Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

I have undertaken another one of my quixotic quests to make an article out of a concept so broad and vague that it just barely pulls together. Would you like to help thread this needle? BD2412 T 15:26, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Odd and interesting. I've got a deadline for offwiki publishing by tomorrow. But I'll look into it. GMG^talk 22:30, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. No deadlines here, of course! BD2412 T 00:26, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This one is actually now finished and live (so much for no deadlines), but now I'm turning my attention to my oldest live draft in the social science field: Draft:House guest. BD2412 T 05:21, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: Working though the first one little by little. But oof. Just realized there's no article for "waving" in the communicative sense. Just the physics topic of waves. GMG^talk 11:42, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wave (gesture)? BD2412 T 17:03, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is a poor redirect. GMG^talk 17:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a move request to make Waving the title of the article on the gesture. BD2412 T 18:00, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• @BD2412: How did your SheSaid meeting go? Mine was fairly muted. It was good, but I was hoping for a bit better turnout. GMG^talk 11:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think there were eight people in mine. It was overall a fun time. BD2412 T 16:50, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

for this. I still have no idea why I'm perceived as "involved" when I'm absolutely not. Glad to have external endorsement that I haven't lost my marbles. Star Mississippi 14:56, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The thing seems fairly poorly handled. From handing out an indef while community discussion on an IBAN was ongoing, to pitching a fit because they're the one who get's to decide when a block "served it's purpose," to taking the entire thing off-wiki and telling folks not to worry about it.

It's definitely an approach I've taken before, because I'm a father with a six-year-old. But being a mop isn't being a parent, and nobody really get's to say "my house, my rules, go to your room." GMG^talk 17:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! I'm not a parent, but can totally see how your comparison works as I just spent part of the week with a 5 and 7 year old.

I'm definitely befuddled but guessing I was the sacrificial lamb for some reason. Oh well. Thanks again Star Mississippi 17:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOSSIS says "Do not make a section whose sole content is box-type templates."-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddy1: Uh...yeah. It's not a box. That's why we have bulleted inline templates for sister projects. Take a deep breath, drink some water, and go back and read the entirety of the guidance you're citing. GMG^talk 14:20, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Talk page watcher) I agree, the section edit was a good edit. No issue here. BD2412 T 21:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Creativerse video game logo 2017.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Afton, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Afton (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For deleting the commons main page. :) Seawolf35 ^T--C 16:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• It was like four seconds okay. It was unintentional. I'm trying to figure it out. GMG^talk 16:52, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment at RFA made me look at the candidate's uploads. They suggest to me that (Redacted). Discretion being the better part of valor, and having already incurred plenty of wrath, I'll not raise the issue at RFA itself. Banks Irk (talk) 01:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• @Banks Irk: I don't like to oppose an RfA. We have few people generally who are willing to stand, and fewer still who are willing to contribute in that seat. I sat on it for a few days, but it just doesn't strike me right. GMG^talk 02:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I was in the same boat, though for a few hours rather than days. There are more than a few red flags. FYI, according to (Redacted). Banks Irk (talk) 02:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Meh. I'm knocking on old, and I'm still not sure that I'm really an adult. But that's something you only wonder if you're getting old, I guess. GMG^talk 02:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Absolutely inappropriate conjecture and reposting of private information, Banks Irk. Kindly knock it off, and keep your observations to yourself. Primefac (talk) 23:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry. Next time, I'll try to be more subtle about the elephant in the room, like Silk Tork, who hit the nail on the head without crossing any lines. Banks Irk (talk) 14:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who has English as their second language, I want to thank you for your grammar fixes and copyedits to Skibidi Toilet! I hope the subject matter didn't cause physical pain for you. :) Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. No worries. After spending all night at a Christmas party (which for some reason is still a thing on the 30th), and one that had way too many crying children, it was nice to sit on the deck in silence for a spell and just do come copyediting. Feel free to reach out any time I can be of any help. GMG^talk 13:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

I just want to say, thank you friend, for giving me the support I needed when none was available. I'll never forget :) Jerium (talk) 22:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Shoot. I totally forgot about that. Happy New Year to you also. Hope all is well. GMG^talk 03:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with your removal of the content on Hazbin Hotel. I think the Mary Sue article is somewhat passable when it comes to this, but... when looking up "verbalase hazbin hotel" this morning, I couldn't come up with ANY other reliable sources. So, it should remain removed from that page (or anywhere else). Historyday01 (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't normally compile online videos about a subject in prose. GMG^talk 17:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personhumanperson (talk) 14:14, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Y GMG^talk 14:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Archdiocese of San Francisco COA.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Far-right politics in Israel, I appreciate it very much Alon Alush (talk)

17:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Treating new accounts like sockmuppets damages wikipedia's credibility. OPENCodeCCCCCC (talk) 15:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you treating me like a sock muppet even though I wrote the right thing? If your account is locked, the only option is to create a new one. OPENCodeCCCCCC (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or just go do something that isn't Wikipedia. GMG^talk 16:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]