Jump to content

User talk:Paine Ellsworth/Archive 26

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Closure requests

Hey @Paine Ellsworth, thanks for the ping here. I happened to be on the page and noticed one was closed, so I figure I might as well mark it as done! Guess it's not like the pages I'm used to elsewhere, such as WP:PERM, where a {{done}} is good enough and the bot archives based on that. I've made a mental note of it so I don't make that mistake again in the future. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

It's all good, editor Hey man im josh. It actually is the closing template that spurs on the archive bot. Setting done=yes alone will not get the entry archived, but it does show at a glance that when the color is gone, so is the entry. All good, and thank you for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Joga (disambiguation)

What other arguments do you think should I have used to prove that there's no point to this move there? --Joy (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi editor Joy, it's good to see you here! Good question, because your args were quite strong, yet the nom and other supporter appeared to be unconvinced. I'm not sure how I would go about rephrasing, maybe somehow condensing, or finding other good reasons for opposing. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 19:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, then I'm not convinced we agree on how WP:DETCON works. Consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy. The quality of the arguments is key, not how many people are convinced, especially when so few of us were involved. 162 etc. made a request. I argued against it - in your words quite strongly. If this was outside of the RM process, per WP:BRD we would have left it at status quo. BilledMammal saw the discussion and relisted it without comment. Amakuru said the original request seems fine, made another kind of argument, I argued against that, and they didn't respond. 162 etc. and myself continued to disagree in the followup. How is this not a classic case of WP:NOCONSENSUS then? Can I ask you to reconsider, please? (When article title discussions end without consensus, the applicable policy preserves the most recent stable title.) --Joy (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
We agree then that the quality of the arguments is key, and in this case it led me to move the page and refocus the new redirect. At the time of the close I detected a consensus to move the page. I still do. Thank you again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 07:50, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Chris Williams (metal drummer)

What is the reason that you closed this move discussion instead of relisting? --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

With two editors ready to challenge notability at AfD, I saw no reason to drag things out. If the article survives AfD, then I would be okay with a fresh RM. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 07:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Rcat query

Hi Paine Ellsworth! I came across your edit here, and I was wondering why you removed the {{R from subpage}} rcat from that redirect. (The reason I ask is because I was going to add it myself, but then noticed that you'd removed it relatively recently.)

All the best :) ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 01:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi A smart kitten, and thank you for coming! The subpage rcat template was removed because there are no subpages in mainspace. Articles at one time had subpages, but that feature has been turned off in mainspace. So remaining redirects that were once subpages have either been deleted or are now treated like OS/2 or Providence/Stoughton Line. If you go to the Afghanistan article, click on "Page information", where any subpages would be linked, there are no subpages. So that redirect, which does not target the Afghanistan article, is certainly not a subpage of the Afghan Armed Forces article it now targets, nor of the previous targets Armed Forces of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and Military of Afghanistan. If a redirect is not a subpage of its target article, then it should not be tagged as such even if the solidus is present in the title. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:33, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the response! Please correct me if I'm wrong, but by my understanding, the {{R from subpage}} rcat could be used in mainspace where the page in question was a subpage in a historical version of Wikipedia - from the template docs, if it's used in mainspace, it will populate Category:Redirects with old history. In any event, as this redirect is definitely an {{R with old history}}, I guess it's just a question of which template to use :)
All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 02:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, again, that redirect is not a subpage of its target article. Since it was created back in 2001, the {{R with old history}} rcat template is appropriate. Not sure why I didn't tag it as such – I guess it was because there really wasn't much old editing history involved with that redirect. YMMV. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:53, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Great Britain rugby league links/doc

Template:Great Britain rugby league links/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Pakeha settlers

I've prepared an administrator-close of the Pākehā settlers requested move. Please read it, and if you feel that it better analyzes the case, I'd appreciate it if you could voluntarily vacate your close so that I could take over and close that one. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 15:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

You went to a lot of work on that one! Your words are certainly a much more thorough analysis of the survey, and I do sincerely appreciate it. Curious about two things: first, have you seen Sceptre's most recent endorse rationale at the bottom of the MRV? How would that affect your proposal? Second, what would then be done with the MRV discussion? Since the outcome of the RM does not actually change, the MRV would still remain open until someone closes it as no consensus. Would it not be better just to close the MRV? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 19:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I sense that there may be a "culture war" aspect to this – I haven't been keeping a close eye on RM discussions on New Zealand topics, though. This move review is a trainwreck, the vote is running 9–9 or 10-9 against endorsing your close. I hate to see "no consensus" move reviews. Looking at the instructions, "If the MRV closer finds that there is no consensus in the move review, then in most cases this has the same effect as Endorse Close and no action is required on the article title. However, in some cases, it may be more appropriate to treat a finding of "no consensus" as equivalent to a "relist"; MRV closers may use their discretion to determine which outcome is more appropriate." I'd like to treat the "no consensus" as a "request for another close", and then re-close it myself. Then see whether my close helps move the needle a bit off of "no consensus". – wbm1058 (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm definitely amenable to that. And it is hoped that the involved editors will then informally discuss the issue on the talk page rather than take your closure to MRV. Thank you for your help in this! I will proceed to vacate my RM close. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. I've now re-closed it. – wbm1058 (talk) 21:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

"Template:R from subtitle" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:R from subtitle has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 4 § Template:R from subtitle until a consensus is reached.

