRM software with no code, and they are transforming the market. Outsystems, Mendix, Appian, and many other companies from this market have pages on Wiki, but in this case, you decided to delete the page.
Can you help me understand how the Creatio page on Wiki can be restored (or how we as a Company, we can improve it from the content standpoint)?
While we can try the redirect method again, I will point out that that has repeatedly failed multiple times in deterring past students each semester assigned to create this draft. They've removed the redirect, uploaded their work as the new draft and leave, completely unaware of how Misplaced Pages works, and ignoring the real article on Kim Abeles. They don't return after the upload and a minor edit or two right after. @Belbury's template was very effective this fall on this draft as no edits occurred between your June and Dec edits. Early Dec would have likely been another round of this likely assignment reappearing. This and multiple other articles have been seasonal regulars of new drafts of existing subjects from a "rogue" teacher's Misplaced Pages assignments, and while I agree that having the redirect is the normal solution, this is not a normal case, and I'm not optimistic that the teacher assigning these is yet aware of the issue (but I've not followed all draft cases, just this one).
I don't recall if a request for page protection on these pages occurred, or if that would be appropriate in these cases with the ~6month reoccurrences, but I feel like it's been clear that having it as a redirect has not been a deterrent for recreations. Like I said at the top of this message, happy to try it with the redirect again, but I'm not optimistic. It will likely be late April/early May when the Spring finals approach when the likelihood is ripe again. Regardless of opinions, hope you have a happy, safe, and calm holidays. Zinnober9 (talk) 11:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Great! I was not aware of that update and will relax on this being a redirect given the promising details of that conversation and the lack of any repeating occurrences this fall from the pages/files you were aware of. I had seen yesterday's changes as a return to a state that had not worked in the past, and was seeing your template as an effective solution so far, but still in the test phase since it had only been up for one semester. I'm glad this issue appears to be concluded now. Happy holidays to you as well, Zinnober9 (talk) 19:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Happy Christmas
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025
Hello Liz, warm wishes to you and your family throughout the holiday season. May your heart and home be filled with all of the joys the festive season brings. Here is a toast to a Merry Christmas and prosperous New Year!.
Undelete page Mudirr, I need to work on it to fix its citations
Hello,
I can see that a page i had create almost two years back has been deleted, i want to undelete it and update its content and references, could you please help in this regard?
Just a reminder, DFO. When you restore a draft/sandbox that has been deleted due to CSD G13, you need to make a minor edit to the page or it becomes eligible again for a G13 speedy deletion. That's something you learn if you help out at WP:REFUND which is actually a more enjoyable admin task than many others I've tried. It's like you have to remove the PROD tag from restored PRODs. But thanks for being a very helpful TPS and I hope you have a great end-of-the-year holiday! Liz20:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!
Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Davidindia (talk) 21:48, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello everyone, and welcome to the 26th issue of the Misplaced Pages Scripts++ Newsletter, covering all our favorite new and updated user scripts since 1 August 2024. At press time, over 94% of the world has legally fallen prey to the merry celebrations of "Christmas", and so shall you soon. It's been a quiet 4 months, and we hope to see you with way more new scripts next year. Happy holidays! Aaron Liu (talk) 05:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!
Featured script
Very useful for changelist patrollers, DiffUndo, by Nardog, is this edition's featured script. Taking inspiration from WP:AutoWikiBrowser's double-click-to-undo feature, it adds an undo button to every line of every diff from "show changes", optimizing partial reverts with your favorite magic spell and nearly fulfilling m:Community Wishlist/Wishes/Partial revert undo.
Miscellaneous
Doğu/Adiutor, a recent WP:Twinkle/WP:RedWarn-like userscript that follows modern WMF UI design, is now an extension. However, its sole maintainer has left the project, which still awaits WMF mw:code stewardship (among some audits) to be installed on your favorite WMF wikis.
DannyS712, our former chief editor, has ascended to MediaWiki and the greener purpley pastures of PHP with commits creating Special:NamespaceInfo and the __EXPECTUNUSEDTEMPLATE__ magic word to exclude a template from Special:UnusedTemplates! I wonder if Misplaced Pages has a templaters' newsletter...
BilledMammal/Move+ needs updating to order list of pages handle lists of pages to move correctly regardless of the discussion's page, so that we may avoid repeating fiasco history.
Andrybak/Unsigned helper forks Anomie/unsignedhelper to add support for binary search, automatic edit summaries after generating the {{unsigned}} template, support for {{undated}}, and support for generating while syntax highlighting is on.
Polygnotus/Move+ updates BilledMammal's classic Move+ to add automattic watchlisting of all pages—except the target page(s)—changed while processing a move.
Removal of Draft referring to the Pony Programming Language
Is the removal of the draft on Pony too soon or can it get put back up? There are some newer books on the programming language that are out. Language appears to be relevant and seems a bit much to start from scratch again.
Deleted link- https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Pony_(programming_language)
Saw that you tagged seasons 3,4 & 5. I agree that they could be tagged, I have a work meeting I need to attend before I can finish moving things from the supercategory to them. Is there a way that I can do this so that I don't waste your time? I'd really prefer to create them all at once, I'm not sure if there exists an equivalent of template:Underconstruction. (And I'm probably going to doing this to split the contestants in at least 3 other franchises of Drag Race. (Agreement on that at the Wikiproject.)Naraht (talk) 19:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Vertiport
Hi Liz. Could you take a look at Misplaced Pages:Vertiport? The creator has moved it back to the Misplaced Pages namespace once again. I'm not sure whether the subject meets GNG or why the creator didn't submit to AfC review, but they seem to be trying to create the article in the mainspace. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
This editor actually has some writing experience so I don't know why they thought they should move a draft to project space. I have moved it back and left them a note on their User talk page. Thanks for alerting me. Liz06:01, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello Liz your: Topic The deletion of my article Bruse Wane
Hello Liz, Happy Holidays. I'm very disheartened that you deleted the article and I created for the subject @Bruse Wane. The article adhered to wikipedia's neutral and non sensationalism writing structure guidelines. The article provided numerous independent 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party references/citations that were not connected at all to the subject, from various media sources. The citations validated the subjects notability in their particular field. Why was the article deleted when it was more than thoroughly sourced ? I know you have a lot on your plate, but if possible please read the article and consider my case for the deletion to be reversed. In my opinion the article was nominated for deletion for no real major legitimate grounds, and if there were grounds I addressed all of them with countless edits to bring the article up to and above par. I worked tireless to make sure this article met all of wikipedia's criteria for notability. Every editor that chimed in on the deletion discussion made comments that clearly showed they did not even read the article, or check the independent references and citations. It made me feel like a clique/ lynch mob mentality exist on wikipedia, with editors ready to pounce on anything they did not create, or fellow clique members did not create. I would like the deletion on the article talk Bruse Wane reversed. Or the ability to create it again in a draft for legitimate review. Edward Myer (talk) 09:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
You asked why I reported myself to WP:AN. It's simple: at VPT, DuncanHill was persistent in their insistence that my status as an admin meant that anything that I wrote was somehow to be interpreted differently from a similar post made by a non-admin. Plus, they were getting insulting, as may be seen from their comments and edit summaries. See also their user page edits from yesterday.
