"Remarkably unremarkable."

This user is very lazy. Please feel free to do his work for him.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27.

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 28 as User talk:Serial Number 54129/Archive 27 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Thanks for your kind words at the CW ANI! PamD 17:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	For literally being a special editor and a source of inspiration to me for four solid years and counting. Celestina007 (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Celestina007: I'm only grateful for one thing—that whatever happens in the future, I've been lucky enough to have had the chance to watch you grow and develop onto one of our strongest contributors—front and back of house—while not shying away from the sensitive areas needing a nuanced touch. Keep up the (very!) good work! ——Serial 18:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You know when your superiors at work make a remarkable comment about you and you literally can not at that moment articulate a proper response that mirrors your inner feelings, that’s me right now. I literally do not have the right words to use to appreciate this statement. Celestina007 (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are not looking my suggestion in the talk page and I cite sources for my assertion. I also gave reason repeatedly that the subject talks about a particular region, thus implying capitalization as proper name. There are also a lot of regions in Ethiopia that take capitlized name. The miniscule region is not retained to Oromia region as the subject talks the particular region name in Ethiopia. I also agreed to replace with Oromia (region) if neither Region nor region are compatible with naming convention. The Supermind (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Supermind: I'm afraid that's not to the point. The point is that, per procedure, there was a move request which—while you took part in it—your proposal received no traction, and a clear consensus for the page title in its present format was established by a neutral closer. As I said at MR/T, and at your talk page, you cannot "contest" an established consensus by simply reverting it: in the knowledge that things might change, another move request might establish a different result. But as I also suggested, another request of the same kind so soon after the previous one will, frankly, probably be seen as simply disruptive. ——Serial 14:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Ah, you thought you'd go ahead and request a move anyway. Interesting... ——Serial 15:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother. Regarding the picture at the top, above, what happened to Slim Virgin? Just curious. Thanks, warshy ^(¥¥) 16:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Warshy: No bother. See her talk. All the best, ——Serial 16:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, ——Serial! I am glad I asked. I agree with your sentiments. Thanks again, warshy ^(¥¥) 17:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It left me speechless first. Thank you for the image. I think it would be great also on her talk. I was quite moved when I found that one of the last things she did here was also missing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ps: am I the only one thinking that these little templated candles on user and talk page are not in her style and might go? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Try clicking on parts of the image now Gerda Arendt, and let me know what you think. But if you want to place it anywhere else, or use it in any way, you know you can do that. I think you probably have better judgement than me in these matters; if I do it, I'l have an admin down here accusing me of trolling so fast it'd make our heads swim.

You know—I think you're right about those candles. They're very twee, and I don't think anyone could ever have called her that! The problem, I guess, is that we only have "one" way of doing these kind of things, when of course we haven't only got "one" sort of editor. Is that making sense? It's like a one-size-fits-all response.

Thanks for the words. Hope you're well. ——Serial 18:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked on image parts before you asked, and clicked thank you. Fine, but that's here. You decide how to show your tribute. I mention her in a "in memoriam" section. - The little candles: I told enough people that I don't want them when I die, - a category would be quite enough. I know a great user talk undisturbed by them, but better no link ... - There's a discussion about the topic on my talk, but not many felt it was even worth talking about. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to answer "well". If you see my talk, you may notice that I decorated for a friend's birthday. I am healthy but know too many people who are not. (sig late, thank you for reformation on my talk, - DYK it's the first word one my user page, after the todo block?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		I would like to thank you and User:Levivich for you help on Fielding L. Wright back in 2020. Sorry for taking so long to give you a barnstar. Jon698 (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Jon698; it was Levivich who did all the "heavy lifting", actually helping you—I just did a slow burn in the corner. Mind you, did I send you a bunch of books? Anyway, the article's looking dead good. Good work! ——Serial 18:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you have to be so infuriatingly diplomatic, Amakuru?! (should that've said "f*****g diplomatic"...?)^[FBDB] ——Serial 11:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the page to which you've linked rightly says, a crack at the right moment can often break the tension. 😀  — Amakuru (talk) 12:04, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for missing and reformation, with some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda! and that's a cool link...old page! ——Serial 18:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thort I waz, forsooth :-)

(Trusting this will be accepted in the spirit it was intended – goats are, as the kids* say, awesome.)

*Not the goat kids. They say "bah".

bonadea contributions talk 17:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for seconding the nomination as editor of the week. It was a very pleasant surprise when I got on my computer after getting up here in Melbourne. --Bduke (talk) 00:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was just thinking last week that I hadn't seen you around in ages. It's good to see you back! Cabayi (talk) 10:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cabayi! Don't think anyone noticed though :) hope this finds you well! ——Serial 11:08, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

None of the stuff I added was biased. The party is widely considered to be a National Conservative party that openly opposes mass-immigration and radical Islam. If I was being biased, I would've added "Fascism" and "Neo-Nazism" to the infobox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWorldThatNeverExisted (talk • contribs) 11:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November songs

... for Bach background an a good analysis on AN. Today 3 DYK, Brahms depicted + sadly Aga Mikolaj (listen!). May the roads that we travel make us meet again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Today we received the annual arbcom message, which made me think. SlimVirgin pictured again, and musing about her wisdom. Will use the Bach more, after updating Volker Lechtenbrink. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The memory of SlimVirgin is pictured again, in the context about my dangerous thoughts about arbcom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well tell you where I am with this - the only good sources I can find are this and this and a trivial passing mention in this - that's about it. A shame, because I have wanted to put "DYK ... that Ben Comeau thinks Donald Trump is a wanker and Boris Johnson is a lying shit?" on the main page for .... quite some time. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:59, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1], [2], [3] --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Gerda - I recall doing GA reviews for your Bach articles that www.bach-cantatas.com is a reliable source, right? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:29, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was when Francis Schonken was around, the only one who thought so. Of course, the bio there is taken from somewhere else (given at the bottom, and often no longer available.) I like their links, and their images, and for recordings, immense detail. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I saw this Wikipedia:Help_desk#Submission_Violation, and thought I could always tell you, perhaps you'll be inspired to go Eric Easton again. There's an amount of copypasting. [4] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Canadian junior officers in World War II