(Notifying you as you participated in a previous discussion at Template talk:R from subtitle.) All the best. ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 10:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the heads up, editor a smart kitten! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:05, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Talk:South Africa v. Israel (Genocide_Convention)#Requested move 12 January 2024

Your close here is very brief; can you expand on it and summarize the discussion? In particular, the level of support for the alternative "South Africa v. Israel"? BilledMammal (talk) 11:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

To editor BilledMammal: yes, my closes are usually concise; however, I would be glad to elaborate. I saw arguments on both sides that seemed very compelling with an overwhelming number of oppose rationales against the proposed title. A significant number of opposing editors favored dropping the parenthetical dab; however, most editors, some expressly, favored keeping it. Thank you very much for coming! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Template:Clickable button/Publish buttons

Uh... genuinely curious, what is this and why is it in the template space? Primefac (talk) 20:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

To editor Primefac: wow, from six years ago, and I sometimes have a problem remembering six days ago. <g> Let's see, what it is – it's just a reminder piece I use to help the more newly registered editors who happen to read my RM closures, where I link it in my closing statement. I think I put it in template space to make it more obvious that it could be transcluded. I see presently that's [only happened once], so if you think I should userfy it rather than leave it in template space, I'll be happy to. Thank you very much for coming! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
PS. Also, I see that I tied it in to the Clickable button template as a subpage. Guess I wanted it to be close to the button template for some reason. Ah well. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I guess I'll leave it up to you what to do with it, I'm not terribly bothered either way but it was a curious find while I was cleaning things up! Primefac (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
To editor Primefac: this has been moved to User:Paine Ellsworth/Clickable button – Publish buttons and is no longer in template space. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. Primefac (talk) 06:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
my pleasure! Paine  06:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Terrorist attacks against Israelis in the 2000s/doc

Template:Terrorist attacks against Israelis in the 2000s/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:07, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors 2023 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2023 Annual Report
Our 2023 Annual Report is now ready for review.

Highlights:

  • Introduction
  • Membership news, obituary and election results
  • Summary of Drives, Blitzes and the Requests page
  • Closing words
– Your Guild coordinators: Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Images in navigation boxes

Please remove flags and icons from {{Federal holidays in the United States}} and {{California topic}} per WP:NAVIMAGES, because its merely decorative. Unlike this, and this proposal that came to the unanimous conclusion that flags and seals do not belong in navboxes. 103.231.177.120 (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tucson Radio/doc

Template:Tucson Radio/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. DrChuck68 (talk) 23:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:University of Oxford/doc

Template:University of Oxford/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Exo/doc

Template:Exo/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Atomic theory

Hi. I see you moved Atomic theory -> History of atomic theory. I'd like to understand how this decision was made. I have been puzzled by the WP:CONSENSUS. As far as I can tell based on other discussions, a single dissenting vote was sufficient to prevent action. In the case of Atomic theory three were for the move and two against with one withdrawn "for move" vote based on the opposition arguments. Based on other things I seen I assumed there was no consensus. Where was my analysis off-base? Johnjbarton (talk) 15:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi editor Johnjbarton, and thank you for coming to my talk page! In that move request I read strong arguments on both sides with a bit more support than you apparently sensed. There was enough support to overcome the opposition to result in consensus to move.
Supporters
editors ReyHahn (the nom), Johnjbarton (you "Strongly Agree"d), Kurzon, Synpath and TheBooker66
Opposers
editors Headbomb and Ajrocke
On Wikipedia, a single dissenting !vote is only enough to prevent action if it is a darn good, policy-based argument, and supporters have weak args. All things considered, it appears that consensus was built to rename the article in this case. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 17:23, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for this explanation. Can you help me with two other mysteries? What set the time scale for making these decisions? Who is authorized to make them? Thanks! Johnjbarton (talk) 17:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you again, editor Johnjbarton, and it's my pleasure to help in any way! There is no "set" time scale for deciding to move a page or not, with the sole exception to be a formal request such as this one. There is a fairly well-set minimum of seven days for move requests. After that editors can close them at any time. A relist usually lasts an additional seven days, however if consensus is reached sooner, say in two or three days, then any editor can close the move request.
Pretty much any registered editor is authorized to close move requests; although, if one is a non-admin, then it helps to build experience starting with the seemingly more obvious decisions. Even then it is possible to make mistakes from which to learn. And the more experience one gains, the better decisions one makes. (Well, generally ) If you are interested in becoming a closer of move requests, then it will help to begin by reading WP:RM and WP:RMCI. To become a "page mover", see WP:PGM. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 14:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ranks for plant higher taxa

Sadly there's complete inconsistency in the literature over the ranks of the higher taxa for plants. However, many of our taxonomy templates treat taxa like Cycadophyta, Ginkgophyta, Gnetophyta, Lycopodiophyta, Pinophyta or Pteridophyta at the rank of division. Hence Tracheophytes cannot, in the taxonomy templates, be treated as a phylum, because this produces inconsistent ranks. If you change the rank of a 'high up' taxonomy template, it's important to check Category:Taxonomy templates showing anomalous ranks some time later (it takes a while for the system to catch up with such changes, as I suspect you know). The category had about ten entries just now before I reverted your edit and made null edits on the affected taxonomy templates. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Peter! I wondered about that after reading the previous posts on the talk page, but I went by what the Tracheophyta article said, which until editor Plantdrew removed it on the 22nd, called it a phylum. Apologies for my screw-up. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Well, it's not exactly a "screw-up", but a symptom of a problem with the automated taxobox system when there is no agreed overall classification, and experts in different groups of plants use inconsistent ranks. I have thought about automatic fixes, e.g. when working upwards from the target taxon, substituting "unranked" or "clade" if an inconsistent rank is found above the target taxon, but this is maybe a step too far. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks again, Peter, and for your encouraging words! Sounds like a gnarly problem, and I don't envy the continuing need to deal with it. I sincerely hope that a good and helpful solution is on the horizon. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Want to add that your Herculean efforts to manage these things does not go unnoticed! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tijuana Radio/doc

Template:Tijuana Radio/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. DrChuck68 (talk) 20:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Review

