User talk:Anne Delong/Archive 12

{talk archive}}

This is the archive of messages posted on Anne Delong's talk page, July to September, 2015.

Please comment on Talk:Tyson Fury

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tyson Fury. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox person

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox person. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Afro-Peruvian music, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cajita. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hi Anne

keep sending as many medical draft or any articles that are related to usWikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine, we really appreciated it, thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:59, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 15 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Bandzoogle page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of European cities by population

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of European cities by population. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Albert Franck has been accepted

Albert Franck, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for an amazing 1003 articles rescued and guided into existence

I am totally astounded by the awesomeness of your persistent and careful and productive work on rescuing draft articles. And your encouragement of new editors has lead to many more successful additions to Wikipedia. Thank you so much. StarryGrandma (talk) 03:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, StarryGrandma. Thanks for noticing! I know that my list is really just bragging, but keeping it is part of my personal motivational system. (Yes, as a child I used to keep a calendar with stickers to remind me to clean up my room.) I have another big list of ones I hope to find time to work on - feel free to take one off my hands!.

I can't help thinking, though, that fixing up these drafts earlier, when the original editors were still active to be encouraged, would be of more long term benefit to the encyclopedia. The trick is in picking them out from the hundreds that are submitted every day.—Anne Delong (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Draft:Dyala_Chack

Worked out your request at Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Draft:Dyala_Chack. Thanks. Vin09 (talk) 06:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Advocacy ducks

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Advocacy ducks. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Sailor Moon

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sailor Moon. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request to Restore D. Ray Heisey

Dear Anne, A Wikipedia administrator deleted the page D. Ray Heisey for copyright infringement. I was the creator of that page and I don't have the idea who added this material to the page. So, first, why should my page be deleted for someone else's fault? And, if the material was copyrighted, shouldn't they gave me time to remove illegal material? Now, can I request for restoration, so I can edit the page? Thanks in advance. Esmatly (talk) 20:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Esmatly. Here are my comments about your concerns:

Every time you add something to Wikipedia, you are licensing it for anyone to use, change, or even sell - so it's best not to refer to the page as yours, even if you were the first one to edit it.
Some sentences copied from Mr. Heisey's obituary were present when no one but you had edited the article, so you can't blame all of the problem on others. If the copyrighted text had been added recently, the article could have been "reverted" to an older version, but in this case even the oldest material had problems, so the whole article had to go.
As soon as copyrighted text is discovered, it has to be removed immediately for legal reasons. There is no choice about this. I know it can be frustrating. With other types of problems that aren't illegal there's more latitude.
You have already asked RHaworth about this, and because he had to refrain from restoring copyright material, he did the next best thing and e-mailed you the text, which you received. He suggested that you create a draft article and have it reviewed to make sure there are no problems. Just type "Draft:D. Ray Heisey" into the search engine, click on the red link and add your revised (totally written in your own words, with no close paraphrasing from another document) text and save. When you think it's ready, leave me a message and I will check it over for you. If I don't find copyrighted material, but do find independent references and a neutral point of view, I'll accept the draft.
One more thing - as you are probably noticing, each of the hundreds of thousands of editors on Wikipedia has his or her own priorities, and many of them choose not to work on or help with articles that don't interest them. The WP:Teahouse is a good place to find a sympathetic ear when you need help.—Anne Delong (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Anne, Thanks for your thorough response. I have created the draft and you can see it here. One problem is that there are some websites that copied material from former Wikipedia page of professor Heisey. Does it mean those material are no longer property of Wikipedia and this new page should be something completely new? Let me know. Yours Esmatly (talk) 10:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Esmatly: I found the article to be free of copyright problems, but it didn't have one very important thing: It didn't explain what he did in his career and demonstrate that he and his work had been written about by others besides his friends and close colleagues. That's what qualifies a subject as notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. I found some book reviews and discussion in books, and added a paragraph about his work with these references. I also took out the bit about his friend, since it didn't seem relevant. I removed the links that were in the main article, since those are not allowed. The article is in mainspace now. If in the future someone adds copyright material, it can always be reverted to this version instead of being deleted.

