Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia records/Archive 1

Archive 1

Great page!

This is a great idea for a project page. Hopefully it will get filled in as more people hear of it... —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 23:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

But I am slightly pessimistic about finding all the necessary information. Some of the records could have been lost forever, although I might be wrong about this. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 06:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I found it!

Serendipity brought me here. I think I have a nominee for most AfD'ed article: see Daniel Brandt currently working on its 13th AFD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Brandt (13th nomination). Anyone know any higher number? Carlossuarez46 01:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The Gay Nigger Association of America article was finally deleted after its 18th AfD nomination. Kaldari 19:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

And actually Daniel Brandt is on its 14th nomination, not 13th. Kaldari 19:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

First featured article

Does this include articles promoted as "brilliant prose" (the precursor to "Featured article")? Kaldari 19:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah. --Mark J 19:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Most Pictures

So far, I've found that World War II has, 50 pics, looking around to see if there is something that beats this. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 15:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Most references

The X-Files has 138 inline and 11 further reading. Looking for more. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 15:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Beat you. George W. Bush has 164. --Mark J 16:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Suicide bombings in Iraq since 2003 has 474. --Mark J 19:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Are lists going to be counted? - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 19:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Shortcut

Can we create a shortcut here? What would it be? WP:WR is already in use... -- Mentifisto 00:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

IrcII no longer (really) a stub

The article is no longer then oldest stub! Let's change that text please to something else. Gary King (talk) 05:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Article in largest number of languages

Counting all the interwiki links, India has an article in 175 languages, English included. Cattus 16:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

• Cheers. --Mark J 07:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • How about Kurów? It has over 200 interwikis (I counted in October (or was it September?) and there were 199, and new ones are added every few weeks), and all this not including those versions that haven't an interwiki to them already (test wikis, for example)... --January First-of-May (for fans of Star Trek here), November 26, 2008 21:14 local (18:14 UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.76.26.24 (talk) 18:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Update

This article needs an update. Us441(talk)(contribs) 11:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Most number of footnotes at the end of a sentence

I've just looked at the Jimmy Carr article to see SEVEN references to him being born in Limerick. Surely this is some sort of record? -- DatRoot 23:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

192(!) references for one sentence (found at WP:CITEKILL), but the article wasn't in mainspace at that time (and this problem has since been fixed). Double sharp (talk) 11:08, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Most languages?

Hey I know no one's posted here for nearly 3 years but I'll still ask my question about this Wiki record I cannot find. Which Wikipedia articles appear in the most languages, I mean most number of different language Wikis, and is there a stats page that lists the top ones? I'm guessing Main Page and Wikipedia are top, but I am looking for a more interesting answer. I cannot find the answer, or even the question anywhere, I've searched on Wiki and Google. Carlwev (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm showing my Wikipedia age here, but I recall a reference desk thread from March 2006 about this question; back then the best answer that anybody could find was India. For a more updated answer, it might be worth asking the editors at Wikidata. Graham87 02:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Also see a thread above about this topic. Graham87 03:00, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

@Carlwev: I didn't realize this when I initially replied to this topic, but there is actually a special page just for this purpose – see Special:MostInterwikis. As of 19 June 2013, the winner was Russia. Graham87 05:52, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Encouraging bad behavior?

Although most of the records on this page are benign, a few like "Most vandalised article", "Longest undetected vandalism", "Longest undetected vandalism in articles", "Longest undetected copyvio", and "Longest undetected hoax article" seem to implicitly present a challenge to the reader to set a new record by engaging in bad behavior. On the other hand, they also help demonstrate to normal editors how long errors can persist, and why even old articles need careful review. Do the benefits outweigh the risks here? Dcoetzee 21:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Longest name for a category

Hi! Which category has the longest name? and in others languages?. --Dhidalgo (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

True Jesus Church

Somebody should fix this article because it doesn't even exist. It is listed at the bottom. Robert4565 (talk) 21:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Fixed; thanks for pointing this out. Graham87 02:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Most external links

The largest page in Category:Medical Subject Headings is List of MeSH codes (D02) which has 2542 external links (all to the same website). Is this a record? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

ctrl+f question regarding "references"

Wouldn't many people ctrl+f "citations" looking for a record thereof, so should the word be added alongside or something? It confused me initially. Is there a difference between citations and references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vulpecular (talk • contribs) 16:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

"References" is the term used most often in Wikipedia; it hardly differs much in meaning from "citations". I don't think it would do any harm to add the word "citations" in the text, so I've done so. Graham87 04:35, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