Hi User:Paine Ellsworth could you please see this Talk:Sargun Mehta#Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2024 2A02:6B68:10:6100:240D:8552:D271:2A6C (talk) 11:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2017 Speaker of the United States House of Representatives election

Hello. Please reopen or, in accordance with the RM, close the nomination as to its merits. The nominator "withdrew" the nomination 16 days into the one-week nom!, which was relisted more than a week ago, and was !ivoted upon and discussed by quite a few editors. Is that allowed, that if a nomination is failing after over two weeks and one relist that it can just be closed because the nominator withdraws? And if so, can the nomination which has already had a full over-two-week run then be newly moved to another group nomination? Please close that one as well since the guideline it points to is inaccurate. In other words, what a mess, and partly because the nominator actually lowercased the nommed titles ahead of the nomination (which should all be returned to uppercase going into the nomination, but not for this 2017 one which already has the full discussion that you've negated). Thanks (and yikes). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Is that better, Randy? I should have done that in the first place. Sorry. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 17:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, thanks, the snow close does make sense and is accurate after 16 days. But another editor points out that the RM doesn't make a difference to the new RM which is going for a completely different name for the page. I didn't know we could get around RM discussions just by offering up a different name, at least things mix it up a bit on Wikipedia. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Normally not, because a "moved" or "not moved" decision should hold up for at least a year. Situation reeks. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Paine Ellsworth Hi could you please fix link redirects for shows like Bigg Boss, Jhalak Dikhhla Jaa, MTV Roadies, MTV Splitsvilla, Strictly Come Dancing, Dancing With The Stars , Big Brother and Celebrity Big Brother contestants, hosts and judges also guest celebrities too as they all have been renamed. Like for example Tiffany Pollard and Gauahar Khan. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:D10E:EC4D:5600:8515 (talk) 16:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I need to know more – precisely which redirects and how exactly are they "broken"? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Look in Gauahar Khan#Television click on Bigg Boss 7 link then you will find out. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:614D:B596:BF0:9EE5 (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Strictly Come Dancing series 21 This as well see in the contestants pages all are old links. Please do for all the contestants celebrities pages for all reality shows mentioned above. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:F5F1:28CB:14AE:CC00 (talk) 17:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm very sorry, did I not say 'precisely which redirects and how exactly are they "broken"?‍' Those I've been able to find so far do not appear to need fixing. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 19:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
No I meant for example in Gauahar Khan it’s named as it’s old title Bigg Boss (Hindi season 7) when it should be changed to Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 7 please check television section. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:B030:62B8:832D:5BCA (talk) 20:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
User:Paine Ellsworth All bigg boss and other many reality shows in uk, us and india etc are renamed but pages still have redirects on. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:B030:62B8:832D:5BCA (talk) 20:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
It’s used as old link please rename to new link for all celebrities who are associated with the reality shows above. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:B030:62B8:832D:5BCA (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Editor IP2A02+, you might want to rethink all this and give WP:NOTBROKEN a read. That guideline, which represents a community consensus, tells us not to fix redirects that are not broken. When we put ourselves in the reader's shoes, the reader sees twenty instances in the Gauahar Khan article of Big Boss (some #) and all those redirects still get the reader to where they want to go if they click on those links - in the case of Big Boss 7, they still get to the Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 7 article by way of the redirect. That's why a redirect is usually left behind after a page move, so that readers will still get to the article they want. And as editors, we do not have to fix 100, 1,000 or even 100,000 redirects that have been left behind after a page move. Hope this helps, and thank you very much for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 21:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
But I don’t understand is you have fixed the redirects over here Template:Nach Baliye but you are not doing it for all the other celebrities of the reality series. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:C54:A57C:8433:485A (talk) 22:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Please let me ask you to look more closely at that "navigational template", also called a "navbar" and a "navbox" – and at WP:NOTBROKEN, which guides us "Good reasons to bypass redirects include: it is usually preferable not to use redirected links in navigational templates, [...]" An example of a subtopic redirect that did not get bypassed is "Amita Chandekar", a contestant in season 3. Most of the other redirects could be bypassed. Remember, the rule is not to bypass redirects; however, there can be exceptions to the rule as noted in the guideline. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2017 Speaker of the United States House of Representatives election_2

Greetings, user:Paine Ellsworth. I see you have changed the decision on the requested move at Talk:2017 Speaker of the United States House of Representatives election. I am not opposed to you marking it as "not moved", even after my withdrawal that is fair enough. However, you are mistaken by asserting that I withdrew in due to "wp:SNOW" opposition. I withdrew my nomination in light of discovering policy that applied, warranting me to close this discussion and open a new RM for that page, not because of any opposition. I still stand by my reasoning in that RM even if it is overriden by that of the newer RM and would have held out until the dicussion could be closed "normally" had I not created a new one. I am kindly asking you remove "nominator has withdrawn in light of SNOW opposition," as it is untrue. Thanks BurgeoningContracting 14:21, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, editor BurgeoningContracting, I certainly didn't mean that your withdrawal was "due to" the SNOWy opposition, but only that the opposition was snowy. And yet I can see how the wording might be misunderstood by some editors, so I will make an attempt to clarify and to word it more precisely. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 14:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, I appreciate it. I understand why you put that there myself, but to an editor who is barely coming across this, it could be very easy to misinterpret the situation. BurgeoningContracting 15:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
my pleasure! Paine  15:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

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

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Paine Ellsworth,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Please see now again

Hi User:Paine Ellsworth please see this again Talk:Sargun Mehta#Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2024 as I have shorten the confusion to the edits I want done. 2A02:6B68:10:6100:E1B1:5C52:7559:5A76 (talk) 11:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

User:Paine Ellsworth Please 80.76.56.153 (talk) 19:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Mexicali Radio/doc

Template:Mexicali Radio/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. DrChuck68 (talk) 19:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2024 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors April 2024 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the April 2024 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.