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
399		Orinoco Flow (talk)	Add sources
294		Vandwelling (talk)	Add sources
480		Trump family (talk)	Add sources
13		Bellevue War (talk)	Add sources
217		World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories (talk)	Add sources
10		Timberline Trail (talk)	Add sources
51		Zachlumia (talk)	Cleanup
738		Police brutality (talk)	Cleanup
1,096		Steele dossier (talk)	Cleanup
101		Intersnack (talk)	Expand
46		Speculation about Donald Trump's Cabinet (talk)	Expand
132		History of the Jews in Japan (talk)	Expand
59		The Holocaust in Bulgaria (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
154		Evidence and documentation for the Holocaust (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
29		Elizabeth Fitzalan, Duchess of Norfolk (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
223		Business career of Donald Trump (talk)	Merge
467		Assassination of Qasem Soleimani (talk)	Merge
11		George Floyd protests in Pennsylvania (talk)	Merge
32		Pablo Morillo (talk)	Wikify
8		William Hankford (talk)	Wikify
9		Malaysian Indian United Party (talk)	Wikify
4		Albert Reuss (talk)	Orphan
3		Zainon Ismail C.N. Afghani (talk)	Orphan
1		Lewis Petit des Etans (talk)	Orphan
12		United States – Russia mutual detargeting (talk)	Stub
24		Hugh le Despenser (sheriff) (talk)	Stub
8		Niles Essanay Silent Film Museum (talk)	Stub
5		A Beast at Bay (talk)	Stub
11		Parti Hizbul Muslimin Malaysia (talk)	Stub
4		Malaysian Nationalist Party (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:08, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I considered commenting on the FAC, but I'm still a bit terrified of the place. Hope you're well. Vaticidalprophet 02:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vaticidalprophet: And I thank you. As someone recently pointed out, my activity over the last year does rather look as though my parole keeps getting pulled. But thanks for waving that bone in my face and then taking it away again :p I'm surprised you'd be worried about reviewing at FAC; reviewers, I find, tend to find themselves the ones in the positions of power, usually, unless they make completely unreasonable demands (which in itself can be left to the co-ords to give due weight to...and ignore). FWIW, I'm surprised not to have seen any of your stuff listed there yet (yes, Prehistoric religion, I'm looking at you)—many of your articles are only a spit and polish away from potential FA status, and they're particularly original and eclectic topics. Think on it, perhaps.

Thanks for the hello, in any case  :) ——Serial 15:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did have an article listed there at one point; "it went well for the first two months and then didn't", might be the best way to put it. I suspect I'll come back with a smaller topic next time (medical articles have their own lore). I hope your parole doesn't get pulled again :) Vaticidalprophet 21:42, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked Check-wikifi-here. I would have done it earlier, but I had to get some technical information on how the Thanks button works once a user is blocked. I must say your report is one of the more unusual ones I've received. BTW, I have Thanks turned off in my Preferences. Personally, I think the idea is a bit silly.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good result Bbb23, thanks. Yeah, the height of childishness...although one to which I've climbed occasionally if someone says something particularly sardonic and/or crushing. ——Serial 15:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove that tag, and give that warning? The talk page was moved elsewhere, and will be returned once this is deleted. I am trying to get a content dispute off my talk page, as I can't be bothered arbitrating over it any longer. if you have the technical ability to delete this page, please do so. Then the talk page will be restored. it is currently hanging out at User Talk:The Alternate Mako/Moved Mako001 (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Alternate Mako: That is completely bizarre, and out of process. Redirecting your talk page to the main page, really. If you don't want editors posting at your talk, just tell them per WP:NOBAN and if they do not honour your request except for required notices, file them at WP:ANI. And, like it or not, all you've now done is archive your talk page to a subpage which makes the new page you've created your talk page which as I have already said, are not usually deleted (WP:DELTALK) in order to keep the history.

All of this pallava could have been avoided if you had only asked someone (WP:TEAHOUSE, WP:HELPDESK are at Least two places where you will get a more polite reply than here) as to your next move. ——Serial 16:08, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it was a bit stupid. I admit that. The History is at the Moved subpage, not at the original page anyway though? Mako001 (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye. I won't bother you any longer, I'm just nonsense anyway. Mako001 (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Late medieval and Tudor. Did you see that job opening in Groningen? The deadline was sometime last week. Are you on the market? Drmies (talk) 17:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you help me to check my talk page, User:JTommyZ is repeatedly deleting my own message on my own talk page. Thank you.--Jellylovers (talk) 17:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SN 54129,
I sincerely hope your holiday season goes well this year especially with what we went through last year. I'm optimistic that 2022 will be a better year for all of us: both in real life and on Wikipedia. Wishing you the best from, Interstellarity (talk) 19:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to apologise for my behaviour earlier. I make no excuses for it. My reversion of your removal of the user talk CSD as vandalism was definitely against WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I also apologise for my rather rude and terse comments here following your warning, which was definitely justified. Mako001 (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Serial Number 54129! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas Serial Number 54129
	Hi Serial Number 54129, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,    –Davey2010Talk 17:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply] Share similar holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Davey2010/MerryChristmas}} to your friends' talk pages.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Retainers and fee'd men of Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chancery.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on the Franklin–Nashville campaign Review essay: Military History Wikiproject Coordinators' reading list