I just wanted somebody to step in and explain that not everything that an admin does is necessarily an admin action. Not all admins are evil.
As for the post to my own talk page: that is a required action for WP:AN reports. I didn't want to be pulled up for not having followed procedure. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 11:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Jujubinus articles
So sorry to leave you with the clear up of the categories in the many Jujubinus articles I draftified. I hadn't looked properly to see if there were any there. I will try and do better in the future! Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 18:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh, it wasn't time-consuming. We have one admin who regularly removes content categories from draft articles. There is a script that makes the process really fast. Liz01:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
"Early" AFD closes
I got super sick all last week, so I wasn't following that discussion or really anything else for a while there.
I've realized we're probably not meaning the same thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you and some of the other regulars keep a very close eye on the exact timestamps and close based on that. I'm going by midnight UTC, when literally everything from the day is considered old. I simply don't pay that close of attention to the exact timestamps, so I think we were not exactly talking about the same thing. Which means nobody was really wrong, so ...go team? El Beeblerino03:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
We go by the UTC time clock. I think you are in the U.S. so Midnight UTC on the East Coast is at 7 pm and on the Pacific Coast it's 4 pm. But my Preferences are to show local time so I never have to do any time mathematics. I have a clock in the upper right-hand corner that shows UTC time but I use that for CSD G13s which are organized by UTC time on the list by SDZeroBot. But as for AFDs, just set your Preferences to show your local time and then you can easily see when the AFD discussion was originally posted and just close the discussion 7 days later. We do try to honor the 7 day discussion period for several reasons, one, AFDs that are closed early can be challenged at DRV based on the closure happening too soon. But also, we probably have 5 or 6 regular AFD closers and honoring the 7 day period ensures that we are not stepping on each others' toes. I will say that it's within the parameters to close with one or two hours so the discussions can be closed a little early without much complaint. But about a year ago, we had one regular admin closer who would close discussions about 10 hours too early and it just caused confusion among discussion participants and nominators.
P.S. I'm so sorry to hear that you were ill. You seemed to be absent for a few days and I guess this is the explanation. A lousy time of the year to be feeling unwell. I hope you are feeling better now. Liz01:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Seeing as I'm here I'll poke my nose in—as a former regular AfD closer, it's always better to err on the side of delay if there's any doubt. There's nothing to be gained by closing after exactly 168 hours—if the page is so problematic that deletion is actually time-sensitive, it won't be at AfD in the first place. It's not unheard of for someone to come in right at the wire with an argument that changes the direction of the closure; a fair few editors only edit one day a week so have a 1⁄7 chance of only seeing the notification just as the discussion is about to close. ‑ Iridescent04:08, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm delighted to see you on my User talk page. Don't be a stranger! Your absence has been deeply felt. Your talk page provided a salon of sorts, where editors could come and ruminate on different subjects of concerns. But if this is a temporary visit, well, have a better than expected 2025! Liz04:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks—I'l try to be at least vaguely more active next year, but no promises as it depends on reality. (Unless Arbcom has changed since my day, you are about to have a worse than expected 2025, but if someone has to do it you're definitely one of the better choices for the job.}) ‑ Iridescent04:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm in Alaska, so midnight UTC is three in the afternoon here, but it seems like about two hours before that almost all AFDs, except the really awful ones, are already closed. As some commented at the AN discussion, this may be one of those good problems, at least it isn't backlogged like many other processes.
That flu was a bad one, i'd never experienced full-body chills and muscle spasms without even a fever before. Luckily I figured out after the first day that simple ibuprofen would stop that, and I was basically asleep most of the time for five days. I was better by Chrstmas, but I still postponed our usual seafood dinner with my Dad, as I was probably contagious and he's in his late seventies. We'll get tot hat in the next few days, got some nice crab legs in just now. El Beeblerino19:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Done That article was only deleted for 9 minutes before you asked for it to be restored. How did you notice it had been deleted? Liz05:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Done The editor who tagged these two articles for proposed deletion just tagged dozens of articles as PRODs over the past two weeks. You might browse their list at User:Imcdc/PROD log if you think you can bring some of these articles up to current standards for the project. Many of them were for small financial institutions/incubators so they may not be of interest to you. Liz05:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
To be honest, I am really skeptical of that editor's understanding of notability. Based on the amount, I truly doubt they are spending any real time looking into source material before proposing them for deletion. I have removed a number of tags and will continue to look into more. Best, Thriley (talk) 06:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
It was a little overwhelming yesterday. We had 128 PROD'd articles and even though they were not responsible for all of them, they did tag at least half. A typical day has around 30 PROD'd articles/day to review so this was a sizeable jump in quantity. I asked them to pace themselves. Liz06:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Based on what I have seen so far, I think they should just be taking these articles to afd. I think there's going to be more cleanup than needed because they have chosen not to do their due diligence in looking up source material. Thriley (talk) 06:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Good Morning Liz, Happy New year to you! I’m not sure if I’m messaging you at the right place but I’ll give it a go here. My name is Carlton Ubaezuonu and I’m a professional football player. I used to have a page written up on me on Misplaced Pages but for some reason it’s not there anymore? I noticed you may have worked on it so I was hoping it can be brought back? I’m not sure how it works. Thank you very much! Carltonuba38 (talk) 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
2025
Have a happy New Year filled with light!
Hi Liz, Best wishes that the new year brings peace, good health and happiness. Thank you for what you do for the encyclopedia and this community. Your work at AfD is especially appreciated. Congratulations on your newest role as an arb. Hope the year ahead is a good one.