Election results: In our December 2023 coordinator election, Zippybonzo stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki and Miniapolis were reelected coordinators, and Wracking was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).

Drive: 46 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 32 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 289 articles totaling 626,729 words. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: 23 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 18 claimed at least one copy-edit and between them, they copy-edited 100,293 words in 32 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: 53 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive, 34 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 300 articles totaling 587,828 words. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 14 to 20 April. Barnstars will be awarded here.

Progress report: As of 23:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 109 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,480 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Re this edit

Hi :) While I won't undo it (as at the end of the day, it was only down to my personal preference at the time of typing the comment that I didn't bold the first word, and I don't want to be pointy), I'd prefer it if you didn't copy-edit my messages for me in the future. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 08:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh my, please do forgive me if you think I've overstepped. I do that all the time in discussions where the usual format is not followed. I honestly can't promise I won't do it again sometime down the road; however, I will try to remember your wishes. Thank you very much for coming to my talk page, editor a smart kitten! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 08:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

"Template:R subpage" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:R subpage has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 30 § Template:R subpage until a consensus is reached. ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 12:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Somewhere over the rainbow

Re this edit, why did you decide "Over" should be capitalized? Seems like our titlecaps styling would say 4-letter preposition is lowercase. Dicklyon (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

That's a very good question, Dick, and I agonized over it for some time. The article was moved from "...Over..." to "...over..." in May of 2006, and then to simply "Over the Rainbow" (dropped the "Somewhere") in June that same year. So neither title that uses "Somewhere" appears to be appropriate for the article – "Over the Rainbow" remains the original title and the common name of the song. So I dug deeper and found that the vast majority of sources still call the song "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" along with just "Over the Rainbow". The few exceptions are "Somewhere over the Rainbow", "Somewhere over the rainbow", and even "(Somewhere) Over the Rainbow". I think the reason why most sources capitalize "Over" in any case is because that is the actual first word of the songtitle whether or not "Somewhere" is also present. So I went with the sources and IAR'd WP's five-letter rule for prepositions in titles. I considered the usage in sources to be a good reason to ignore the guideline. My bad? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 21:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
A better way to ignore the rules would be to not declare either version to be a miscapitalization. But I see you might want to say which one is printworthy. Personally, I'd think following WP style works well here, as the "Somewhere over the Rainbow" version is quite common in sources, even if the other is in the majority. So I'd choose that as the printworthy redirect. Dicklyon (talk) 02:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Something like this? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 14:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@Dicklyon 2001:D08:1B88:6404:8DA7:2755:A972:7E11 (talk) 20:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Undiscussed move restoration

Hi. Can I ask why you have restored the undiscussed and no consensus title of the article that was erroneously changed without WP:RM? This is a controversial topic and article, undiscussed and non-consensus moves like that aren’t permitted and should be reverted. Now depending on the current move discussion’s outcome, the original title should be changed or remain the same but the undiscussed move that had no consensus should be reverted as it violated WP:RM. Thanks. Vanezi (talk) 09:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for coming to my talk page, editor Vanezi! I ask for your forgiveness, because we shouldn't rename pages during an ongoing formal move request. The move request began on 30 Apr, and you restored the title on 5 May with [this edit], while the move request was still open and ongoing. So please be patient while you and the other involved editors continue to sort things out, and wait until the move request is closed by an uninvolved editor, who will make a decision based upon consensus garnered in the survey and discussion. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Yet the move that I had reverted literally violates WP:RM. How is this relevant to the current move discussion? The current move can still proceed while we restore the last consensus version that was the article title until it was erroneously moved with no discussion or consensus in a controversial topic/article. Vanezi (talk) 10:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
If you don't have further disagreements, could you please revert the undiscussed move and restore the consensus version of the title until the current move is concluded? I tried but it failed for some reason. Thanks. Vanezi (talk) 07:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't usually repeat myself, and yet in this case apparently I must... pages should not be moved during an ongoing formal move request, not by you, not by me, not by anyone. Again, please be patient until the move request has been closed. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Redirect category question

Hey, been a while my friend ; I hope this finds you well.

Thought you might be able to help me understand why {{R with wikidata item}} is returning an error message for me on Ralph Humphrey (drummer) (permalink).

Warmest regards, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, editor Godsy, for coming! This seems to be a rare problem that I think is caused by an anomaly in the Wd module. I'm not well-versed in Lua, so I haven't been able to find the cause. My "bandaid" solution has been to link the redirect to Wikidata directly, which I have done for the Ralph Humphrey (drummer) redirect. That removes the rare occurrence of the error. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Images with misspelled parameter

A tag has been placed on Category:Images with misspelled parameter indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Liz, and welcome! This category was used for tracking and fixing an error and has served its purpose. It can be deleted anytime. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 17:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi

Can you please rv moosa edit as she removed my requested edit User:Paine Ellsworth 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:91BF:F278:6C67:7EFF (talk) 17:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 7 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:C4FA:446A:37E2:B2A3 (talk) 17:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 Completed. Elli AvrRam is still alive, so it becomes a WP:BLP issue to spell her name correctly as it is now regardless of what decade the listing is in. So I have linked to the correct spelling of her name as it is now. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:05, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tampico Radio/doc

Template:Tampico Radio/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. DrChuck68 (talk) 21:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi please edit request see

Hi User:Paine Ellsworth please see my edit request in Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 8#Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2024 (3) thanks 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:24C3:67E6:B5AB:195A (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi_2