Yes, it is a problem that others have copied the old article - not a problem for you or for this article, but a problem for others who may have copied the text in good faith thinking that it was legally licensed. That's why Wikipedia tries very hard to remove copyright problems before this happens. Unfortunately, with nearly 5 million articles, and volunteer checkers, it's impossible to keep up. I hope that if in the future you find something like this on Wikipedia you will point it out to someone right away so we can remove it promptly. In answer to your question, any parts of the old article that were original text are still okay to use, even if they have appeared since on another web site. The old article is still available in a hidden archive. However, the original editor who wrote the text should be given credit in your edit summary if you know who it is (I can find out for you if necessary), rather than having it look as though you wrote it yourself. A simpler way is just to add the information, but rewrite it in your own words.—Anne Delong (talk) 14:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Anne, Thank you very much for your help and instructions. I should search and know more about Wikipedia policies. I will also try to check copyright infringements in articles that I check. As regard to evidences which show D. Ray Heisey's notability, there would not be any problem. As most of his life was spent in NO-Internet time, most of resources on him are offline. I will find third party sources about him and I will add them to page.Esmatly (talk) 14:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Thanks for helping less experienced editors. Esmatly (talk) 14:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 5 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Draft:Richie Birkenhead page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Sockpuppet

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Sockpuppet. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi Anne, just wanted to thank you for rescuing Walking boot from the garbage pile where it'd been languishing for nearly 3 years. I was a high school senior experiencing a sudden rare burst of motivation that quickly wore off when I realized my paltry few references weren't enough, and promptly forgot I'd ever started the thing. When I got the notification email telling me it'd been published after all this time I almost couldn't believe it. So: please accept my sincerest thanks and know that you just made my day, and maybe even inspired me to take a crack at writing another one.

Eelamme (talk) 04:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eelamme. Yes, making new articles is one of the hardest things on Wikipedia, especially for new editors, because they don't know the ropes. Many start out with good topics but give up before finishing the job. What really should happen is that other more experienced editors come along and help each new person. However, there are hundreds of new editors every day, and many of the regular editors are busy with their own interests. I hope that you will return to editing! If you don't have a new page in mind, I have this little list of other abandoned pages that I think have potential. You are welcome to pick one out and improve it.—Anne Delong (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Barr (playwright), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Columbia College, Black Caesar and Black Jesus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Fire Emblem Fates

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fire Emblem Fates. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Olympic Games

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Olympic Games. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OPNsense

Dear user @Anne Delong:, is any record of the recently deleted article OPNsense left over? Is everything -including former versions- inaccessible now? --Miraclexix (talk) 09:52, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Miraclexix. I see that you put a lot of effort into that article; you must be very disappointed that it's been deleted. Since I am an administrator, I was able to look at the deleted page. I have to agree that a lot of the references are unsuitable - personal websites, blogs or Wordpress sites, forums, announcements and press releases, etc. For a truly notable subject, there should be reviews and news coverage in computer magazines and the tech sections of newspapers, etc.

To answer your question, none of the versions are available on Wikipedia at this time. However, if you want, I can e-mail the text of the latest version to you if you didn't keep a copy.

Here is my suggestion: Wait for several months, keeping an eye on the news sources. If during that time the project is covered in recognized sources (magazines and news outlets with editorial control, not ones where anyone just writes whatever they like), then you can ask for the article to be restored at WP:Requests for undeletion, showing the reviews and news reports that you've found, and agreeing to remove the inappropriate sources.

I know advice to wait until later is not always welcome, but please remember that Wikipedia's policy is to have articles only about subjects that are already well known, and to specifically avoid being used to help new subjects become well known by promoting them.

