User talk:Voorts/Archive 25

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

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

→

If all goes well

Managed to squash MRDA into the character range needed for TFA: here. Feel free to tweak it, or rip it up and start from scratch if you want (if it passes of course—fingers crossed). Hope you're well; good luck with Cora Agnes Benneson's FAC too. Cheers, Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Looks good to me, except she's a bit small in the image, so I would create a cropped version that zooms in a bit on MRD. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:19, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Rank-and-file strategy

Hello, Voorts. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Rank-and-file strategy, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:09, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Weird Faith

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Weird Faith you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Weird Faith

On 22 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Weird Faith, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that singer-songwriter Madi Diaz released her sixth studio album, Weird Faith, after touring with Harry Styles? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Weird Faith. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Weird Faith), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Weird Faith

The article Weird Faith you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Weird Faith and Talk:Weird Faith/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wisecrack (album)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wisecrack (album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of OlifanofmrTennant -- OlifanofmrTennant (talk) 06:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Well he would, wouldn't he?

Congratulations, Voorts! The article you nominated, Well he would, wouldn't he?, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Congrats voorts. Was a fun one to work on, although you did most of the heavy lifting ;). To many more! Tim O'Doherty (talk) 00:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Tim! Congrats to you too. This article wouldn't be anywhere without your UK history and politics insight. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Libertarian Party (Australia) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)