Image: New Year's Eve Foxfires at the Changing Tree, Oji, Utagawa Hiroshige, woodcut, 1857
Happy New Year, Liz! In 2024, other editors thanked you 1481 times using the thanks tool on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the #5 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024. Congratulations and, well, thank you for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! Mz7 (talk) 19:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
As far I remember, there were almost 500 redirects to gameplay of Pokémon, many of which had other targets in the past, were blared (they have history), or could be retargeted to other pages. What could we do about it? Skemous (talk) 21:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
I could not end the year without expressing my thanks for your perfectly chosen closing words nearly three months ago. Having been the subject of that ANI, those much appreciated words greatly contributed to the positive closing of the matter. I am grateful for your kindness and extend best wishes for 2025. —Roman Spinner(talk • contribs)02:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
or
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Liz -- Thanks for your message on my talk, and for suggesting looking at recently deleted prods, I hadn't realised there was a report. I see what you mean about there being a lot! Do you mind if I just undelete those I would definitely have deprodded if I'd seen them, without consulting you as the deleting admin? Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
No, I have no problems with PROD restorations. You don't have to make a request but do include an edit summary. Unlike articles nominated for AFD discussions, PROD'd articles get little attention. Here are a few lists that can be helpful that you may or may not know about:
I will just add that some editors can be a little touchy about an article they have PROD'd being de-PROD'd or restored. You might see some of those articles later sent to AFD for full discussions. Liz20:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks -- I've been using the first two lists, but the SDZeroBot/PROD Watch set are new to me; I'll make a note of them.
I undeleted a handful of yours, but managed to click undelete on one before I'd provided a summary, sorry -- blame it on the New Year's mulled wine! (Not to mention the cat walking all over the table.) Have a great New Year's Day yourself -- Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
J. Steven Svoboda
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello Liz,
How are you doing?
Sorry I was busy yesterday.
The latest vote on the deletion page got me thinking: was I supposed to post relevant links on this page? I thought I was just supposed to modify the article, which I did for several days. Also, I'm not sure that I understood your decision.
Here are what seem to probably be the most relevant sources to give some info about him. Although many articles, mostly academic, and two large international child genital cutting experts statements, mention his work. I hope that voters have taken the time to read them and/or find them before voting (almost all these links were already in the article)?
Please maybe more time and efforts should have been given, particularly because Svoboda writes on a very sensitive topic and I'm not used to biographical articles? Maybe I should have gotten AI help for the article and deletion page, also to avoid the copyright concern? It seems to know well the author, which likely makes sense because he's a recognized expert in his field, and apparently in children's rights in general. Should I ask for a deletion review? Thank you Chrono1084 (talk) 15:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
I assume you are contesting the closure of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/J. Steven Svoboda? This discussion was relisted once and I didn't see sufficient support for Keeping this article on the project and most of the arguments from longtime editors were for Deletion. Yes, it would have been worthwhile to post your newly found sources to the discussion so that other editors could evaluate them and see if they would have persuaded them to change their argument but I'm not going to revert my closure and reopen this discussion. At this point, if you want to have an article on this subject in the main space, I see two options for you:
1) If you believe that I misinterpreted the consensus of the participating editors in this AFD discussion, you can file an appeal at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. DRV is not AFD2.0, it's not a place to re-argue the AFD. It's solely focused on my action as a discussion closer and if you believe I didn't interpret consensus correctly.
2) You can try to overcome the problems in the deleted article by writing a new draft. For this, I can restore the deleted article to Draft space or, what is probably a better idea, start a new article from scratch using these new sources. Please know that you can not simply move an article deleted through an AFD discussion back to main space as it will be tagged for speedy deletion CSD G4. You'll need to submit your draft article to AFC so that an experienced editor can review it and make sure than the new article has overcome the problems the caused the original article to be deleted.
So, the next step is up to you and how much work you want to put into having an article on this subject on the project. I do not recommend using AI to write articles on Misplaced Pages, that is likely to lead to more problems among editors that assess new articles. Liz01:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
(talk page stalker) It was a redirect to a now deleted user subpage; the only content on that page was a smiley. Since it seems like it was in use on multiple talk pages, I've recreated {{laugh}}, not as a redirect, but as a smiley. I'm not emotionally invested in this solution if there's a better one. Hopefully not stepping on your toes, Liz. Floquenbeam (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm sorry if this page deletion caused problems. The template was a broken redirect to User:VS6507/Laugh and the editor did a courtesy vanishing and in those cases, typically all User pages are deleted. I'm not sure why the template was redirected to a User page, I just saw it listed as a broken redirect that needed to be deleted.
Thank you to Floquenbeam for fixing the problem post-deletion by recreating the template. I should know in the future to keep a wide distance from template issues as there can be unforeseen problems from transclusions that might not be apparent. I'll stick with article, draft, talk, user and category broken redirects and leave the file and template ones to admins who understand those namespaces better than I. Liz01:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I see that my ANI report has been archived without any response, which really doesn't surprise me. I'm not convinced by the "I don't have time right now", as they have been editing quite a bit since they urged me to "go for it" – including even leaving 'normal' comments at my talk page as though the episode never happened. I suspect that they have realised that the evidence is just too damning: in the same circumstances I would just push my king over as there really is no credible defence. I suspect that they expected an adjudication on the content dispute, even though I told them that ANI does accept such pleas. It's a real pity that they declined to climb down the ladder when I offered. I can appreciate how they managed to paint themselves into a corner as I came very close to doing the same thing myself many years ago.
So now what? I have no demand for my pound of flesh. I don't want an apology. I just want to know that they have made a clear statement they now understand, accept and commit henceforth to comply with WP:EPTALK, WP:EW, WP:CONSENSUS and WP:OWN. I don't really see any alternative to a block on further editing in the meantime, that responding to the ANI should be their first and only priority now.
I'm sorry to dump this on you. If it is of any consolation, I think that this is my first or maybe second referral to ANI in best part of 20 years. (And I've also been the accused just once, due to an astounding coincidence.) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
What I often see happening on ANI is there can be little or no response to the first complaint about an editor. Any subsequent complaints that happen months or years later will refer to the first complaint and some editors will consider that a lost opportunity to act. Or it could be that there aren't any future incidents about this editor, it's hard to predict. But it's not uncommon for complaints posted at ANI to result in no action, especially if the complaint is very complicated. I know this can be discouraging if you spent a lot of time crafting a cogent complaint but for action to be taken, it often has to be the right time and this might not have been it. Liz03:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for that. No, I have no desire to pursue this to the bitter end, so I won't resubmit. My only concern really is that they may consider that there was no case to answer and that they can just do as they please without consequences. Is there any such thing as an "Administrator caution" (like a police caution albeit without requiring the admission of guilt)? Something along the lines of "Due to other priorities, no further action is being taken at this time but this incident is likely to be taken into account if there is any repetition. Please ensure that you understand WP:EPTALK, WP:EW, WP:CONSENSUS and WP:OWN." — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMF (talk • contribs) 11:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC) Just a sig, not a nag. No need to reply or even acknowledge. If the process doesn't already exist, an isolated incident such as this doesn't generate a pressing case to create one. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 01:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
So, 𝕁𝕄𝔽, did you repost this discussion from the noticeboard archives? Because it looks like it just needed more visibility to find an acceptable closure. I think editors go way too caught up in whether or not Uwappa was making a legal threat because it seemed like they were making a joke to me but other editors took their words very seriously. Are you satisfied with how the problem was resolved? Liz06:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
No, it was he who did it. His choice. The whole episode is rather odd. First, he urged me to escalate to ANI – and then declares himself too busy to respond when I did so. Next, he declares himself ready to rumble again: now a sensible person would only repost if they had their response prepared and would include it the same posting. And they certainly wouldn't (and had no need to) include "my legal team" nonsense with it – so we have to assume that it was deliberate. If it was a joke, why did he decline The Bushranger's invitation to confirm or deny? And then why did he respond to Malcolmxl5 by doubling down? All that said, I would be astounded it "our legal team" is anyone but himself.