Hi User:Paine Ellsworth please could you see the requests for Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 7#Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2024 (2) and Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 8#Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2024 please. 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:600D:1B5C:3E36:D939 (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Paine Ellsworth Please see my reply on
Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 8#Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2024 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:E525:41FB:E799:C303 (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Please because I am very busy and can’t wait for long as I improved both seasons 7 and 8 tables for edit request. 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:D986:B385:6F60:FB4A (talk) 17:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I am also very busy and have been unable to analyze your complex requests. Please be patient, and if you are the IP who is changing |answered=no to |answered=yes, then be aware that you are disabling the request and no other editors will see it listed. To reactivate just change it back to |answered=no. The big box must appear in the discussion in order for other editors to see the listing and perhaps respond. Thank you for coming! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 7#Nominations table has been done just need Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 8 to be completed. So please could you only see Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 8#Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2024 and do the request edit please when you have time either today or tomarow morning. 2A02:6B68:10:EF00:196F:60F:2AAE:65CA (talk) 08:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hello PaineEllsworth, I hope you're having a good weekend. Since the move discussion is closed now, may I revert the previous erroneously changed title which was done without a WP:RM? Thank you. Vanezi (talk) 09:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

To editor Vanezi: since at least one other, editor Grandmaster, agrees that the current title is a bit ambiguous, I would not challenge your page move back to the Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis (2021–present) title. However, I'm sure you're aware of the notice near the top of the talk page that this article is part of WP's contentious topics system of protection. If you do decide to boldly change the title back to the previous name, don't be surprised if it is challenged by other involved editors. In that case, you can always open a fresh move request to revert to the older title. Best to you, and thank you very much for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I think I'll move the article back to the original version that was prior to the undiscussed move, "Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis (2021–present)". I've tried to move it back but it doesn't allow me and gives an error, saying that "Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis (2021–present)" already exists. If you know, what can I do to solve this problem? Many thanks! Vanezi (talk) 14:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
To editor Vanezi: I've gone ahead and implemented your decision. Best of everything to you and yours! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Vanezi (talk) 16:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Happy to help! Paine  19:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!

It appears we don't agree on Template:R subtopic, Template:R subpage, Template:R plural, but thanks for pointing out the 21 yr milestone. It seems like only yesterday that I completed the 20! And if I recall right, I may have copied my signature font from yours. Jay 💬 07:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

my pleasure! Paine  08:15, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ancient Greek schools of philosophy/doc

Template:Ancient Greek schools of philosophy/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 07:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cigarettes/doc

Template:Cigarettes/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 07:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Death/doc

Template:Death/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 07:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Edit semi-protected

Template:Edit semi-protected has been nominated for merging with Template:Request edit. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Valianivske#Requested_move_14_May_2024

I know this closure may not be intentional and you did it in good faith. I am willing to ask whether you knew it was reopened for further discussion without intentionally affecting the move already done. Please revert your closure because @Pppery reverted it and later backed off as per no reason why you did that. Thanks. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

To editor SafariScribe: thank you very much for coming to my talk page! and yes, I did wonder why editor * Pppery * reverted my closure and then self-reverted his revert. His edit summary was, "Actually this is more complicated than I thought, will back out". To be honest, my close was intentional because I monitor the malformed move requests list, and that is where that move request appeared after you moved the page with this edit. I'm not sure what the correct way is to fix all this, but I do know that reopening that move request is definitely not the right answer. That will just land the request back on the malformed requests list. If you think that more discussion is still needed, then an informal discussion in a new section on that talk page might work. Or if you want it to be in the way of a formal move request, then perhaps the correct thing would be to open a fresh move request. Would you like me to do that for you? And thanks again for coming! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Gotcha. I see the problem. Thanks. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 01:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Happy to help! Paine  01:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Two reverts to Module:Wd/sandbox

Hello, you made two reverts to the said page some time ago. I presume you were debugging something. Is this still relevant? I mean, we should keep the sandbox up-to-date, to prevent some issues with editors forgetting to synchronize the sandbox with the main module before editing it. Could I revert the sandbox to the up-to-date version, or do you still need that one version which is there currently? Thanks. Janhrach (talk) 09:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

To editor Janhrach: by all means feel free to sync the sandbox, and thank you for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. Janhrach (talk) 09:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
My pleasure! Paine  14:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2024 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2024 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the June 2024 newsletter, a quarterly-ish digest of Guild activities since April. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.

Election news: Wanted: new Guild coordinators! If you value and enjoy the GOCE, why not help out behind the scenes? Nominations for our mid-year coordinator election are now open until 23:59 on 15 June (UTC). Self-nominations are welcome. Voting commences at 00:01 on 16 June and continues until 23:50 on 30 June. Results will be announced at the election page.

Blitz: Nine of the fourteen editors who signed up for the April 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 55,853 words comprising twenty articles. Barnstars awarded are available here.

Drive: 58 editors signed up for our May 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive and 33 of those completed at least one copy edit. 251 articles and 475,952 words were copy edited. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: Our June 2024 Copy Editing Blitz will begin on 16 June and finish on 22 June. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.

Progress report: As of 05:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC) , GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 2,779 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

TfD issue

Hi Paine, I've reverted [1] but only on technical grounds, the TfD template seems to have been causing the If_both template to throw the following <div style="display:inline-block;Expression error: Unexpected < operator">​ error, so I've rolled back the change but it's only a technical issue - I'm not in any way opposed to the deletion discussion etc, so if the TfD template can be added back (I'm way behind on my wiki markup to allow me to do it myself) feel free to undo my change. Nick (talk) 11:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Ignore the above, Nickps provided an alternative TfD coding option which appears to be working correctly, so it's back with it's seemingly all important TfD template now. Nick (talk) 12:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, your changes on {{If both}} and {{Both}} were wreaking havoc with a bunch of templates and infoboxes. Please remember to test your edits, and make liberal use of inclusion control tags. Thank you! Ivi104 (talk) 12:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Also noting that I also reverted Template:Both, and no objections if anyone wants to fix it up properly. Notes at WP:VPT. -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