In answer to the second part of Vulpecular's question, a citation is text quoted from a given source, either directly or paraphrased whereas a reference indicates the source of some more general information. So, given a sentence in a police report "Fred said afterwards that he and the others had found the experience very frightening", one could cite "The experience frightened Fred" in a Wikipedia article. However a sentence "Company X's stock declined during the '90s, prior to their merger with Y" in a wiki article, giving a link to a graph of their stock value over time would be giving a reference. It's not surprising the two terms are often confounded. - TB (talk) 08:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation page records

A recent article lists the dab pages with most entries, but a question then came up in discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Longest_Wikipedia_Disambig_page: Which disambiguation page has the longest title?

The list of "Longest titles" here only shows the top 7, none of which are dab pages. Any ideas? PamD 22:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Uridine diphospho-N-acetylglucosamine:polypeptide beta-N-acetylglucosaminyltransferase is the longest title that is a disambiguation page at 86 Unicode characters. In a list of page titles in the main namespace in order of decreasing length, titles of this length occupy positions 5740 to 6240. The shortest titles that are disambiguation pages are 1 Unicode character in length (ּ and ک) - TB (talk) 08:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

User Records

I see here that we know who the 100000th and millionth user to join Wikipedia was. Does anyone know how to find out where each user comes in the list? If so please tell me. Thank you. The Free Editor Anyone Can Cite (talk) 03:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

You can do it using the API, like so. Graham87 04:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Longest of protected articles

I want to know what article has been protected the longest (semi or full). 216.145.89.170 (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Shortest Title

A good way to decide between all those single character titles is to redefine this record as 'smallest' title instead of 'shortest', and then judge the size of the title on data consumption or pixel size, potentially both. --Anon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.202.184.15 (talk) 14:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I looked at the kanji articles. They have been treated inconsistently. Some have been reduced to redirects. Some have been deleted with suggestions to go to Wiktionary. Also all the Emojis are articles 👀 . QuentinUK (talk) 11:08, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

2 Questions

which user has the most number of barnstars and which user has the most number of supports in request for adminship — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.63.237 (talk) 17:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

To question 1, we don't keep a record of that. To question 2, see WP:RFX100. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Most Category record

Hi, I once found (but since lost) a list of articles with the highest number of categories. (Possibly Most categories for a non-convention article). Which listed Winston Churchill in first place. Can anyone re-direct me to this WP records list, thank you. Stephen2nd (talk) 10:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Article with most wikilinks?

Can we have article with most wikilinks? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Number of consecutive indents on a talk page

My current nomination: 30 without any undents. Double sharp (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Liberal democracy/Archive 3#Liberal stands for liberalism in general: 41. Gorobay (talk) 18:27, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Even better! Hooray! (How about user talk pages specifically, though?) Double sharp (talk) 06:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Longest page nominee

ru:Колчак is just slightly shorter than the List of law clerks of the Supreme Court of the United States but longer than both Opinion polling for the 2015 United Kingdom general election and Mary Hanford Ford. Or do only English Wikipedia articles count here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GareginRA (talk • contribs) 22:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, only English pages count here. A list for all Wikipedias or Wikimedia projects would go on Meta. Graham87 05:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Does this count as the vandalism record?

This edit, made in 2007, reverted today by me. Almost 9 years undetected. 67.243.139.242 (talk) 03:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I think it does; I've added it accordingly. Impressive work! Graham87 14:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Most nominations for deletion

So I take it the page that was brought up for the most AfDs has been (ironically) deleted for good? I can't seem to find the page anymore.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Nope, it's still there. Graham87 00:37, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Should've reworded myself. I was talking about the page that listed the articles that had the most AfDs.--Prisencolin (talk) 23:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah OK; I don't know where that is. Graham87 01:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Another long title?

Shouldn't this article be included in long titles? It has ~171 characters-

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/The_Dissection_and_Reconstruction_of_Music_from_the_Past_as_Performed_by_the_Inmates_of_Lalo_Schifrin%27s_Demented_Ensemble_as_a_Tribute_to_the_Memory_of_the_Marquis_De_Sade — Preceding unsigned comment added by GigaG (talk • contribs) 17:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

That table propbably needs to be updated overall. For instance, there was this page move. Graham87 07:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion

Do you think you can do a list of articles with the most of a specific letter in them... --198.111.211.2 (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Longest article titles