It wasn't quite the closure I wanted (because it got side tracked by the legal threat and only marginally referred to the behaviour issue that underlay the report) but I'm content to leave it at that. My only concern is that he may appeal the block on the grounds that he never intended that the "threat" be taken seriously. I would hope that whoever evaluates the appeal will take into account the overall behaviour that led to it. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I wouldn't say better things to do, I just have a lot of things to do! It's all admin-related responsibilities. I can get discouraged when editors put together well-written reports for ANI and they just get archived with no action taken. I felt I might have dropped the ball here myself but I wasn't confident of what action was called for and I wanted to hear from other admins. And since I suggested you repost the complaint, it caught my eye when it turned up again. Why the editor chose to repost it themself when no action had been taken is a mystery. It's almost like they wanted to get blocked if you just look at their recent actions. As for if they appeal the block, they were acting rather sockish/trollish so I think it is more likely that they create a new account. Let me know if you spot a new account acting similarly. Liz17:59, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
The redirects that have been targetting Skibidi Toilet was retargetted to the vandalised title by a double redirect correcting bot. The pagemove vandalism has been reverted, while the vandalised title was deleted, leading the redirects to target a deleted page, which you deleted(or at least some of them; I am not sure).
I am not sure how much or which redirects used to exist, but those two are the ones I was able to identify.
Can you restore the deleted redirects? (assuming you deleted the rest of the redirects as well)
You can see the broken redirects at User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects. Sure, I can restore them and then I guess I'll undo the edits that caused them to become broken. It wouldn't have happened if the page mover who corrected the bad page move had left behind a redirect. Are they all worth restoring? Liz05:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry--I was away from my devices. I'd say they are all plausible search terms. However, I wouldnt reintroduce the Biser King and Paryss Bryanne due to WP:RETURNTORED concerns. The article has little information about those two figures. Ca07:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I have a concern about the deletion as i feel the nominater is biased towards pages like that as he has nominated severeal pages for afd based on his opinion which goes against years of precdence as survivor winners have almost always had pages for years all to be destroyed by one editor Wwew345t (talk) 21:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Please provide me with a link to the deleted page so I can see the reason why it was deleted. Thank you and have a happy new year! Liz21:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I feel like it was important to reach out to you because you closed most of thoae afds which also seem to be genreally not attended sometimes it was only the nominator who attended Wwew345t (talk) 21:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
He had severel soruces stating his notability per notability guidelines doesnt it mention that people with significant roles in shows get pages? Not only did he win he played 4 times Wwew345t (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm reluctant to restore Draft:Alfred Edgar Smith as it is essentially a blank page with just the page title on it. But you are a regular content creator so assuming that this article will become more than a blank page, I'm restoring it upon your request. I know that you have many editors and allies who support all of the work that you do but I'd put in a little time on this draft in the near future as it could be tagged again as a test page. Liz00:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I don't make test edits, and I am unable to see what was in an entry once deleted. I went to work on it and found a kind editor had already written up the subject. Thank you for restoring. I think the subject is worthwhile and worth including. I hope polite requests can be honored and that it's not too much trouble to restore deleted material. I am very limited on what I can publish to mainspace or more of these subjects would be added. Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Responding to AFD request
Hello,
I noticed that you said something about expanding on AFD requests. I am sorry for not expanding on what each article said on AFD, due to the lack of WP:GNG. I'll try not to do it again.
Okay, after doing some research, I think you are referring to a relisting comment on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Cydoor where I critizes your deletion rationale which was simply "Fails WP:GNG". This was an inadequate explanation for why an article should be deleted which should be an adequate explanation made up on complete sentence, not just an abbreviation, that references that a WP:BEFORE has been done which should be done before nominating any article for an AFD discussion. These two word deletion nominations just give the appearance that you spent about a minute on this AFD and are putting all of the responsibility for doing background research on the participants of the AFD discussion. Unfortunately, deletion rationale like yours are not uncommon but that doesn't make them any more acceptable.
A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
Technical news
The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.
Thank you, Tantomile and Fayenatic london for your good wishes. I have yet to plunge into my arbitration committee duties, another lapse on my part over this first week of January. It's so easy to get caught up with ones regular responsibilities on the project. Liz00:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025! ♦ Maliner (talk) 02:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
FYI, I've done several of these for BA. While the original articles were created by a sockpuppet, BA's taken the articles in hand and developed them appropriately. Acroterion(talk)20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm sorry for the delay in responding, I've gotten behind in replying to messages on my user talk page. Thanks to Acroterion and Star Mississippi for stepping up while I was busy doing other tasks. It looks like your request has been addressed. Liz00:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I just moved your draft to the correct name space, I don't review draft articles. But, on your behalf, I submitted it for review by an AFC reviewer who will give you feedback on your work. Liz00:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Dear Liz, I wanted to bring your attention to a fraudulent company at the deletion discussion. I nominated it, because this is a fraudulent company I read about. None of the articles there are reliable. They added a bunch or irrelevant paid "research", not covered by any media. I erected a threat on my talk page, from the author of the page. The the criminal history of all the "founders" was removed by the same editor, who has been blocked 7 times.They left the same threat on the page of a[REDACTED] who added that section in April 2024 or so.
Chargers include drugs, attempted murder. I had no idea my nomination is going to trigger this form of threats. This needs to be addressed. Please, take a look at the sources, when you will be closing the discussion.