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Sdrqaz
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Retainers and fee'd men of Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Stapleton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
957		John of Gaunt (talk)	Add sources
187		Satyaki (talk)	Add sources
3,092		Wars of the Roses (talk)	Add sources
33		Alceste De Ambris (talk)	Add sources
1,083		Kurukshetra War (talk)	Add sources
97		National Radical Camp (talk)	Add sources
200		Shūmei Ōkawa (talk)	Cleanup
36		Antisemitism in Spain (talk)	Cleanup
987		Richard B. Spencer (talk)	Cleanup
379		Hindu mythology (talk)	Expand
32		Mocidade Portuguesa (talk)	Expand
159		Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda (talk)	Expand
24		Close order formation (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
336		Criticism of democracy (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
304		Hindu mythological wars (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
250		Breechloader (talk)	Merge
18		Lex loci rei sitae (talk)	Merge
1,018		Vaporwave (talk)	Merge
174		Vishvarupa (talk)	Wikify
58		John Neville, 1st Marquess of Montagu (talk)	Wikify
45		Antisemitism in Sweden (talk)	Wikify
60		Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (talk)	Orphan
7		The Verdict of Perugia (talk)	Orphan
18		Balakrishna Guruji (talk)	Orphan
30		Guddu Engineer (talk)	Stub
17		Liechtenstein Homeland Service (talk)	Stub
17		Bargain and sale deed (talk)	Stub
18		Grant deed (talk)	Stub
11		Cécil von Renthe-Fink (talk)	Stub
13		Cloud on title (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SN - hope you are well and a happy new year. Per your propsal at ANI, which was enforced, you stated in your opening line "perhaps 500 words? —which is the minimum accepted at WP:DYK so has a precedent". I've had a quick look at WP:DYK, and it doesn't mention 500 words anywhere, but 1,500 characters (WP:DYKCRIT, point 2). Do you have any objections on my restriction being changed to match the DYK standard that you initially suggested? I doubt some of my better articles(!) would pass the 500 word limit, such as this, this and this, but they'd pass the DYK requirements (on length). Happy to discuss.

Also @Spartaz: as the closer of that thread.

Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Lugnuts, and I hope I'm not a complete hypocrite for wishing you and yours a happy new year too. Yes, please do get the change in restriction effected if you can—it was that DYK criterion I was intending, and I apologise for misleading you (and ANI for that matter!). Please let me know if I need to reaffirm this anywhere, any time. All the best! SN54129 — Review here please :) 18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, that's good to see. Easy to flip 500/1500! I've let Spartaz know about my post here, so hopefully they can update this to reflect this. No hypocrisy either - all is good. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The term word was used twice in the proposal and rereading the discussion and noting the number of users advocating for a total ban on article creation, there was clearly no consensus that less than a total ban would fly unless substantial articles were produced. Regardless of the original meaning, the concept that gripped was a substantial article and multiple users endorsed 500 words. I don’t feel comfortable arbitrarily changing it to characters as that wasn’t the consensus of the discussion. If you want to shorten it, I think you need a fresh consensus and should open a thread at AN. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: S Marshall
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, cool. But I basically just wrote the original article; many moons ago I realised that any article put forward for ITN would be taken over, not so much by gatekeepers, but by trivialistas and this hasn't proved me wrong. Still, collectivism is the name of the day!  :) SN54129 06:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've blocked the /64 range. Bishonen | tålk 08:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

No, thank you Bishonen. But you denied me my return to AIV—would have been my 51st in over eight years  :) SN54129 09:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, the emphasis there was meant to be on "No, thank you Bishonen", while I've just noticed that it might read more like "No, thank you Bishonen" or even "No, thank you Bishonen". The vagaries of old mother tongue eh!  :) SN54129 19:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't say. It's not my mother tongue. See how I use italics to make sure of communicating — you've made me nervous now! Howsomever, I did read your reply the way you meant it. Bishonen | tålk 20:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, thanks for the alteration, you were right about a common name, I was a bit confused doing research into the naming of Llywelyn and suppose I left a flaw to catch up on. I would like to bring it to your attention that Elder Llywelyn is actually Llywelyn Fawr, and this name has been taken by Llywelyn the Great, who is not actually 'Fawr', and someone has potentially made a mistake in naming these articles. This assumption can be verified through references : Llywelyn Fawr - Pierce, Thomas Jones. "LLYWELYN FAWR and LLYWELYN FYCHAN (fl. early 13th century). lords of Merioneth". Dictionary of Welsh Biography. National Library of Wales. Llywelyn the Great - Stephen, Leslie, ed. (1888). "Llewelyn" . Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 16. London: Smith, Elder & Co. p. 831. , Lee, Sidney, ed. (1893). "Llywelyn ab Iorwerth" . Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 34. London: Smith, Elder & Co. pp. 7–13. , Pierce, Thomas Jones (1959). "LLYWELYN ap IORWERTH". Dictionary of Welsh Biography. National Library of Wales. Officially at no stage in these references or any others found online is Llywelyn the Great name Fawr, however in the very few sources avaialble for Llywlyn the Elder he is named Fawr, eg. Myth of Llywelyn Fawr. There's some resarch into the topic, I've also opened discussions on relevant talk pages to try and get a general consensus. Cltjames (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, my Welsh is insufficient to the task. But good luck with it! An Bhreatain Bheag abú!  :) SN54129 17:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't often see you down at SPI. Your spidey senses were right - there were more. Girth Summit _(blether) 19:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks GS; 'tis a souless pit of the damned... must be why I keep going back  :) hope you're well! SN54129 17:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably what keeps me there too. Girth Summit _(blether) 18:22, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Indeed, I replied 15 minutes ago SN54129 17:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, missed that until, of course, I posted the above. Doug Weller talk 21:13, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you run an eye over Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 18, 2022 for me? 985 characters used against a hard limit of 1,025. Ta. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Serial Number 54129, for some reason I can't email to you. I changed my email back to the oldest one I have some time ago, and it's not sending the confirmation email. Anyway, can you please forward the Joseph Lister article to scope_creep dot hotmail dot com. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 16:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: Sounds bizarre! But Sent as directed  :) SN54129 16:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was quick. If only sources research was like that. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 16:09, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...miss the reference to my oppose in your own rationale. Thanks for noticing the point I was raising. You took an extended break last year, and I've been editing sporadically for many months. It would be remiss of me not to drop by and say hello. Hope you're well, Mr rnddude (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, long time no virtual interaction. Glad you've come through all *that* crap, I hope not too scathed. Also yeah, there's no fury like a support scorned eh?! SN54129 18:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on the Australian Army in Somalia Review essay: Hog Farm on American Civil War sites in the South and Midwest