The table is currently out of date--Avg W (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

suggestion

Can we have a "most revisions/logs deleted at once" section... -24.180.251.38 (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Sure, if you have a proposed record holder — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 15:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Oldest active and continuously active editors

I've added two records to the section "Beginnings": the oldest active editor (User:Jimbo Wales) and the oldest continuously active editor according to the number of regular editions each month, which turned out to be User:Rmhermen. Jimbo's account is still active, but he had been absent for several months on some instances; this isn't the case with this other user. - Alumnum (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

I still maintain that the whole thing is misleading and nebulous. Not everybody edits with the one account all the time, there is JimboWales, and the other user's entry is misleading because, as it says, they aren't recorded as making an edit in February/July 2002 (during which there were several software upheavals). Also, I am very wary of adding more stats about users here that aren't backed up by other lists, simply for privacy reasons. Graham87 03:38, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

And if you're going to mention a thread somewhere else, it'd be nice if you could say so in the original discussion; see the relevant thread at Jimbo Wales's talk page. Graham87 04:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

New vandalism record

Vandalism from 2008, just fixed (I googled it to make sure it was actually vandalism, Google turns up no references): https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Perfect_Game_Recording_Co.&action=history -- does this count for the record? Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gnomingstuff: Wow, I think it does! Thanks for letting us know; I've updated the page accordingly. I've also fixed the vandalism in the Portuguese translation of the article. Graham87 02:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

A new record? Vandalised 13-May-2007 [1], fixed 17-Jan-2019 [2], 11 years, 8 months, 4 days. Adpete (talk) 08:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Adpete: I'm not sure that's vandalism. It seems like a good-faith but rather clumsy attempt to describe what happened, like this other edit by the IP around the same time. Graham87 14:47, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

If it is not vandalism, then we could create a record for a new achievement, something like "longest undetected undesirable good-faith edit". PJTraill (talk) 17:56, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Aww drats! I'll have to keep looking, because I'm sure the true record is well over 10 years. It's amazing what nonsense survives in articles that are barely touched for years (like a 2007 TV series, in this case). I'm sure I've seen copyvios well over the stated record of 8 1/2 years, too. Adpete (talk) 22:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

I dunno about a new record ... undesirable according to whom? But then you could say that about vandalism too ... Graham87 04:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

I think I meant "undesirable" as shorthand for something like "reverted (without dissent) when the community finally noticed". PJTraill (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

It's me again, with another vandalism revert, from December of 2007. (The IP's only other edit is very obvious vandalism in the same 5-minute time span; no reference to such a company exists anywhere; the "arse" factor, etc.) Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:04, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Yep, I think that one breaks the record. Wow! Graham87 06:18, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

13.5 years. Good thing this isn't a competition. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 18:38, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Most pedantic discussion?

Not sure if this really fits, but there are some doozies out there. Here is one: talk:Avengers:_Infinity_War#This_movie_follows_Thor:Ragnarok. I suppose the metric could be (number of characters in discussion)/(affected number of characters in article body). So in my example, we get a score of 29233/4=7308...! --Zojj tc 04:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Naaah, that's not quantifiable enough for here. See Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars for much crazier stuff. Graham87 15:20, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

You need new record section

Breathtaking 15 megabytes kilobytes text (there is few links) in a single noticeboard discussion edit.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 00:28, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• No offense, but I believe that's only 15 kilobytes of text. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:38, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, +14 thousands bytes, it's a staggering amount of text for a single edit in discussion, and of course non taken.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 00:55, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

i just saw it :-) that number would probably be for some kind of award.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:06, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Nope, it probably wouldn't. And that record really isn't interesting enough to include here, anyway. Sometimes people have a lot to say ... Graham87 02:57, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Or indeed nothing at all ;-)--౪ Santa ౪^99° 04:38, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Longest undetected vandalism on a redirect page - new record!

I've just fixed some vandalism from April 2007 which I think breaks the record for the Longest undetected vandalism on a redirect page. Bellowhead678 (talk) 13:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Huh, apparently it is looking at the current page, I'll add it shortly I have added it. Great work! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 13:28, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Update: I just reverted some even more ancient vandalism at DAK. Bellowhead678 (talk) 21:44, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

New longest article with no reference?