It's best to present your argument including reliable sources, not just accusations, at the AFD discussion where it can be considered by other editors. Because this message could be seen as a form of canvassing (see Misplaced Pages:Canvassing), I won't be closing this AFD discussion. I've posted a message on your User talk page to the anonymous IP editor who was asking you to withdraw the deletion nomination. Liz00:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I haven't looked at this RFC yet but I'd be surprised if any airline destination articles are still present on the project. Most were deleted through AFD discussions from 2023-2024. Liz01:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Done Just a note that this was a BLPPROD, not a regular PROD, so it needs to have a citation soon or it will likely be tagged for deletion again. Liz01:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Liz, the article had nothing useful, and I wasn’t able to find any sourcing beyond the fact that he’s now a skating official. I’ve tagged it for BLPPROD. Bgsu98(Talk)13:18, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for this notice, I don't watch pings but after seeing this notice, I'm responded on your User talk page. Please do not stop with your ACC work, I obviously stumbled upon an unusual case. Liz01:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
January 2025
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Liz, it has been a week. I went to the 'Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The North American Discworld Convention' page, and then to the WP:refund page. The opening paragraph is,
I went to the Are you in the right place?
If your article was deleted through the articles for deletion process, then a request here is not the way to seek restoration. If you believe that the deletion was handled improperly or that circumstances have changed, please contact the administrator who deleted it. If such concerns are not addressed by the deleting administrator, you may seek redress at deletion review.
Can you assist here please? I think the info at The North American Discworld Convention should be folded into the International Discworld Convention.Halbared (talk) 15:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi! Just mentioned you here and suggested that MC might contact you for the draft so wanted to give you the heads up. (The deletion is fine, no issue with that at all). Have a great day StarMississippi14:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Deletion of a page I wrote
I just got a notification of deletion of a page I wrote by yourself citing some sort of reason I don't understand. The article is in reference to a defined standard and as such is self sustaining. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=PDX_(IPC-257X)&action=edit&redlink=1
I may not be the best at writing original articles and I really don't recall or can see what I wrote, but given my passion for detail and accuracy together with extensive domain knowledge I expect it was as accurate as possible. JayMoog (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you
Liz, following on from our recent exchange at ANI I just wanted to acknowledge the accuracy of what you said and my appreciation to you for having said it. You were correct in relation to the type of user that I had become over the course of recent months.
Nonetheless, with regard to it's kind of like you are saying what you think we want to hear so it's hard to know how reflective this incident has caused you to be I just wanted to reiterate that everything I said in that thread was entirely genuine.
I have acknowledged and apologised for my errors in great detail and have offered to moderate my future conduct in ways that far exceed even the requests of my greatest critics. For further evidence of self reflection please see my recent comment to Timtrent, here .
My only wish now is to be allowed to move on and to put these events behind me. Earlier today I overhauled my userpage from the recent version displaying my COI-related barnstars to a rather older version setting out my previous rather modest activities in content improvement. Hopefully this gives further indication of my intentions going forward.
Lately I've seen your comments around in several discussions, and I realized that they always seem to contribute insight and understanding, and to relieve some tension in the discussion. I think I have some pages to take from you in learning how to conduct myself in heated exchanges. Best wishes. Photos of Japan (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar. I have some links to some articles/essays at the top of my user talk page that have guided some of the work I do. I just try to remember that every account is a person who might be having a really bad day. I think we can be quick to just want to block editors that might cause occasional disruption when they really need is some education. But they have to be open to it and for some editors, realizing you don't know it all can be the hardest step.
But I think you'd be surprised if you looked into the early editing histories of editors who have been here for a long time and see that they didn't "get" all of our policies immediately when they first started editing. Heck, I was part of an SPI case in my first months here because a longtime editor thought I "knew too much" so I must be a sockpuppet. So, we need to realize that a) everyone makes mistakes, b) a actual human comment usually works better than a template and c) don't assume bad motivations when the truth actually lies in ignorance of specific policies. Thanks again. Liz21:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 66
The Misplaced Pages Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024
Liz, I'm sorry to bother you as I know you are busy. When you have a minute, could you close this AFD as Speedy Keep, per a discussion that took place there. Thank you so much. Bgsu98(Talk)00:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi,
As you’ve noticed, in the ANI titled Cross-wiki harassment and transphobia from ;:User:DarwIn. It has become a colossal mess and it’s all over the place with the community heavily divided as to the full ramifications. I would like to request if you in your capacity as an arbitrator could bring this up to the Committee because I think the community is so divided on this issue that it’s not gonna end well. I think the community deserves to have a final answer to this because of the crazy nature of this post and I believe if the committee was to get involved. It would resolve things. I was considering filing a request but since I’m not party to the case and I am merely an outsider I believe I have no grounds for this.
What are your thoughts on this? You mentioned I am inexperienced and I admit I am as I am wet behind the ears so to speak so I’d like advice from you as an arbitrator and experienced editor. Reader of Information (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
First, always provide a link to the article or discussion you are referring to. Otherwise, the other editor has to go searching for it which is likely to decrease the possibility that they will respond.
Secondly, I have become an arbitrator a week ago and have not done any official arbitration committee work yet. So, I don't think I have any more standing than you would. If you would like ARBCOM to consider a case, it would be more effective for you to open a case request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case or email the committee <arbcom-en@wikimedia.org>. I don't mean to dismiss your request but this dispute seems much more important to you than it is to me. But once you provide me with a link, I'll give it a look. But just know that many complaints posted to ANI or AN never receive official closure, especially when opinion is divided. Liz01:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Good morning, afternoon or evening (whichever is correct for you). As you are the closing admin for the Traveen Mathew articles for deleting page I would like to raise your awareness of the fact that, despite what an as I write unsigned user has suggested, I am neither the original editor of this man's page nor am I paid to edit on this website or any other for that matter. I don't really see why I have to point this out but as I have been accused I thought I'd reply. The user who accused me (Cameremote) has had numerous warnings about conflict of interest and other such matters. Cheers. Lookslikely (talk) 01:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Can you provide a link to the article or to an AFD if that is what occurring? Then I can look into your concerns once I can easily check the page you are referring to. Liz01:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for the link. I've made additional comments on this AFD about this editor casting aspersions. I should also point out that they are a new editor which doesn't absolve the editor from acting poorly but they are likely unfamiliar with discussion norms on this platform. Liz01:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I hope you are well. I was wondering if you could help me understand how this page failed to pass muster at an AfD and yet somehow still lives. I'm asking you as the closer, since you might have a better idea if what's going on here. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm not sure which page you are referring to but I try to help where I can. We have tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) pf old user space drafts I wish we had a way to clean up but so far they have been off-limits for decades. Some are rather promotional but so far I haven't tagged any as CSD G11s yet. Liz20:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello @Liz Thank you for your messages on my talk page. I have replied there but thought I would post my reply here also so as to be sure you saw it. I hope that is ok?