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
254		Livery (talk)	Add sources
7,357		MrBeast (talk)	Add sources
9		Anne Hastings, Countess of Pembroke (talk)	Add sources
26		Yamaguchi Motomi (talk)	Add sources
6		E. F. Jacob (talk)	Add sources
344		Mathcore (talk)	Add sources
50		Wales in the Middle Ages (talk)	Cleanup
58		Saint Joseph University (talk)	Cleanup
23		History of the English fiscal system (talk)	Cleanup
282		Insulin (medication) (talk)	Expand
12		Coke Studio (Pakistani season 4) (talk)	Expand
31		First Fleet Re-enactment Voyage (talk)	Expand
547		Manorialism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
173		T-X (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
6,548		Triple J Hottest 100 (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
434		Investiture Controversy (talk)	Merge
23		Dapeng Jinchi Mingwang (talk)	Merge
17		Heroic verse (talk)	Merge
28		Susan Elan Jones (talk)	Wikify
19		Llywelyn ap Dafydd (talk)	Wikify
79		Catherine Walker (fashion designer) (talk)	Wikify
9		William J. Rothwell (talk)	Orphan
2		Walter Lougher (talk)	Orphan
3		Alastair Minnis (talk)	Orphan
7		Saint Gordianus (talk)	Stub
6		Oiketerion (talk)	Stub
8		Anthony Tuck (talk)	Stub
9		Simon Walker (historian) (talk)	Stub
8		Calchfynydd (talk)	Stub
3		Listening for the Weather (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Concordat of Worms, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Anselm and Colin Morris.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Epic Barnstar
		I'm giving you this barnstar in recognition of your impressive expansion of Concordat of Worms. I'm glad to see someone share my interest in this very deserving topic. Thank you! Modussiccandi (talk) 21:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this Modussiccandi, and also for kickstarting it in the first place. What I noticed was that the original merge (so-called) discussion comprised one editor's proposal—in which the topic's notability was actually admitted!—a "go ahead" from a <300 edit account, and no notifications to any relevant project pages whatsoever. Slam-dunk merge!

I don't want to tread on your toes, but there's a bit more I'd like to add (not much—just a few unused sources). I don't know about you, but I reckon there's an FA in there, eventually; thoughts? SN54129 12:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Congratulations on your upgrade, of course. SN54129 12:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Please feel free to add as much content as you want! And yes, I agree the topic has lots of potential. It might be at GA level already. Is there there such a thing as a joint GA nomination? I know it exists for FAC, but I'm not sure I've seen it for GA. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure...but I know a man who might. RX3, know ye of such a beast? SN54129 13:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Not Ritchie, but yes -- co-noms at GAN level are very common. I don't believe the bot can handle them well, though (the bot in general is rather on its last legs, although someone I've promised to ping every time it comes up until he's finished >:) is working on a replacement), so they tend to be informally done by adding a "[name] is co-nominator" to the |note= section of the GAN template. The unofficial status also means they don't get registered properly on WP:WBGAN, but that can be manually done if it's any sort of concern. Vaticidalprophet 13:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Vaticidalprophet: thanks for that. Sounds like you need a nightstick in your line of work  :) SN54129 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ealdgyth is your go-to expert editor on mediaeval history. In terms of GA reviews, one person has to start it, and one person has to take responsibility for closing it. Beyond that, in theory, anything goes. For example, Talk:Elham Valley Railway/GA1 was largely undertaken by other people than the reviewer. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ritchie333; obvs, I'll do the Pepsi challenge with anyone on (late) medieval history—although not denying it might be a bit of a stretch call Worms late med—but it sounds like an "anything goes" GAN could be a goer! Cheers mate  :) SN54129 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeeees I really really need to get that bot going. As I have said before, the initial 80% of the work is done, it's now the latter 80%.... :) firefly ( t · c ) 14:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ritchie333: by the way, check this out. Right up your alley! :D http://liar.co.uk/ SN54129 14:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned them in a recent DYK, go to Queen's first album, track 5 - or side 2 track 1 if you're old school, about 3:20 in. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Modussiccandi: Hi again! Re. the joint GA nom, would you like to look over the article and see if you think its about ready? I wanted to leave it a few weeks back then, so that it becomes fresh again. What do you think? Hope all's well. SN54129 19:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notifying me! I have to say that I don't feel a joint GA nomination can be justified at this point: you have contributed much more to this article than I have; all I did really is start it with the most important information. You should do the nomination on your own. Regarding the quality of the article, I think it's in good shape for the GA review: it's comprehensive, well sourced, stable, well illustrated etc. I'm glad you took this article to where it is now. Thanks and best,Modussiccandi (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Serial, do you intend to continue your review on this FAC? I really hope so but please let me know either way. (t · c) buidhe 23:24, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Buidhe, I'll look in later. SN54129 12:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Juxlos has responded to all your comments, do you feel that they were adequately addressed? (t · c) buidhe 08:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept this note as an invitation to participate in the discussion of this latest FAC nomination for the nonmetal article.