Hi (kana) has been up for a very long time and it’s only reference is other wiki sites, does this count? Bluecrab2 (talk) 18:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Bluecrab2, unfortunately it hasn't been quite long enough yet. The article was created on May 13, 2006, 13 years and 9 months ago, versus the current record which is 14 years 3 months. So I guess we'll see if it's still unreferenced in August. Ionmars10 (talk) 18:18, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Ionmars10 oops! guess I set the reminder on my phone too early, thankss for doing the research! --Bluecrab2 (talk) 20:26, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Longest image on Wikipedia

I came across this image (collapsed because it's so long) on Guyed mast and wondered if this is the longest image on Wikipedia? Has anyone come across any longer ones? If it is, maybe it should be added to this page. TheAwesomeHwyh 23:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

The image

COVID-19 as Article with Most References that is neither a list nor a biography

This article claims that the page for COVID-19 has 1,032 references when it appears that there are only 772 in actuality. I resisted changing it as the significant difference in the two numbers could mean that there is another page that might actually have the record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxteroni (talk • contribs) 22:12, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

new longest undetected vandalism?

Just reverted some old vandalism and I'm pretty sure [[3]] barely edges out the last record: 13 years, 8 months, 18 days. Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Wow, it does indeed! I've added it. Graham87 04:49, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

it's me again (more longest undetected vandalism)

[This] edit is just barely older than the last one I mentioned (plus of course it's been longer since then). Also let me know if I should just edit the page myself, it's an official page so I wasn't sure.Gnomingstuff (talk) 07:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gnomingstuff: Sure, sounds like a new record ... though it is admittedly on the lower end of the vandalism scale. You can edit the page yourself ... I don't have that much time to do so at the moment. Graham87 07:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I had more time on my hands than I thought. I've gone and added it. Graham87 08:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Longest time without references (but is it legit?)

I think I've gotten one: Passive attack was nominated at AfD for being unreferenced since 2004, so I added some references to it. It was without them from 1 February 2004 to 14 April 2021 (17 years, 79 days). This is much longer than the previous record listed, but I am wondering if this counts as legit (since the version I edited did have an external link under a "Further reading" section). What does the peanut gallery think? jp×g 23:17, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I think there's room for both; I've edited the page accordingly. Graham87 01:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Confusion

For the record: "Longest time an article had no inline or explicitly-cited sources" (in the Articles section) it just says ditto, no link just "ditto" which article does it refer too and what is the time range for that article?

RandomEditorAAA (talk) 17:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

It's the same page as the one above; see wikt:ditto. Graham87 08:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

@RandomEditorAAA: I've gone and changed it to "same as above" to clarify the text; that term is also a bit more formal than "ditto". "Ditto" is a reasonably common word though; is English not your first language? Graham87 09:36, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

By namespace versus by type

If you're going strictly by namespace, then as noted Help:Starting a new page is the oldest, from 16 April 2001... but help pages existed before namespaces. HowDoesOneEditaPage, which was changed into a redirect to Help:Editing, was created on 14 February 2001. SummarizeDiscussion, which was changed into a redirect to Help:Talk pages, is from 17 January 2001!  — Scott • talk 11:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Nah, they were started earlier; see the August 2001 database dump, which is human-redable, especially once you get to know what the Unix times represent. There's also Wikipedia 10K Redux. I think categorising by namespace is more helpful as it's not as arbitrary. Graham87 16:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Longest talk page thread ever

There could be one at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather/Colour discussions. 🇺🇦 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:30, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

First deletion discussions

I have found a number of things which I think are interesting, but I'm not sure if they are legit. I will put them here and we'll see what the deal is.

The earliest revision for an AfD page is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Francis Cruickshank, per this SQL query (2002-12-01T20:02:18‎). jp×g 08:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

The earliest revision for a VfD page (per this query) is this one, from 2002-05-15T15:22:23, which has the first vote on the page as such:

Formalism/art

Gianfranco May 14, 2002, because : subpage"

Oh ho -- but there's even earlier stuff at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia utilities/Page titles to be deleted. I don't know what the deal is (there are no timestamps on most of these), but one comment on JamieTheFoool says "April 3, 2002".

Hmm, and that page links to even earlier stuff, at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia utilities/Page titles to be deleted/Archive. These don't even have timestamps at all. And it links to something even further back...

Which is Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia utilities/Page titles to be deleted/History. This has a couple entries -- God knows when they're from, but the page says it was created on 2001-11-06.