I read each article and each attached reference, if they open as some do not. I do a Google search for each subject matter and look at each result that comes up. I then write my response. I accept my responses are brief but I did not know they had to be any certain length. I can assure you I do not just vote without trying my best to be fully informed. I know Moscow Connection says otherwise but that is untrue and I am saddened that you have decided to take their word as fact. I have had several articles deleted and know how upsetting that is and therefore would never vote to delete something which I did not truly believe should be removed and had looked into. As you will see I often vote to keep articles or redirect. I also usually do my research on several articles then post my responses in one go which will explain why my replies often come in batches. Since my efforts are obviously not wanted and I am now receiving this thinly veiled threat from an admin, I will cease participating in AFDs other than ones involving any articles which I have started or been heavily involved in. As for blanking my talk page, I did not know there were any rules against doing so and you can check the logs to see what has previously been written. Once again thank you for your messages Shrug02 (talk) 09:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
@Liz In fact on further reflection, after more than 12,000 edits (93% in the main space) and 55 articles created (excluding about 10 which were deleted), I will (with great sadness as I have enjoyed editing and as a disabled person have limited other activities I can do), quit Misplaced Pages and leave it to you, Moscow Connection and JTtheOG. I don't want to be under constant monitoring and threats. Shrug02 (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
@Liz You know what, on further, further reflection, I am not going to let you force me to give up one of the few things that I enjoy doing in life. I have done nothing wrong. I have always acted in good faith and I believe I have added a great deal to Misplaced Pages. If you want to force me to quit then go through the proper channels where at least I can defend myself publicly. I would be interested to know if you have sent similar messages to the many other people who write brief responses to AFDs? I could provide a list but I do not want to be seen as casting aspirations against anyone else in the way you have me. Shrug02 (talk) 11:35, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
I understand that the article about "Khaleedthefirst" has been nominated for speedy deletion, and I wanted to share my thoughts with you.
I am relatively new to Misplaced Pages, and I know I still have much to learn, but I am very passionate about contributing and improving my editing skills. Writing articles has always been a dream of mine, and I’m committed to making sure the information I contribute is accurate, reliable, and properly sourced.
Regarding the article on "Khaleedthefirst," I am actively working to gather better sources and factual information about the subject. I realize that more verifiable references are needed to meet Misplaced Pages’s standards, and I’m focused on finding high-quality, independent sources to support the content. I want to ensure the article is both neutral and comprehensive, and I plan to revise it accordingly.
I’m aware that the subject may not yet meet Misplaced Pages’s notability guidelines, but I ask for your understanding and support as I continue working on improving the article. It’s important to me that I contribute to Misplaced Pages in a meaningful way, and I’m eager to learn from experienced editors like yourself to ensure the content is up to standard.
I sincerely hope that you will allow me the opportunity to improve the article, and I am more than willing to collaborate with others to make sure it aligns with Misplaced Pages’s guidelines.
I didn't think Khaleedthefirst demonstrated what we look for, which is notability so I tagged it for WP:CSD which is called "speedy deletion" here, but since you are new to Misplaced Pages I'll let you know that every page that is tagged for deletion is reviewed a) either by another administrator or b) discussed in an AFD deletion discussion. In this case, an administrator disagreed with my evaluation and untagged the article. I think you would benefit from looking at their edit in the page history to see why they thought the article might demostrate notability.
If you have questions about notability and editing on Misplaced Pages, I recommend you bring them to the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you advice and support. Good luck! Liz02:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I've always gotten the impression you have either pings disabled or too many pings to keep track of, so here's small no-pressure to do anything notice to say I responded . Also, omg your edit notice has a kitten in it - I love it so much and I love the anti-vandal kitten. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 02:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Your impression is correct. I guess there is a Misplaced Pages grapevine. In the past, the issue was that the majority of my edits are to User talk pages and the majority of those edits are to User talk pages for very new editors. So, I was getting a lot of pings with questions about general editing on this project, more questions than I could respond to.
But after a few years of not paying attention to pings, I should probably try again to see if I can respond to the ones that I get. Not being responsive to pings does irritate some longtime editors who don't know to come to my own User talk page.
I very rarely participate in FFD discussions so I'm not familiar with the norms of that deletion forum. I just happen to come across this image in an ANI discussion on the same day as you nomiated it so I thought I'd post a comment, not a vote. I will readily admit that after editing on this project for 11 1/2 years, my weakest areas of knowledge are files and templates so I usually don't butt regarding these pages. But I'll check in and see how you responded to my comment and, you know, I'll probably learn something new! Liz02:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Dear Liz, I am a member of the German Misplaced Pages. A friend of mine, an investigative journalist from Germany, asked me to contact you. He has some questions regarding YoungHoon Kim's attempt to add an article to the American Misplaced Pages.
How can he get in touch with you? I'm not able to send you an email here. In any case, I can't find the function for this. The interface of the German Misplaced Pages is structured differently. Maybe you would respond to my request here? Thank you very much and kind regards... NellsPort (in GER-Wiki) NellsPort (talk) 19:31, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Liz! I recently raised an ANI filing that you commented on, and I just wanted a piece of third party advice about its closure, and what (if anything) I should do about it. I'm coming to you rather than the closing admin as, based on their last comment, I'm worried that if I attempt to discuss the closure with them directly they will interpret it as a personal attack on another user, which isn't my intentions.
I personally think the last comment and closing statement is incorrect, that Sro23 did not say what they are being claimed to have said at SPI (comment in question - they say Note: StrexcorpEmployee behaves differently from previous sockpuppets, which I'm sure is just Sro23 saying the SPI pages got incorrectly merged the day prior; not a response to the IP user's comment giving evidence linking the two accounts). The closing admin closed the AN/I topic and gave me a formal warning based on this. I feel a bit powerless here and I feel like this warning was unfairly applied and based on a misreading, especially when no other admin weighed in on Sro23's comment, and I don't feel able to go to the closing admin directly. I'm mainly asking for admin input - is this a clear cut case of me just being in the wrong? If so I'll just take it on the chin and move on. But really I think this formal warning is overly harsh, and (if appropriate) would like it struck, but I don't know how to pursue that without causing a scene. Any advice (including simply saying "Bugghost, you're in the wrong, just drop it"), would be appreciated. Thanks! BugGhost🦗👻05:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
No worries. The trick that was complicating it for you is that the categories weren't straight declarations, but were using complex switch coding to factor for the variables in each category name (like the year, the federal, provincial or territorial distinction, etc.) — and what made it a pain for me was that because it was done the way it was done, there was no way to fix the federal categories without breaking the provincial and territorial categories at the same time.
But since the provincial and territorial categories were eventually going to get moved anyway on the same grounds, it would have made no sense to either revert all the category moves or try to get a half-measure added to the template that only fixed the federal categories only to have to undo it again a few days or weeks later — so I just went for the whole enchilada, and then buckled down and dealt with moving the provincial and territorial categories right away.