Let me know if you need a copy of the text.—Anne Delong (talk) 11:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A copy of the article would be good. Can you put it on a underpage of my userpage, like user/copy, or is there a way not to give you my email through kind of a public means? --Miraclexix (talk) 13:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Miraclexix, if you have e-mail turned on in your preferences, I can send it to you without knowing your e-mail address. I shouldn't post it anywhere on Wikipedia when it's just been deleted. For future reference, if you ever have one of your pages in a deletion discussion again, you could ask for the page to be moved to Draft space as an alternative to deletion, and if the editors agreed the page would be moved there, where search engines wouldn't pick it up. Too late now, though. I will try sending the text through the e-mail process. Let me know if you receive it.—Anne Delong (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

A very warm thank you for the tone and effort of yours you put into this answer. Why? It is rather the very good exception in WP; I can fully understand your statements, I only do not like the way the WP lets gross-uncivility live it up, both from normal and admin-like WP editors, but waiting is o.k. --

Miraclexix (talk) 13:11, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Miraclexix, there certainly are a variety of personalities here, some rather over-the-top. I myself have been called rude because I rarely include pleasantries and I say what I think. However, sometimes an editor's feelings are hurt more than they should be because they forget that every page is a collaboration and that the integrity and trueness-to-vision of the encyclopedia is more important than any one person's edits. I have learned to think of my edits as "casting bread upon the waters" (editing impersonally for the good of the encyclopedia) rather than as "casting pearls before swine", (feeling ownership and pride in each edit and being disappointed when others hack and change). I still shake my head at times, but without the angst.—Anne Delong (talk) 14:13, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thats the way it goes per email. Thank you for the copy! P.S.: I still at times shake my head but without the revert ;) --Miraclexix (talk) 15:17, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Delong: If you -as an WP-admin- engaged with a longer than WP-average conversation w/me I thank you for your civility, because it is a seldom piece of culture in WP! If you've been called rude or something, you might have deserved it! To speak your mind in to my face would probably cause s.th rude - maybe, if you smile it would be not hard, though :) You told me you speak your mind. If I would do so on WP - not an admin- it would be bad, and encourage others to do the same. You have to decide, do you support rant speech or do you support diplomatic speech, now that you are an admin. I did edits a long time on pseudonym base! Notice that I am WP-around since it's start, some nasty new-sub-admin stalked me on this recently, rudely on my personal TP, I may have to back down to anon editing again, because of them stalking the wrong. This stalker is younger on WP than me, he might simply been envious, he disliked them "Ia ma since this time on WP" info-boxes on the personal page. There are portions of mine given into WP, still persisting, that are older that you probably started editing here (2001), I know some dirty abyss of WP, and I do not want to learn every new stuff the WP head-up-clouds got into. WP: guidelines that non of the staff and non of the admins seem to follow breaks normal Minds. Simpler rules would be better and the few rules should be enforced, even admins and vandal-vandal fighters should toll a portion. You might know what I tell my students and children about WP: do not trust it, find better sources, citing WP is a death-sentence! Now, what did I do? What did you do? There is material older that you stared editing and rose an admin in WP from me, and I am still in search of trustful people on WP, but my testing of one sub-admin, just got me into an witch-hunt of admins. I like it, because it proofs my case! Please convert to be a positive force and get things into perspective. Thanks for that in the long run , because WP needs a reform -- You can answer me , fully welcome, yours truly, but were do I find real persons on WP ??? If you have a _real_ and not forged advice how I could be more productive in the WP - yes I sorta beg you and it does not break a piece of my crown :) - I would appreciate it, because I stepped into and made a new -after a long thought and time - account and need some nice and cultured people here. If you stalk me for coverage, please notice I did also s.th to test the average admin-style WP crowd ;) --Miraclexix (talk) 00:16, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Miraclexix: Your post covers a lot of topics, and I'm not sure that I understand some of it, but I will say what comes to mind:

Having an account isn't necessary to edit Wikipedia articles, but it does make it easier to interact with other editors, so I hope that you will continue to use yours.
You are right to tell students not to use Wikipedia as a source. It is only a summary of what is in reliable sources, listed in the reference section of each article, and those are what should be used as sources.
The length of time a person has been editing Wikipedia isn't important; it's what he or she has done to improve the encyclopedia that counts. This can be done in two ways: (a) making changes directly to articles of draft articles, adding facts and backing them up with citations to reliable sources, and (b) writing on talk pages to co-ordinate with other editors. Posts on talk pages are worthwhile if they (a) help you to learn to make better contributions to articles, (b) help and encourage other editors who are doing their best to improve the encyclopedia, (c) discourage or prevent editors from making inappropriate changes to articles, or (d) are calm and logical discussions about how to make Wikipedia better. Some other types of posts just cause anxiety and take up everyone's time with drama, slowing down the important work of improving the encyclopedia. I try to avoid these and spend as much time as possible working on articles or drafts, or helping editors who need specific information.
If someone leaves a message on your talk page, look first to see if there is useful information in it, rather than worrying over the tone of the message. You can of course remove posts on your own talk, but consider that sometimes leaving messages that are questions and answers may save you time later, preventing another user from asking the same question.
Admins are just ordinary editors who have been given some extra cleanup tools. There is no such thing as a "sub-admin". I hope that you will stop spending your time "witchhunting" and "testing" people (this is a form of WP:Trolling).
About where to find civil people: You have already been invited to the WP:Teahouse, and there is also WP:Co-op, where you can find a mentor to help you to improve your edits. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Krishnakumar

If you don't mind, I'll move the page to P. Krishnakumar. The redirect from the current page will be automatically generated. Tintin 12:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine to me.—Anne Delong (talk) 03:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of best-selling girl groups

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of best-selling girl groups. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject TAFI

Hello, Anne Delong. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement, a project dedicated to significantly improving articles with collaborative editing in a week's time.

Feel free to nominate an article for improvement at the project's Article nomination board. If interested in joining, please add your name to the list of members. Thanks for your consideration. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, North America. Thanks for inviting me to what seems like a very worthwhile project. I won't be participating right now, at last not regularly, because there is so much to do at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/G13 rescue page, and the drafts there are all living on borrowed time. There are only a few of us working there, and I hate to see drafts about Members of Parliament, Olympic athletes, multinational companies, influential scientists, etc., being deleted because their creators didn't add enough sources or understand proper encyclopedic language. Maybe in the future there will be more participants and I can take some time off.—Anne Delong (talk) 18:03, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bombay Riots

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bombay Riots. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blue link not showing

Two times I tried to link Throne of Glass (novel) to this article Throne of Glass (which is about the series). first time second try. Didn't work. --Action Hero 16:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Action. I am assuming that you want the link to Throne of Glass (novel) to appear in the table in Throne of Glass. Your second try made a link which connected the article to itself. Try [[Throne of Glass (novel)|Throne of Glass]] and you should get Throne of Glass. —Anne Delong (talk) 17:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:B'Day (Beyoncé album)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:B'Day (Beyoncé album). Legobot (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Massimo Livi Bacci, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Rome. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians/Categorization

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians/Categorization. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AGO Art+Feminism Edit-a-Thon

Thank you so much for your help, Anne! Your presence was much appreciated. Can you help us in preparing for the next one this January? Seazzy (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Seazzy. I am willing to bring my projector if you have only one and want to do parallel talks again as you did this time.—Anne Delong (talk) 21:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! We'll be in touch :-)

Seazzy (talk) 21:51, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Janet Jones (artist); template; explanation

User:Seazzy left me a message about disrupting an editing session by making a reversion to an addition to an article with an under construction template by a new user in a session by you. I made the edit through Huggle. I first left a brief explanation and apology and thanks, thinking I had missed the template though stating that I was not sure I would have seen it in Huggle if it were not part of the most recent edit. After checking the history of the page, unless I am confused, I now see that the template was added after my one and only edit to the page. Another user made the later reversion after the template had been placed. It was a reversion to my previous version and perhaps that made some impression.