@Graham87: You have any idea what of these is the real deal? Is there more stuff on Nostalgia that comes before this? My thinking here is that we have a few things of note here: the first standalone deletion discussion page, the first voting process, the first nomination of an article to be carried out by an admin (rather than just a direct summary deletion), and then before that, the first deletion itself. jp×g 08:22, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

@JPxG: Yeah, they're all the real deal ... see Wikipedia:Archived articles for deletion discussions/Page history. I've imported the interesting edits from the Nostalgia Wikipedia. I don't know if all the old history survived but the earliest existing edits are from around the same time as the creation of the deletion policy, so perhaps we're not missing that much. Graham87 08:48, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Also, UseModWiki deletions weren't logged anywhere, as far as I'm aware. Graham87 08:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Dang

I thought a 21⁄2 year old vandalism at William Draper might have made the list. Those are some seriously impressive records for going undetected. Not sure if there is room for a non-English vandalism category that this might make, though. VanIsaac, MPLL ^cont_WpWS 01:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Shortest pages?

If the legitimate shortest pages (as in, pages that weren't kept as redirects through page moves) were to be included here, the shortest disambiguation page on Wikipedia would be Phenylphenol, at 150 bytes. The shortest article would be Queen Eleanor's Vengeance and Other Poems, at 288 bytes. DizzyTheMan (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Longest footnote

It may be worth it to include the longest footnote on Wikipedia, in terms of word count. ~ HAL333 06:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Delted former featured articles, featured articles considered for removal etc.

End time or list of goals by Abby Wambach. Dawid2009 (talk) 07:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Delted pages with many views or google trends

For example [4] or video game Glaiatus. Sometimes topic can be very popular but is delted due to poor writting article or topic actually may be not notable despite popularity (inherit or no fair sources etc.) Dawid2009 (talk) 07:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Strange

User:Jasonr was made a sysop in 2003, in order to fix a server crash, and apart from that has four edits. That's gotta be something, right? jp×g 21:24, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@JPxG: This led to Jimbo's final time desysopping someone! I believe it's the record, at least of the modern admin era (since there may have been some people with fewer edits who had access to the shared admin account). Graham87 might know. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 21:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tamzin: Yep, that's correct, with Clifford Adams (along with his CamelCase username CliffordAdams) being a close runner-up. I'm sure I remembered an old list of these ... and after much toing and froing, I managed to find it ... behold Wikipedia:Historical archive/List of administrators by edit count, which I just restored! Graham87 (talk) 07:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Graham87, would it be possible to fully update this to 2023? You know, for those of us who were still editing with IP accounts back in 2006. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:34, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Liz: HaleBot could probably do it, but whether it should (if once or regularly) is probably an entirely different matter. That would fly against the face of the MFD discussion that led to it being deleted. To get the current answer, you can see the regular list of Wikipedians by number of edits and just ignore those not marked as admins. You could also view this 2022 query I did for admins with lowest edit counts in reverse to get a reasonably up-to-date answer. I/you could fork it for admins with highest edit counts. As for making it an onwiki page again, I'm not sure ... as you might know back in 2007 there were no usergroups between regular editors and admins (see this Signpost story) but now that's certainly not the case. Graham87 (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Revision IDs

Do we have anything on this? For example:

• https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Death_Breathing&oldid=1000000000

Is this anything? jp×g🗯️ 22:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

We have Wikipedia:Time Between Edits. Graham87 (talk) 04:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

My user page

My user page is over 1.2 million bytes. Cellular data user (talk) 15:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Now it isn't; that disrupts screen readers, among other things. And you've been blocked. Graham87 (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

idea: article name with the most repeating words

i was reading James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher article and i thought maybe we should add a record of article name with the most repeating words EpicMagicBoi6 (talk) 02:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I dunno ... that's not a record that can be easily measured nor is it one that can be broken any time soon. Graham87 (talk) 03:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Longest undetected vandalism recent update

Why's Everybody Always Pickin' On Me? is now mentioned at the record for longest undetected vandalism, but I am not sure that it is completely vandalism. The links seem to have been added as an attempt to explain several gag names in the music video, but links to the original terms do not seem to be done with other articles about gag names. I do think that the edit was not useful, as the page is not about sexual activity (so removing the links would be compatible with Wikipedia's guideline on objectional content). Xeroctic (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Hmm, looking at it again you might be right. I’m gonna go ahead and revert it since it could have been made in good faith. Pahunkat (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Largest RfC

Is Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RFC:_The_Anti-Defamation_League in the running to be the largest RfC discussion or have there been much larger ones thanks? NadVolum (talk) 12:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Not sure. But if you want you can add it to the page after the discussion gets closed. Procyon117 (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Well it's closed now so there's that. Procyon117 (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Well I put it in but I guess WP:RSN#RFC: The Telegraph on trans issues will get bigger - and that some trans issue probably already has a much bigger RfC! NadVolum (talk) 23:22, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