You're all correct, that's all on me. I should have checked for the disabled type in the code. That's something that is not usually needed for these TfM issues, and it's been awhile since I had to ensure that the notice was disabled. So yes, I should have caught that, and I will be more vigilant in the future. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 June 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dancing with the Stars (American TV series)/doc

Template:Dancing with the Stars (American TV series)/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 18:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Jhalak Dikhhla Jaa/doc

Template:Jhalak Dikhhla Jaa/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 18:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Michael Crichton/doc

Template:Michael Crichton/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Linguistics

Hi - editors are currently discussing the topic "Should we keep delimiting diaphonemic transcriptions with single slashes?", which you may be interested in. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics#RfC: Should we keep delimiting diaphonemic transcriptions with single slashes?
Best wishes - 1RightSider (talk) 00:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much, editor 1RightSider, for this notice! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 21:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Islamic terrorism in Europe protection change

@Paine Ellsworth any way you can change the Islamic terrorism in Europe page back to regular protection, I have many edits I think should be added. Marksaeed2024 (talk) 21:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

To editor Marksaeed2024: I didn't protect that page, because I do not have the tools to make page-protection changes – as a page mover, I can only transfer existing protection when I move a page. Administrators (admins) have the necessary tools. You can make a request at WP:Protection requests to lower the protection level, and then see if an admin will approve it. Thank you for coming to my talk page, and hope this helps. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Your close of RM of 13 July 2024 al-Mawasi airstrikes

Hello. On 21 July, you closed the Requested Move of 13 July 2024 Al-Mawasi airstrikes as Moved to 13 July 2024 al-Mawasi attack. However, besides the nominator, there was only one vote supporting the move and the reasoning for it was not based on policies or guidelines. So, your close is premature and the discussion should have been relisted since the discussion only went on for one week with very few participants. Please revert your close and relist the discussion. StellarHalo (talk) 02:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

To editor StellarHalo: thank you very much for coming to my talk page! I don't mind doing this work for you – moving the page back, reopening and relisting the move request – but then what? Even if you were to oppose the page move, another editor can come along, close the request, and move the page anytime after relisting if they see a consensus. So unless you intend to oppose with a strong, policy-based argument, the page will be moved anyway. The move request went a little longer than the seven days minimum required. There were two supports, the nominator counts as one support and another editor also supported. There was no firm opposition. One other editor just made a suggestion as to the use of "massacre" instead of "airstrikes" or "attack", but did not support nor oppose anything else. On Wikipedia, that is consensus. The only way this should be reopened and relisted is if you can write a strong, policy-based opposition argument. What would that be? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
I would not have asked you to reopen and relist this if I have no intention of contesting the RM myself. I will oppose the move with a strong argument based on WP:COMMONNAME showing that most English-language RS refer to the subject event as an airstrike. I will also be arguing against any support argument that is just WP:OR. StellarHalo (talk) 22:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Okay, and  completed. Thanks again, editor StellarHalo! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 06:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded Isabelle Belato
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Izno

CheckUser changes

removed Barkeep49

Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Template flag

Hello, could you please replace the watermelon with the Palestinian flag here: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template%3AWikiProject_Palestine&diff=1232241010&oldid=1177607679 Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

We will need to establish WP:CONSENSUS first, since there was already a discussion which decided differently. Thanks for including your input there. Tule-hog (talk) 01:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
It was a "hidden" discussion. The community should have been pinged. 2 people should not have been enough for the change. At least change it back to the Peasant family until new consensus. There are already now more people that want the flag instead. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 04:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
I agree that more of the community needed to be part of the consensus. The change has already been made to use the flag for now, but I still encourage boosting the discussion in appropriate places to reinforce the longevity of the consensus. Tule-hog (talk) 04:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

"Reticulum-cell sarcoma" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Reticulum-cell sarcoma has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 14 § Reticulum-cell sarcoma until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Better automating "include Permanently protected notifier"

Hi, I've seen you add {{Permanently protected}} to multiple pages with the edit summary "include Permanently protected notifier". Nothing wrong, despite me using MediaWiki:Protectedpagetext instead.

As far as I can see, you seem to have Category:Wikipedia_template-protected_edit_requests watchlisted. I think it would save you some work if you went to WP:BOTREQ. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 12:56, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP 142+, and thank you for coming to my talk page! I've never actually made a bot request in all my years. And I don't come across the need for the template all that often. It applies to all higher forms of protected pages (not just templates) from extended-confirmed-protected on up. If it is put on a semi-protected page's talk page, it just stays invisible. And the text changes for different protections, and so forth. It's really not all that time-consuming. When I find a rare page that needs it, I add it and move on. Like magic! Thanks again, and thank you very much for noticing! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Ah, understood "needs editorial discretion." Btw, I really like the refreshing rotated exclamation mark, talk header, and editnotices. If there existed a Category:Wikipedians_who_use_rotated_text, I'd be interested and curious about the history. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 15:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Well, thank you so much! The exclamation mark is just in italics, as in ''!'', or <em>!</em> – the headers and edit notices are the result of my coming across the rotation code and shamelessly copying it from Alexis Jazz's talk page. So I know nothing of its history, but perhaps AJ knows something? The code for template rotation is:
<div style="-moz-transform:rotate(-1deg);-webkit-transform:rotate(-1deg); transform:rotate(-1deg);position:relative;margin:3em 0 3em 0;">{{(template name)}}</div>
for a minus one degree rotation. Again, thanks so very much! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:39, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Dashes and hyphens

Edits like this one and this one mess up the record of what the article titles were when the RM was proposed. Can you please stop doing that? When I submitted the RMs, these article titles had a hyphen. I also don't see anything wrong with the original location of the RM at Talk:Charles de Chambrun. The RM instructions describe how to put an RM discussion in a different place than one of the articles proposed to be moved, and I thought hosting it at the dab page would naturally show which article titles needed to be disambiguated from each other. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