The context is that you were involved in the FAC 3 discussion for the article (which was not prompted) or you are an editor who made a recent edit to the nonmetal article.

Thank you. Sandbh (talk) 07:13, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February songs

in friendship

thank you today for the article, introduced: "A return to FAC after a year away. Where does it go, etc. But here's a thing that was brought to GA by the thorough review of T. Riley, of this parish, and should be ready for the next stage. Another—if slightly later—medieval parliament—the King wanted money, both lords and commons refused until he got rid of a few scroungers, he refused, and all hell burst out. Hey, parliament was nearly invited for dinner and poisoned by the King, how's that for a healthy political relationship?"! - Sorry, I missed the FAC, meant to go ... -- Happy 2022! (I was on vacation.) The image was taken in memory, and I remember your tribute for SlimVirgin. "the land is bright and wide." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely message, thanks Gerda! SN54129 11:37, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! - stand and sing Prayer for Ukraine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it would have been beneficial to allow the discussion to run for the full 30 days; even if no additional editors comment, there is no harm in it. As such, I would ask that you revert your close. BilledMammal (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for looking in, BilledMammal. What full 30 days is that, though? SN54129 15:21, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Standard length for an RFC; WP:ANRFC. There are exceptions, but I don't believe they can be applied to a no consensus close. BilledMammal (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, per WP:RFC, 30 days is purely the time given by the bot to avoid a buildup of stale discussions cluttering the lists and wasting commentators' time; but indeed, editors are actively encouraged to not wait for that if, for instance, a discussion is stale. Or in this case, one which has not been replied to in nearly a fortnight could well be assumed to be so. Cheers, SN54129 15:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Discussions "waste commenters time" when there is a clear consensus that is unlikely to change. In this case, additional commenters could result in a consensus being determined, meaning that the time already invested would not have been wasted. As such, I believe it is more appropriate to leave it open for the full thirty days. BilledMammal (talk) 15:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • That is not per RfC: An RfC should last until enough comment has been received that consensus is reached, or until it is apparent that it won't be.^{my emph} Anyway, thanks for looking in again. Cheers, SN54129 15:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thank you for providing your position. In that case, I would like to ask how you weighted the various arguments when making your close. BilledMammal (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I only reviewed two, I'm afraid, but one of them is a slam-dunk paid editing job. SN54129 16:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing and removing the master's thesis source from Lakeview Academy's article as it did not meet Wikipedia's standards. I would also like to thank you for focusing on the question at hand (source review) and not get off track as others had done. You have restored my faith in the editing process.--Smileykaye (talk) 16:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Serial Number 54129

Thank you for creating Ahmad Al Mallawani.

User:Curb Safe Charmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hi. As is being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers#AFC_and_NPP_-_is_there_a_"rights_conflict"? at the moment, when an autopatrolled AfC reviewer accepts an article it is automatically market as patrolled. This article is a good example of one that should be marked as unreviewed - it needed quite a bit of cleanup, was uncategorised etc.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Curb Safe Charmer}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they're distinct processes, and I'm not sure one project can dictate the duties of another. It's certainly an interesting discussion (although, in its current state, seems likely to tail off into oblivion before any kind of firm proposal is made, let alone consensus come to). SN54129 16:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...I can really do about that draft. It looks sus, for sure, but I don't know who it is. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Me neither. Just for your notes, really. SN54129 13:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you create SPI/Arizeuo... manually? You know Twinkle can do that for you? I tried to raise one manually, years ago. Once bitten, twice shy... Girth Summit _(blether) 18:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: Nooo—! Tried that myself once, and as you say, thus is the path to madness. The twinkle form froze and the only way of getting out of it was to refresh, which of course lost the info (a shame that editing windows save one's work but dialogue-style boxes (not of the tech term?) do not...). But it's probably my machine; I generally have a mortal number of windows and/or tabs open at any one time, so something often has to give  :) thanks for dealing with it so quickly though, especially before the AfD finishes. (By the way, I edit conflicted with there, also doing the sock strike; if you don't mind I kept the little template in, and debolded the !vote, so as not to mislead (?) the script.)SN54129 18:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No worries about the AfD, you probably did a better job of it than me. Tabs - makes sense. Looking up right now, I count 46 tabs currently open. What am I doing to my poor processor... Girth Summit _(blether) 18:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what was going on with my user and talkpage, but thanks for fixing it. How odd! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Banks Irk (talk) 18:34, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I made all the changes. Could you make your final decision? LittleJerry (talk) 15:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	You've been mildly reprimanded by your passive aggressive aunt
	ArbCom noticeboards are no place for humor, young man! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:53, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good one, ScottishFinnishRadish. Kinda glad there are no fair use pics of Tattaglia though  ;) SN54129 14:13, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Over all civilisations hovers the shadow of admonishment"¹

(admonished and restricted by arbcom, and never understood why) thank you for taking up the GA review of Prayer for Ukraine, the work of many. The German translation will go to the German Main page tomorrow (with the image taken by me in better times), so if you find things that need change fast a large audience will profit. DYK that we began expanding it, without knowing of the exposure on U.S. television? I have no access to the NYT report about that, - do you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you got a link to that report, Gerda? I'll have a look, if so. SN54129 10:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's in the article, found on de, of all places. There are 2 refs for the same fact that all can see, just that NYT has a higher reputation. A friend uploaded the video for me which is not available in Germany (Europe?), so I can confirm that what the 2 refs describe is fact, especially the detail that until after the last announcement, you do not see that the candles spell Kyiv. - Suppressed by whom one wonders. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ps: ... and I now I can see the article, which has a less good description, but refers to the two other occasions when the show began without a sketch: 9-11 and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any idea why the bot didn't add it to the list of GAs? - It's on the German MP today (pictured, by me) and tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