New longest redirect title

The redirect 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078164062862089986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505822317253594081284811174502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867831652712019091456 seems to be the new longest title for a redirect, hitting the character limit of 255 characters. (obviously, it's the digits of Pi) ApexParagon (talk) 02:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

I've just nominated this redirect for discussion. See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#3.1415926535… for why I think it should be deleted. Renerpho (talk) 04:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Longest without references

Blade Runner 3: Replicant Night currently holds the record for the longest time without references. It received two "references" in 2021. However, I just removed one of those as circular (the source is directly based on the Wikipedia article), and the single remaining sources says nothing about the topic (it mentions it in passing). That reference may as well not be there! As I explained on the article talk page, I am considering nominating it for deletion.

While holding a Wikipedia record clearly has no bearing on whether an article should exist, I am concerned (and curious) about what happens to that record if it were deleted. Is there precedent for this? Renerpho (talk) 10:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

I'd say if you can't find any other suitable references for the article, then be WP:BOLD and nominate it for deletion. If it does get deleted, it'll probably go back to the article that had that record before Blade Runner 3: Replicant Night (i.e. going through the page history to find what the previous holder was). Procyon117 (talk) 04:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@Procyon117: Thanks, I've nominated it for deletion. Renerpho (talk) 07:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@Procyon117: The article has been turned into a redirect. Renerpho (talk) 07:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Sweet. Procyon117 (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Another record? But for what?

I just had a look at

Longest unchanged semi-protection in mainspace: Nigga, semi-protected by Wknight94 on 21 February 2007.

The source Wikipedia:Database reports/Indefinitely semi-protected articles listed Rick Ross (semi-protected since 2005-07-23) as the oldest, which confused me, not only because it was listed out of the chronological order.[5] That article was semi-protected on 2010-07-23,[6] indicating that the date had been manually changed at some point.

Looking through the history of Wikipedia:Database reports/Indefinitely semi-protected articles, Rick Ross was added by a bot in September 2010, with the correct date.[7] Due to the very convoluted history of the page, I am unable to determine when exactly the year was changed to 2005. It definitely had the wrong date when the page layout was changed in June 2021,[8] but it may have happened much earlier, and could be as old as 14 years.

I don't see how this could have been done accidentally, considering that this page was only ever supposed to be edited by BernsteinBot and nobody else. If the possible vandalism is old, I don't know what category it would belong into. Fake Wikipedia records? Renerpho (talk) 13:03, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Legoktm: Can you confirm that the bot wouldn't be capable of making such an edit? Do you know how to search the page history of WP:DBR to find when this was changed? Renerpho (talk) 13:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Not to mention that semi-protection was only enabled here in December 2005. Searching the history of the database report using WikiBlame for 2005--07-23 with wikitext searching enabled shows that the incorrect date was added in this edit by SDZeroBot. (I'll do a bit more checking). Graham87 (talk) 14:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

The page is listed in this revision of page 6 of the semiprotected articles list under the date of a page move. The last actual protection in the logs for Rick Ross is indeed in July 2005, and refers to removal of full protection. I might actually unprotect and re-protect the article just to reset everything. Graham87 (talk) 14:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, the article about the rapper was only created in April 2006! Graham87 (talk) 15:05, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

And the article that used to be at the title Rick Ross is now at the title Rick Alan Ross. Graham87 (talk) 15:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Graham87: The log is really odd. It clearly says it was fully protected on 23 July 2005;[9] yet the article history shows semi-protection on 23 July 2010,[10] of which there is no record in the log. Renerpho (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Renerpho: That's because logs don't move along with articles. The log of the semi-protection is here, as indicated by this log entry. Graham87 (talk) 01:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Graham87: Ah yes, thank you! That only leaves the coincidence of having two similar events, exactly five years apart. Renerpho (talk) 10:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Longest time between edits to a page in the main namespace, excluding redirects?

Salva congruitate: October 14, 2013 – August 12, 2024: more than 10 years. Should this be added? Roasted (talk) 22:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Seems so;  added. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 22:59, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gluonz: In the edit you made here, writing Longest time between edits to an article in the main namespace (rather than a redirect or disambiguation page): Salva congruitate from 09:04, 14 October 2013 to 22:32, 12 August 2024 (10 years, 303 days), the edit difference makes no sense (it links to a random edit from 2010). Did you mean to write 09:04, 14 October 2013 to 22:32, 12 August 2024? I've corrected this, but I don't understand the "failure mode"... Renerpho (talk) 20:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)