I'm not always an expert in template coding either, especially when I come across redlinks created because the category generation is sequestered off in a module I can't edit at all, but luckily this one fell inside what I knew how to fix. But thanks for the props! Bearcat (talk) 21:22, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
I would like to create an article for Allicia Juarrero, noted theorist and philosopher
However, a previous draft was deleted due to inactivity:
A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted.
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below.
Hello, and a question. I've been taken to task for commenting too much in the AfD, although I feel I'm just correcting basic mistakes in editor's comments. Now another 'merge' comment also misses the point of a museum source being counted towards GNG. Can I comment again, or does being accused of bludgeoning by those who want to delete an article carry some kind of actual weight of "don't comment again or else". Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
p.s. Seems I don't have to comment again as someone has come along with several additional good sources. Just not understanding why correcting misinformation in such a discussion can be considered bludgeoning. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
As you mentioned in your close that it would be a possibility, I’ve recreated the title as a redirect. Would you be opposed to undeleting its history for posterity & access by non-administrators?
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 23:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
The afd was, briefly, closed as keep between here and here, there was a DRV.
PrimeHunter's move occured here which is within that c. 35h timespan. Basically because I asked him.
Per this, I see nothing troutable about PrimeHunter's draft move. Also, all comments after the first relist (which also was the DRV-reopening) is referring to the current (mostly) article-version, which is more substantial than the keep version. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:24, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
This timeline is too confusing to follow. An article shouldn't be moved in the midst of an AFD discussion. If it was moved during some weird time zone when the AFD was temporarily chosed, that should have been mentioned prominently in the AFD and the AFD should have been closed at that time. There was no "right" closure with this AFD since the article changed midway through the discussion. Liz07:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
It wasn't moved in the midst of an AFD discussion (it's not that confusing, is it? DRV:s happen). The afd was closed keep, and there was no reason at the time to think that was temporarily. It was noted in the afd that there had been a DRV, though arguably not prominently (the re-opener did state "Reverting non-admin close and relisting as an uninvolved administrator in my individual capacity."). Ping @OwenX and @Pppery if you wish to comment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Sequence of events:
The AfD was closed as keep. There was no indication it would be temporary.
On a request I moved a better version of the article whose inferior version had already been kept.
Somebody opened a DRV.
The AfD was reopened.
I could not predict 3 and 4. The closed AfD page said as usual
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
I'm not sure I agree with the logic that rewriting an article during the AFD invalidates the AFD. Notability is usually independent of the state or quality of the article.
That was a weird afd because it was an nactor and gng fail, but experienced editors really wanted to keep it.
I wouldn't have minded a keep outcome for that afd. The article is useful and encyclopedic. It doesn't hurt anything by having it. Just my two cents. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Also, the draft had been around quite awhile, submitted several times and was waiting for review (again) when someone put the version that was taken to afd in mainspace, so the afd was going on at the same time as the old draft was waiting for assessment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Liz, can you please look into this user's CONTINUING reverts of my actions? This is a completely unreasonable level of preoccupation with my edits. 04:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I reverted all my edits on the Fender article, however this edit is not how to improve the article, article talk pages are not a forum and that is my rational for the removal. Do what you want to the article, if your edits are an issue going forward, then other page watcher's will handle them. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 06:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
AFD discussion was closed, and included in that AFD discussion was talk about how the draft version should be used instead, with general concurrence there and elsewhere.
(An in any case, it shouldn't matter, since the discussion was over the notability of the topic, and both versions of the article were on the same topic.)
I suggest that you at the very least undo the trouting, and consider undoing the closure altogether. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello! I just wanted to request that you archive your user talk page, Liz. While it may not be bothersome to you, many editors have slow connections, and having a very large talk page can hamper communication. Cheers, CapnZapp (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
If you have time, please help
Hey, @Liz I hope your are well, a group of editors overreacted and reverted my edits aggressively. While i was trying to improve the SIF article by moving criticism out of the theology section to separate criticism section, Because i was reading similar article, Minjung theology before and the criticism section make it easy to understand.
Theology and criticism are not the same thing, which is common sense, but I was punished for using my common sense. I even tried to discuss it with them but they are threatening on my talk page, may be they think they have some sort of ownership of the article. One of them has been blocked before for such behavior.
Re: User:102.220.210.123, to clarify I wasn't requesting an indef block, only providing commentary for context. Predominantly to dissuade an admin from a worthless 48-72 hour block, given the IP appears appears to have remained static for past 9 days already, thus gone beyond the usual DHCP average lease times. I was hoping an admin would read between the lines as occured. CNC (talk) 22:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
That "stressed" edit notice is from this summer after my mom died, I really have to remove that. Liz03:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry to hear that, my condolences. It is not time-sensitive at all. I just figured I'd mention it here because you do a lot of cleanup work. It looks like user TheTechie added that template in this edit. Polygnotus (talk) 04:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Liz, its Nelson. I would want to thank you for the matter. I am glad that you and the others helped out in this case; the matter had been affecting me personally. Still, I have a concern that he might retaliate again despite the block and might go further on.
I had not responded to him directly because I do not wish to make enemies or increase the conflict, and even gave him chances. I am shocked and saddened that he would be going after me for the photo issue when it could be easily resolved in another, perhaps an even better way and somehow, I was singled out. It was my interest in crime that made me come here years ago and he said a lot of things, whether indirect or direct, and yeah it affected me for the week throughout. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 04:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Have you ever noticed the difference between the banner on an article that has been nominated for deletion and the banner on a draft that has been nominated for deletion? An article says not to remove the notice until the AFD is closed. A draft or essay or whatever says not to blank, merge, or move the page, or remove the notice until the AFD is closed. I have said, for several years, that the AFD banner should contain the same notice. What happened with Raegan Revord is that an editor moved the page by replacing it with another page, gumming up the AFD. A notice not to move the page would have been useful.
This was a misguided good-faith move that was not a good idea. What I have seen more times is a bad-faith move. An author, maybe a conflict of interest editor, or maybe just an ultra, creates an article. A reviewer draftifies it. The author moves it back to article space. A reviewer then writes an AFD and nominates the article. The author then moves the article back to draft space, to stop the AFD, preventing the community from reaching consensus.