It appears that several people have done similar edits. Maybe there is some reason to do them that I'm not aware of, but I think it confuses the record. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 06:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
To editor BarrelProof: those edits are the result of a move request appearing as a "malformed request". These show up regularly near the bottom of the WP:RM page and are fixed by several editors who, like myself, monitor them. When a multiple move request is made, then the request should be placed on the first article's talk page. If a different page needs to be referenced, such as a dab page, then a link to that page can be made in the nomination statement. Sometimes, to centralize discussion, a move request is placed on for example a WikiProject's talk page. That is the reason for the rare exception noted in the RM instructions. Thank you for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 14:54, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I guess I'll put RMs on one of the affected articles in the future. I had thought that putting it on the dab page would be friendly because people would need to consult the dab page anyway in order to understand the motivation for the RM, but that has other downsides as well. In the future, when someone renames an article after I submit an RM, I may revert their move to avoid this "malformed" categorization. I don't like the RM record to misrepresent the status quo ante. I just added comments to the User talk pages of two editors who did that recently to discourage it in the future. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
To editor BarrelProof: just had a thought... you have probably already considered this. Wouldn't it be better if you were to go ahead and move an article from an incorrect hyphen to a correct endash before you begin an RM? That would solve the problem of editors taking it upon themselves to move the article (against the RM tag which specifically sez to NOT move an article while it's undergoing an RM). I wouldn't make a move like that, but some editors seem to be passionate about fixing the hyphen-to-endash when they see it, which results in your RM becoming malformed, which prompts other editors like me to "fix" your RM. So just curious, would it be against your principles to make the minor move first? Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 10:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it crossed my mind, but I've had a couple of reasons for not wanting to do that in the cases where I think opening an RM is desirable. Leaving it where it is makes the dashed title less of an incumbent and helps show that it needs some kind of change, and I only open RMs when I think a simple change to a dash is not the right approach. There also may be no need for the dashed redirect if it doesn't already exist. Maybe I'm being obstinate and should reconsider, but I'm already done with all titles that contained hyphenated date ranges since 1700 (only a few remaining that currently all have an RM opened), and each century moving backwards has fewer titles like this. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I don't have a problem with that, but you might have to continue to put up with those editors who are passionate about correcting the "little things" without looking at talk pages for open formal requests. I've edited the lead of WP:RM to clarify and to support the RM tag that gets placed at the top of the article's page. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 21:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

NAC at Talk:Piecewise

My RM at Talk:Piecewise#Requested_move_20_July_2024 was closed in [2]. My [3] should be allowed in light of your edits like [4] in #Dashes and hyphens. User:Steel1943 was successfully updating the RM templates and the nomination statements (EDIT: of other RMs). It does not look proper for people WP:INVOLVED in discussing whether it's permissible to change a requested move in this way.

The latest comments and Polyamorph's relist showed a consensus towards Piecewise function and against my nom target. It's unfair to them to have a procedural close just because I edited my nom to match consensus. There was no P&G wikilink in the close. IPs can't close, and this may look like a improper proxy close on behalf of me.

However, I'm not sure if I still want it reopened. This RM is a train wreck. I previously noted it's may digress into WP:PM, WP:PROPSPLIT or WP:AFD. Idk how a "move" close could be implemented towards Piecewise function in contrast to the previous nom target. What should we do? 142.113.140.146 (talk) 23:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea why I'm mentioned here: I have never edited Talk:Piecewise ... see the edit history. Steel1943 (talk) 23:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I mentioned you because your comment suggests that editors are allowed to edit RMs while discussions are open. Perhaps these separate discussions should be centralized in a RfC. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 23:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Per the discussion on my talk page, IHDFC anymore about this, so feel free to do or discuss whatever without me. Steel1943 (talk) 00:18, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
It has something to do with your bringing dab date ranges into MOS:DATERANGE compliance, Steel Man. Unfortunately that malformed one or two of BarrelProof's ongoing move requests. See above. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Well ... the moves weren't malformed until my edits were partially edited. More details are on my talk page. Paine, I know you tend to take the same type of care, so I know you know what I mean there. Steel1943 (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
I do know what you mean, and thank you for the nod, Steel Man! Paine  00:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
About that reference to your edits being partially edited, please note that some of your edits that you're referring to were edits of someone else's remarks on Talk pages. It's generally considered inappropriate to change the record of what someone else said and when they said it. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
I don't consider changing what needs to be changed to make the procedure and bot work right a WP:TPA violation, and never will. Also, I did not change any remarks; I changed the text before the arrow, which is not a remark, but rather the text that the bot needs to be correct for it to work right ... which needed to be updated after I made the move I made. And all of this has already been explored in thorough detail on my talk page. Yet another late hit in this convo ... I thought we were done here. Steel1943 (talk) 12:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for coming to my talk page, editor IP 142+! I have reread your move request and have decided to change it. Please be patient as it will take a little time. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
You can also chose to selectively revert my RM retargeting on that article and talkpage. This is if you believe it is possible to move to Piecewise function. After all, the evidence that I am 174.92.25.207 is circumstantial.
I also want to apologize for my own part in pushing the boundaries of P&G. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 23:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Ok, it seems that you are deciding in [5] that consensus exists anyway. I moved my post-move cleanup complexity concerns to Talk:Piecewise#c-142.113.140.146-20240825001500-Post_move. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 00:18, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, there was consensus to move away from the Piecewise title, but no consensus for any other title. I responded to your post-RM note. Thanks again, IP 142+! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to review the RM!
Oh, and the post-RM cleanup didn't prove at all as difficult as I feared. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 01:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

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

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.

Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed Mox Eden to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as Lead Coordinator, and Miniapolis and Wracking returned as assistant coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.

Blitz: 13 of the 24 editors who signed up for the June 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 169,404 words comprising 41 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: 38 of the 59 editors who signed up for the July 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 482,133 words comprising 293 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: 10 of the 15 editors who signed up for the August 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 71,294 words comprising 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.

Progress report: As of 05:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 233 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,824 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Message sent by Baffle gab1978 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

"Template:R specific" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:R specific has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 14 § Template:R specific until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NBCUniversal International Networks/doc

Template:NBCUniversal International Networks/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Visa requirements by citizenship/doc

Template:Visa requirements by citizenship/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Template:R rcat example

Hello, Paine Ellsworth. In 2015, you've created template {{R rcat example}} with the edit summary create example rcat for use with Template:This is a redirect/rcat on all rcats. It seems that these plans didn't materialize – there is only one actual but broken transclusion of the template on the page Nxm.

Should we nominate the template for deletion as unused? —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Andrybak:, it's DB1729, I've been perhaps clumsily dealing with the redirect Nxm at the same time you've been. I wish I had just let you handle it all now but I was not aware you were active. Would you prefer I self-revert my efforts so that what you are doing makes more sense? --DB1729talk 11:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
DB1729, I don't think any self-reverts are necessary. The speedy deletion of Nxm will or won't go through, and we'll see if MikutoH reacts on their talk page. I've subscribed to the section you've started there.
The Template:R rcat example is a separate issue, as far as I can see. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you both very much for coming to my talk page! Editor Andrybak, I agree that there is little to no use for this template anymore. Just to be on the safe side, I've userfied the template and removed it from template space. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 01:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic in Arunachal Pradesh

Template:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic in Arunachal Pradesh has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:34, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Jonesey95, for these notices! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic in Chandigarh

Template:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic in Chandigarh has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:35, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic in Chhattisgarh

Template:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic in Chhattisgarh has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:35, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Move request

Thanks for taking the time for reviewing this lengthy move request. Now although indeed my original proposal did not garner consensus, I think the middle ground solution of Gaza War (2023-present) that was proposed in the new subsection did indeed garner consensus. Can you please clarify why this middle ground proposal and compromise by most editors was not taken into consideration? Makeandtoss (talk) 12:49, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, editor Makeandtoss, for coming to my talk page! That's a good question. I have to do some stuff offline, so please give me time to return and give you a proper answer. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Okay, editor Makeandtoss, another tough offline job is done, and it's a genuine pleasure to have tackled that interesting move request discussion. Yes, I actually did find a consensus in the Common ground subsection, but not so much for the "Gaza War" with daterange as for making that article the primary topic at the Gaza War title. So one reason I had to consider was that it would require a page move from Gaza War to Gaza War (disambiguation) to make the Gaza War name available. But that page had not been tagged by the RMCD bot. Also I did see a significant opposition to the title with or without dates (about 34%) in that subsection and the opposers had strong arguments. When that happens, I usually stick to the rationales and results of the original move request. When another page is suggested that has not been tagged by the RMCD bot, it usually means that another fresh move request will be needed for the new suggested name. I would still recommend the waiting period in my closing statement, though. Again, thank you so much for your time and trouble! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:17, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Can you elaborate what you mean with the RMCD bot thing, as there has been plenty of move requests that were moved by proposals other than the ones suggested originally? Makeandtoss (talk) 11:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I just posted a request for a re-evaluation to the Israel-Hamas section when I should have come here. Posting it here instead of a new section since I see this section is relevant.
As I pointed out in the above link, there is consensus for a move away from Israel-Hamas. The ones voting against the move incorrectly interpreted data for WP:COMMONNAME and were offered corrections by commenters. From your comments here it does look like you already took that into consideration.
I'm not sure how the end result of the RM is the status quo which is the least popular as well as the least correct option. WP:!VOTE and WP:COMMONNAME are both violated and the Hamas started this war comments in opposition are a clear violation of WP:NPOV. CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk) 14:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi editor CoolAndUniqueUsername and thank you for coming to my talk page about the RM and the closure! I mentioned the RMCD bot because it usually has to tag any page that editors might decide to rename in order to let other editors know of its status. The exceptions are when the suggested name is a red link or a redirect with no substantial editing history.
We will have to "agree to disagree" about the consensus. You see a consensus to move away; however, I see no consensus either to keep the old title or to change it. And that is after spending a large amount of time reading and evaluating the survey of editors. While there is some agreement, overall editors were not able to come to consensus. I made a meticulous and extensive data analysis of the evidence (links) provided by editors to get a good handle on the strength of their arguments and found that they tended to be consistent with a decrease of the "Hamas" part of the common name and a growth of "Gaza"; however, as was noted by many opposers, more time is needed before Gaza, as a term, overtakes Hamas. I have reevaluated the move request and have come to the same conclusion as before based upon my research. Thanks again for coming! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the response. I'll read thoroughly once I have more bandwidth. Paging @Makeandtosswho had posted about the RMCD bot (I frankly have no idea how it works). CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Edit request(s) at Template talk:Post-nominals

Hi Paine! Do you think you could consider my edit request(s) regarding {{Post-nominals}}? Many thanks, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 00:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Neveselbert! It's great to hear from you! Absolutely, I'll head over now and take a look. Thanks for coming! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Okay, my friend, all done. You might want to note that you can save time in the future by using the {{Edit template-protected}} template's parameters. You can add an unlimited number of pages to be edited. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks so much P.I.! I'll be sure to keep those parameters in mind. Could you also please look at this further edit request, which corrects for the functionality of |size= concerning unlinked and/or custom-linked post-nominals? All the best, and much appreciated, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
All done. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Paine_Ellsworth/Archive_26&oldid=1258926919"