¹ ^{With acknowledgements, possibly Unamuno, and almost certainly wrongly remembered.} Right, on it now. SN54129 14:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March songs

Not sure on what. Prayer for Ukraine is still not among the Music GA (where I'd expect it). - Listening to the charity concert mentioned here. I created the articles of the composer and the soprano. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now, you can also listen on YouTube, and more music, the piece by Anna Korsun begins after about one hour, and the voices call "Freiheit!" (freedom, instead of "Freude", joy). Music every day, pictured in songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Gerda, sorry I didn't reply then. I put it under WP:GA > Music > Songs > Pre-1900 songs, which seemed about right... did you have somewhere else in mind? Feel free to move it, if it should be e.g. under Classical compositions. Nice music, very emotive at this time. SN54129 17:47, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's not the typical song, which made me look in the wrong direction, sorry. Next wish: some notice on my talk, - I'm not eager for bot messages but this one is special. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bach's No. 1 today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday flowers and sounds, don't miss the extraordinary marriage of the beginnings of the theme of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1, and Prayer for Ukraine - here! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the Robert de Umfraville article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 10, 2022. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 10, 2022, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:32, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your tireless efforts to ensure that Battle of Poitiers is adequately referenced. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you said I and another were socks? Or was that a joke? I was confused because me and that user are unrelated at any just confused on why this user said that someone was drunk in General comments in that RFA. SoyokoAnis - talk 13:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Admin Deepfriedokra was suggesting that Admin Floquenbeam was drunk, on that occasion. SN54129 13:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m assuming/hoping that DFO was jokingly suggesting I was drunk. — Floquenbeam (talk) 14:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam I sincerely hope you weren't drunk. Happy editing! SoyokoAnis - talk 16:21, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely hope you are not drunk too. Stay sober, and happy editing! --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---and/or disorderly 😜. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:23, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We at Wikipedia do not have a sense of humor we're aware of. --MiB --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Serial Number, how are you doing? Perhaps you I've seen the ping on my talk page; would you be interested in taking up JBchrch's mediation initiative? Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Modussiccandi, and hoping this finds you well also. If anything, I'd be more interested in taking them to AN/I for whatever form of WP:HARRASment failure to respect WP:NOBAN is. Do not be deceived into thinking there is a dispute that needs to be resolved; only one editor thinks so, and it's neither me, the editor my original comment referenced nor the other 57 editors who posted to that RfA. No-one cares. The RfA is over. Dead and buried (non obstante the candidate is wished all the best for their next, hopefully, more successful run). The crux of the matter is that, having raised it here—by way of telling me I should be "corrected" (!!!) for a "blunder" and then wondering, innocently, if they sense hostility (!!!)—I eventually inform them they need not stick around (actually more politely than that...), to which they insist on responding to. Obviously, this is removed, and I am placed in the invidious position of having to remind them to whom the last word—with a few exceptions—belongs on a user talk page. Then they come back again with another comment, at which point I invoke NOBAN. And, of course, they just have to ping me again from your talk. I don't know whether using other WP:ECHO facility to carry on talking about people who have made it clear they do not wish to respond is against the letter of the harassment policy; it is certainly against the spirit of it.

TL;DR: My suggestion would be, in this case, not to mistake politeness for civility, and not to allow yourself to be distracted by what is already becoming a timesink. Gently steer them towards your favourite noticeboard, where, no doubt "Let justice roll down like waters, etc.," will be the watchword. Have a good week, SN54129 23:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

but nice. I was leaving if it for the clerk, thou I think the whole lot are heading for DS bloccks. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:25, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Was very naughty! Instead of clerks-l, I bring you seria-l. I'll get bollocked for it, but really, what a waste of time in the making. There aren't enough peanuts to go around 🤪 SN54129 01:45, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is "Don't do that again" a bollocking? Cause that's my message, seriously delivered. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:58, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, Barkeep49, it's not something I have made or intend make a habit of; if I wanted to clerk arbcom or anyone else I would give up my soul for eternity apply through the usual channels (although, on a serious note, it is ironic that only a few days have passed since I reversed a non-clerk action and was critized for it; yes I know it's an arb sub-page, but it's rather a distinction without a difference). For the record, my reasons for that edit were serious, if IAR, and were based on the principle of retaining editors, if possible. See: take a look at the guy's page. He's on the ropes. Probably rightfully. Multiple admins pointing out his faults. Definitely rightfully. And then he goes and posts that. Now, I know that boomerangs aren't commonly despatched or delivered by arbs in official capacity, but that was asking for it. If he was lucky, yeah, it would have been removed; but as you p[pointed out yourself, there are editors who by necessity comment on every case. I felt it was as well to not allow it to get to the stage where anyone noticed. Apologies for the infraction of course, and message received. But if yon guy gets blocked, it should be because of what he's posting, not where; which is what I wanted to avoid, ASAP.

On a lighter note, re. bollockings, here's a cryptic crossword clue which seems pertinent  :) SN54129 23:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, SN 54129, I'm very sorry about making such a mess out of your talk page and sub-pages, while trying to undo pagemove vandalism. Not sure how exactly the "move all subpages" box got checked--I definitely unchecked it at first, but there was an intermediate confirmation page where I guess the box became checked again--but I think I've gotten everything back to the way it was. Please feel free to pelt me with eggs and rotten tomatoes for every bad page move, and if you find anything out of place, let me know, so that I can fix it and then submit myself to further egg-and-tomato-based penance. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:08, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

partially in my defense, I've realized it was a bug in the software that misled me here, so I'm not totally crazy: T304008 Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Writ Keeper: I appreciate you sorting it out in the end though. My apologies are probably due for having so many blooming sub-pages: I had no idea there were so many. Until I saw it take you a 100 edits to move them all anyway! Hopefully your phab ticket will iron out the anomaly though. Thanks for dealing with the original vandalism too, by the way. SN54129 12:46, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Suffusion of Yellow
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What did you mean in thanking me for not making three separate posts about Draft:Vivek Verma? Were you referring to the fact that the article has been deleted three times? Or is there some other humor that I completely missed?