I do not leave this message to chastise or blame User:Seazzy, to blame the other user whom I have not named, to start some sort of dramafest or for any other reason than to say that it appears the message should not have been directed to me and I should not be discredited for the faux pas. But if I had made a mistake, I think the rest of my messages to User:Seazzy, in which I did not criticize the earlier message, were apt, civil and polite. I wrote that reminders to be vigilant are always useful in any event. I am sorry to trouble you with this but your name was mentioned in the message to me and I wanted you to have the fully story if this is on your radar. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 22:14, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Donner60. I was at the editathon, but I was not one of the organizers and was not in the room when this was going on; I was called in after the second revert. The people who organized the event were fearful that the art enthusiasts (many of whom hadn't edited Wikipedia before) would have their experience spoiled by having their edits reverted and wouldn't want to continue contributing. I tried to explain that reverting edits was common, and not to take it personally, and showed them how to leave messages on the talk pages to discuss the changes. A peek at the diffs leads me to agree that your reversion of the edit was completely appropriate, since the new editor removed another editor's work without explanation, and the construction template was indeed not in place at that time. I thank you for your civil response. This group is planning more editathons in the future, but the organizers and most of the participants will have more experience under their belts by then. Still, things don't always go as planned! —Anne Delong (talk) 01:45, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your understanding. I know a little about organizations and organization meetings so I think I understand what you are saying. I am glad that you are working on encouraging new editors because I believe new editors are necessary to continue the work of the project. People come and go depending on real life constraints, discouragement, tiring out or any number of reasons. New editors are needed to expand, improve and maintain the encyclopedia. They should be encouraged. I am not one of those who think Wikipedia is nearly complete or there is nothing worthwhile left to write about despite the wide coverage of topics already online. Many biographies and other subjects, which are notable even if perhaps more obscure, remain to be added. Many articles need to be expanded or improved and kept from deterioration.

I try to leave an extra message of explanation or welcome (with links) in addition to templates if I think that may encourage someone who does not appear to be acting maliciously or is just making some technical mistakes. I suppose some of these potentially constructive users get overlooked because of the way Huggle works. User:Seazzy has a good idea about putting a hold on reverts through Huggle for some period of time if a construction template is placed on the page. However, I am not a bot or computer expert so I do not know whether this is technically feasible. Donner60 (talk) 02:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard good things about Huggle, but I haven't tried it myself, so I can't comment. There are a lot of scripts and tools out there that leave automated messages, though, so I think that editors just have to get used to them. At any rate, there were a lot of enthusiastic people working on artists' pages, and just this one small hiccup, so the event was quite successful.—Anne Delong (talk) 02:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:California wildfires

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:California wildfires. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Double redirect

User:Avabkeating/sandbox is a double redirect. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GeoffreyT2000. Yes, I left the redirect deliberately so that if User:Avabkeating returned he/she would be able to read the text on the redirect page and find the edits in the page history for possible later creation of an article. The double redirection isn't occurring in mainspace, so it won't affect readers of the encyclopedia, just this one user and perhaps a reviewer. Sometimes new users don't realize that their edits have been moved, not deleted, and end up adding duplicate copies because they can't find the original.—Anne Delong (talk) 12:25, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Delong: Can you please fix the double redirect to redirect directly to Kostow Greenwood Architects? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GeoffreyT2000, since you ignored my explanation, and since bots regularly fix up double redirects after a period of time, I will be taking no action. In fact, I see that a bot has already done its work on this one. Next time, if you don't want to wait for the bot for some reason (???), why not just fix it yourself?—Anne Delong (talk) 22:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Precious again

Toronto Light Opera
Thank you, user drumming up interest in Bluegrass music, for quality articles on the Toronto Light Opera and its people, for Rigoletto... in Bluegrass, for rescuing articles and for your tireless effort around articles for creation, discussing, moving articles and expanding, for posts that make me smile , - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 985th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]