User talk:Godsy/Archive/2022
 | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current talk page. |
| 2021 | 2022 | 2023 |
"Easily confused words" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Easily confused words and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 1#Easily confused words until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Blanking draft?
Hey, Godsy! Why do we need to blank this? valereee (talk) 20:51, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Valereee: I was going to move it to User:Kaf121/Madbhi, but noticed your statement that you deleted it. So, I simply blanked it. As long as the templates {{draft topics}} and {{afc topics}} are removed, so that the page does not populate Category:Draft topics used in wrong namespace and Category:AfC topic used in wrong namespace respectively, I have no major qualm with the draft remaining unblanked at its present location (though the main talk page of a user is not a good place for a userspace draft). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 01:38, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm probably being stupid...why shouldn't the user talk work to post that? I have no objection to it being moved to that redlink. I deleted an earlier version due to copyvio, then brought this one in so this very new user would be able to access their previous work without the copyvio. Why would we have any objection at all to that? What am I missing? valereee (talk) 19:34, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Valereee: No worries. Well, let's imagine that the draft remains on their talk page. The user receives communications, maybe even important, from a couple more users. They then decide to submit the draft to afc. The draft will likely be moved to draftspace. That is problematic because now the history of their talk page (something that should be preserved) is mixed with the draft. On the other hand, the draft may be quickly declined where it is at. Either way, the page will now bear an afc template (e.g. {{AfC submission/draft}}) thereby making it eventually eligible for G13. Unless the deleting administrator is particularly savvy and simply blanks the draft (leaving the other contents and history intact), the same issue of losing what should rightly remain occurs. Similar problems would arise if the page is ever brought to miscellany for deletion. Thus – placing the draft content on a main user talk page, as opposed to a subpage of userspace, presents many potential issues for the future. I hope that helps clarify a bit. Warmest regards, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 01:16, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not really, but I'll assume you know better than I do. How shall we best make the content and sources available to this user, then? valereee (talk) 14:18, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Valereee: No worries. Well, let's imagine that the draft remains on their talk page. The user receives communications, maybe even important, from a couple more users. They then decide to submit the draft to afc. The draft will likely be moved to draftspace. That is problematic because now the history of their talk page (something that should be preserved) is mixed with the draft. On the other hand, the draft may be quickly declined where it is at. Either way, the page will now bear an afc template (e.g. {{AfC submission/draft}}) thereby making it eventually eligible for G13. Unless the deleting administrator is particularly savvy and simply blanks the draft (leaving the other contents and history intact), the same issue of losing what should rightly remain occurs. Similar problems would arise if the page is ever brought to miscellany for deletion. Thus – placing the draft content on a main user talk page, as opposed to a subpage of userspace, presents many potential issues for the future. I hope that helps clarify a bit. Warmest regards, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 01:16, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm probably being stupid...why shouldn't the user talk work to post that? I have no objection to it being moved to that redlink. I deleted an earlier version due to copyvio, then brought this one in so this very new user would be able to access their previous work without the copyvio. Why would we have any objection at all to that? What am I missing? valereee (talk) 19:34, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
"George Traut Austin" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect George Traut Austin and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 14#George Traut Austin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Fram (talk) 15:08, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
"Wikipedia:RFDC" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Wikipedia:RFDC and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#Wikipedia:RFDC until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
| New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Happy Eighth First Edit Day!
|
Hey, Godsy. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 16:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
Happy First Edit Day!
 | Happy First Edit Day! Hi Godsy! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |  |
Happy Holidays!
.jpg)
.jpg)
Hello Godsy: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, RV (talk) 06:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
,_cropped.jpg)