As to CheckUser and the editor who submitted the draft, as you know, anyone can submit a Sockpuppet investigation, and you also probably know that CheckUser data is only kept for three months. Anyway, I don't know if the submitter is VV, that is, a sockpuppet, or if the submitter is someone being paid by VV, and paid editing isn't dealt with by CU. I don't really care if the submitter is a duck or some other species of waterbird. (Either way, waterbirds can be plucked.) Robert McClenon (talk) 04:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Robert McClenon: ah, you noticed! The "three comments" comment was slantendicular reference to this of yours, a three-for-one! 🤪😉
  Obvs, I'm fully aware of CU policy, but in a case like this, the purpose is to shite up either VV or some PAID ring although to what degree of efficacy I don't know. Hope you're well, and have a good weekend! When it starts. SN54129 12:41, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Greg has been consistently opposing RfA candidates with less than 1 FA or 2 GAs for years and years; see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bradv and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rosguill for relatively recent examples. There's no point debating his view as it's a waste of time and a drama sink. The simple answer is anyone who writes two or more GAs won't get opposed. I've never tested whether there's a difference between the GAs being Texas Recreational Road 8 and Texas Recreational Road 11, or Dracula and The Rolling Stones, though. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, from past experience he will usually a) say he is being badgered or harassed and b) demand that you explain your support rationale to his satisfaction before he will explain his oppose (which never happens). The fact that historically, there has not been the same obligation on supporters to explain their reasons for supporting (assumed to be "per nom" or a confirmation that the candidate is regarded as fully qualified)as there has been on opposers is not something he accepts. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care how much people say, "Oh, that's just GregJack". Needs pointing out. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya you took on Attack on Kennedy Road for a GA review on 8 March, I was wondering when you will get a chance to make comments? I'm not in a particular rush, just planning out next week. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 13:12, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: I apologise for my tardiness with your GAR, Mujinga. We're playing host to 'Rona here, at the moment, so my time hasn't always been my own. But I'm intending to start on Kennedy Road tomorrow. Don't worry if that doesn't suit you—I've kept you waiting long enough, so you should take as long as you want! All the best, SN54129 18:51, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope everyone returns to good health soon! Please take your time with the review as well, whatever suits. Mujinga (talk) 09:22, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! By the way, how detailed would you like the review? Obviously, the CA criteria need to be fulfilled, but were you thinking of subsequently taking it further? SN54129 14:32, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting User:75.169.140.50's strange activity. I was laboriously reverting by hand; what mechanism did you use to implement such a swift resolution to the series and is it available to the likes of me? If not, as the activity by User:75.169.162.15 is evidently the same individual, could you please implement a similar mass rv please? Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:54, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Matt Lunker: Happy to help! This is the script, another fine thing from User:Writ Keeper. Be careful though: I use it extremely;y rarely, as if you had much more than, say, at a guess, a 5% error rate, it could rebound upon its user. "Misuse of rollback" is a thing; misuse of mass rollback, an even greater thing! SN54129 16:01, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that and I should have said, I'm fully aware it wouldn't be the kind of thing to wield often or lightly, though I have come across similar editing patterns before that were extremely laborious to revert manually. I'm afraid I wouldn't know how to utilise the script and would be wary of doing so at the risk of causing mayhem. Is there an easy explanation of what to do with it? Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've asked  :) SN54129 19:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Informal threats sent to me saying “your gettin blocked” without rationale evidence or reasoning. Please explain! Phil.Mcrackin123 (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just so. Luckily for you, no administrators watch this page, otherwise, they would realise your account has been blocked by Cullen328. As I suggested, you may wish to read WP:EVADE and WP:SOCK as to what happens next. SN54129 13:42, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This account has just been created ? I’ve not been blocked, you just came out the blue and said “you gettin blocked” ! When in doubt don’t block ! Phil.Mcrackin123 (talk) 13:50, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is true. Accounts belong to people, one at a time. Note I used the future participle. Infinitive, To Block. You have been blocked. You are blocked. You will be blocked. SN54129 13:58, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Except I have not been blocked, I am not blocked and with reason, because there is no reason as to why I should be blocked hence why I am not blocked 😂 Phil.Mcrackin123 (talk) 14:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Received and replied :) --Blablubbs (talk) 14:18, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on 1937 tour of Germany by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. — Bilorv (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on your first Four Award! — Bilorv (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind, Bilorv, thanks very much! Now, about the fifteen Triple Crowns I'm about to log...  :) SN54129 16:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, always happy to check and give out these awards—it pales in comparison to the amount of effort people put into earning them. — Bilorv (talk) 21:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
20		John de Vere, 7th Earl of Oxford (talk)	Add sources
28		Thomas Walsingham (talk)	Add sources
52		Istithmar World (talk)	Add sources
26		Dubai Maritime City (talk)	Add sources
4,037		Hundred Years' War (talk)	Add sources
22		St. Peter Line (talk)	Add sources
312		P&O Stena Line (talk)	Cleanup
6		Allostock (talk)	Cleanup
73		Economy of Somaliland (talk)	Cleanup
94		Cheshire West and Chester (talk)	Expand
14		MS A. Nepita (talk)	Expand
84		Jebel Ali Free Zone (talk)	Expand
1,152		Historical materialism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
18		Bruges Garter Book (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
229		Richard de Clare, 2nd Earl of Pembroke (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,316		2020 Belarusian presidential election (talk)	Merge
225		Lockout (industry) (talk)	Merge
6,934		Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk)	Merge
34		Dunollie Castle (talk)	Wikify
97		Hubert Gough (talk)	Wikify
2,340		Maersk (talk)	Wikify
36		Emirates Transport (talk)	Orphan
2		Radio Free Europe/Free Europe Committee - Encrypted Telexes (talk)	Orphan
9		Megh Singh (talk)	Orphan
18		Kiss Network (talk)	Stub
21		The Wizard and I (talk)	Stub
62		Dubai Drydocks (talk)	Stub
1		John of Hoo, Abbot of Vale Royal (talk)	Stub
2		Richard of Evesham, Abbot of Vale Royal (talk)	Stub
1		John Chaumpeneys, Abbot of Vale Royal (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Five years!