The afd notice used to say exactly that - see for example this old version. It seems to have gone missing during the cut and paste to what's now at Template:Afd in 2006, and the deletion of the old history conveniently covers it up. —Cryptic23:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon This subject has been in a kind of "development hell" for quite awhile. The draft was pending for review (again), and someone decided during that pending to make a new version and put it in main-space, and that version was taken to afd. Then the afd closed keep, the "swapping" happened, there was a DRV, and the afd was reopened, then closed by Liz. And now there is a new DRV. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Do you realize that the whole notion of "rogue admins" has been around for 18 years, back when admins would occasionally actually go rogue? Look at old ARBCOM cases and noticeboard discussions and it wasn't that uncommon for rogue admins back then to just act without any attempt to justify their actions by referring to policies. It was a wilder time but there are some longtimers who miss those days. Liz01:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
That was long ago. But the misspelling of rogue is still with us. One admin deleted AfD (or was it VfD then?) and then there was the Userbox wheel war. And more. Amazing. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:46, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I am messaging you because I have seen you close multiple AfD's I have started, and no doubt countless more. I started a new AfD a couple days ago, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jodi Hildebrandt, and there is a brand new account that has never edited before voting in it. I wanted to know who they were after they voted to keep it without citing any specific notability guidelines the article passed or guidelines more generally that would support keeping the article, and I came to find out they were a brand new user whose account was registered six hours ago, as of writing this. I am not contacting you as an administrator to get this user in trouble, I just don't quite know how to take this, since in the interest of not casting aspersions, I don't want to accuse them of sockpuppetry. But at the same time, I don't know why a brand new account would be voting in an AfD. I do want to assume good faith, but I find it kind of strange myself.
But that's just me. Do you have any thoughts on how this situation can be handled in the context of determining consensus for this discussion? JeffSpaceman (talk) 12:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Offer of help with ArbCom
Hi Liz. As we head into week four of the year, I have noticed that you had been inactive all year so far with ArbCom. Coming here I see you've made a couple of comments suggesting that you might be having trouble getting started. I'm sure that your colleagues are ready to be of help but sometimes it's easier to get help from someone a little removed. If I can be that person to you please don't hesitate to reach out - here or via email. Given your overwhelming trust by the community - 1100 votes! (real votes too not !votes) and 80% support! - I can't be the only one eager to see your work on the committee. But I could also see how that election result could put a lot of pressure on someone. So if it's that or anything else that I could be of assistance with, please do let me know. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for reaching out in such a polite, gentle way. I'll just say that the biggest concern I saw in the questions I faced during the pre-election process was the high level of activity I spend on this project already. It was a valid concern and it's been a challenge for me to cut back my busy admin activities to make space for arbitration work. I also have a separate email account for arbitration work that I need to start checking more regularly. And all of the arbitration wiki pages that I don't seem to be able to find links for.
So, I think my biggest problem is not scheduling in ARBCOM work into my daily routine of tasks. I do feel a great deal of pressure though and dismay that I haven't made that job a priority in my on-wiki time. I'll try to make a fresh start tomorrow morning and if I have questions, I'll reach out to you. Thanks again. Liz05:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Glad to hear you'll reach out. I hope you'll forgive a couple of follow-up comments. As for And all of the arbitration wiki pages that I don't seem to be able to find links for. the best place to start might be {{ArbComOpenTasks}} which lists all the open onwiki buisness of ArbCom and can be found on each of the three work pages (Requests, Motions, Amendments). Diving into PIA at this point might be hard. But there is an open request for amending the scope of the American Poliltics contentious topic open at WP:ARCA that might be up your ally? As for the email checking, having just started my own separate email for the U4C, I've been forwarding to my main wiki account. That way I know when there's something in there to check. This might be helpful as you establish habits and then you can easily turn it off? But so much of the important work happens in email and yes figuring out how ArbCom fits into the flow of your life and wiki work is a challenge for every new arb. Given your experience (and perhaps a little trial and error) I'm sure you'll figure it out. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi Liz, I hope neither you nor Barkeep minds me sticking my nose in. I would suggest making emails part of your daily routine; the way I do it is I check all my notifications (work, social, Wikimedia) first thing in the morning and then every few hours as I get chance, usually on my phone just to keep abreast of anything urgent but find a workflow that works for you. Anything older than a day or two can probably safely be archived unless it's of special interest or you want to plough through. Then you can just watchlist the relevant pages on-wiki as long as you check your watchlist regularly. You don't need to worry about arbwiki on a day-to-day basis. If it helps, I give freely of my phone number to anyone who isn't a loony. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?21:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
If it helps, I give freely of my phone number to anyone who isn't a loony. :) ahh well that explains why I never got it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:40, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
" It also shouldn't have been tagged for deletion FOUR minutes after it was created." It was created a week earlier (), it's not as if the creator had had no time to work on it (and they had extensively worked on it previously in the Spanish version as well). That they put it in the mainspace via a cut-and-paste move is allowed in a case like this, but that doesn't mean that it is a "new" creation where the creator needs to be given time and space to work on it. Fram (talk) 09:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
I was not aware of the article draft in User space, I was just looking at the main space version although the fact that it was cut and pasted should have been obvious to me. I was still surprised that it was tagged for an AFD discussion just a few minutes after it was created, I don't know how you even spotted it so soon after the article was published.
I apologize if my tone was sharp, I just think that content creators should be given more time to improve a new article before deletion is considered. Liz01:37, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Regarding recently speedy deleted article
Hello, you recently speedy deletedNom Krouk. I had been editing that article to be in a better state than it was before, and I would to have it please be undeleted. At the time of deletion, the article would not have fallen under G12. TansoShoshen (talk) 01:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I deleted this article as a result of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nom Krouk and it was the consensus opinion of he tparticipants that it was a copyright violation. I can't revert my closure because you disagree with the consensus of the other participants who all argued for Deletion. Ordinarily, upon request I would restore an article deleted through AFD to Draft space but I can't do that with content that might be a copyright violation. Admins can't restore content that has been tagged as a possible copyright violation.
I would recommend starting a new article from scratch but if you really want this old content restored, you'll have to file an appeal at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review and argue that the closure of the discussion was incorrect. If participants in the review agree with you, they can decide to overturn my closure and restore the article to main space or draft space. Good luck! Liz01:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
User talk:Liz: Difference between revisions
Add topic
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Arbitration
Miscellaneous
Done I initially thought it was too late in the process for a procedural close but when I saw the nominator's deletion argument was actually an indirect request to get support for keeping the article, I decided that you were right and this was an incorrect use of AFD. Liz 20:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Faddle 🇺🇦 09:00, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 23:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Interface administrator changes
(and thanks for the note about NACs happening a day wearly; I will try to spend some time watching for that as that is far more troubling). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
.JPG)
cookie monster 755 02:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Y Restored there. Jay 💬 20:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!
Featured script
Miscellaneous
Improve a script
Requested scripts
Updated scripts
Newly maintained scripts
New scripts
![[REDACTED]](https://u3vuiephb.global.ssl.fastly.net/File:Oversight_logo.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
_by_Ron.jpg)