- look and listen today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Hitler as a military leader

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 13, 2022, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 08:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as to why you added the {{canvassed}} template at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will Smith assault of Chris Rock at the Oscars. It seems more likely to me that the influx of new users commenting there is due to many people reading the page about an event that has been dominating the news for the past few days, seeing the giant red banner at the top of the article, and giving their two cents at the AfD. Is there evidence that the AfD was posted to some external website? Mlb96 (talk) 01:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid WP:OUTING would probably apply; so an abundance of caution, and all that! Hopefully it is as you say though. SN54129 10:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know I'm giving you shit on the FAC nom page, but here is an angry tune to take away the pain[5] n (as you are a Fall fan, there are a lot of similarities especially with he bass lines). Ceoil (talk) 04:52, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

​ Bring on that shit!  :) Man I listened to that before even properly waking up. It certainly cleared the head! SN54129 12:11, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its pretty heavy, which is what I like. Now you owe me one link. Ceoil (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is also this [6] Ceoil (talk) 05:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of the Fall (and well done at spotting ref)...buried here is talk of a collab. If interested, what period? For me it would be early....Slags, Slates and Tapes, or This Nation's Saving Grace. I only really go as far as Curious Orange, which is Steve Hanley's high point. Ps I have a fuck ton of books. Ceoil (talk) 22:30, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pps, your more recent FA recalls[7] Yeah I like queen, shoot me. Ceoil (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you editing other people's comments including this and this? Is this account compromised? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:41, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please desist from making patronising commments, particularly when hatting sections. Remember, you should strive to model appropriate standards of courtesy and civility to other editors, per the community's expectations of your conduct.

I assume your question is a joke. SN54129 11:49, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I was just worried. If you'd said, "hey did you really mean to yell 'play nice' at those two, couldn't you just hat it with no comment" on my talk page, I wouldn't have batted an eyelid. But to edit somebody else's comment with "ce" (which gives no indication of that actual issue) eight days after it was made (from which we could assume nobody is particularly bothered) seems so far out of whack that I can't believe it's something you'd do in good faith. FWIW I have hatted discussions using this phrase or similar (eg: "not now chaps") because I feel it calms the mood down. In the past, admins have dished out civility blocks instead, and (quite rightfully in my view) caught merry hell for it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:53, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cobblers. Which demonstrates bad faith on my part. Even more bad faith would be to suggest that you included that first diff to try to indicate a pattern, although it's clear to everyone that it was an accidental rollback that was itself rolled back the next minute. And it was over 12 hours ago. In which time this supposedly compromised account carried out a ~2K-byte featured article review. "I'm a compromised account, please bring me massive articles to tie me up all morning!" :p SN54129 12:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, I've got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. I'll start again .... hello, SN54129, how are you? I was reading Murder of Deborah Linsley again recently, and it's made me think of how safer train travel appears to be these days. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:13, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April songs

memories: two people on DYK, both connected to Oper Frankfurt, and don't miss yesterday's video of Pink Floyd given to me! - I'm happy that the only infobox discussions are humourous, - could you perhaps tell our missed ones? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for Robert de Umfraville, introduced: "Apologies in advance to our Caledonian colleagues! This is a fellow—a 15th-century "hero" no less—who wanted "good rest and peace" in England while sending fire ships into Scotland—who may have plotted against Henry V but probably fought at Agincourt as well, who contemporaries saw as "an ideal knight" yet whose biggest claim to fame was that he raided Peebles on market day, burnt the place and nicked all their gear. A piece of work, one way or another."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

dance and singing, peace doves and icecream --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clarendon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 12 May 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 12, 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:35, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not resent your comment at our discussion in AN, truly. I was trying to say something visceral about how deep feeling for a way of thinking comes from experience, not necessarily from advocacy or refusal of progress. The words erupted from my heart, not my head; I did not intend to make a scene. It was considerate to rethink your comment many hours later. My friends are people who feel they can be candid and direct with me; I'd like to count you as one of my friends as of that datestamp (before that, I'm certain). BusterD (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting my talk page back in order, I was just working out how to do it myself. And "arse"? Yup, there it is in a very small nutshell. Britmax (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Britmax, very sorry about that—I didn't know you were around! I thought you'd only edited once today and wouldn't want, you know, arseholery hanging about your page like a smell. You certainly seem to have picked up a...bizarre follower there! SN54129 19:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The thanks for doing that were genuine, you saved me a job. You're right about the smell, and the bizarre followers. Still, all part of life's rich pageant, don'tcher know? Britmax (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and mostly for the better. Sometimes you've just gotta go see about a girl, and other things take the back seat for a while. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 20:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
664		2022 Pittsburgh shooting (talk)	Add sources
3,483		Henry IV of England (talk)	Add sources
7,398		Holodomor (talk)	Add sources
1,557		Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick (talk)	Add sources
612		Alex Rider (talk)	Add sources
69		Henry Stafford (died 1471) (talk)	Add sources
98		Silcoates School (talk)	Cleanup
30		Richard Scrope (bishop) (talk)	Cleanup
32		Wolmer's Schools (talk)	Cleanup
656		Face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic (talk)	Expand
168		Pete Sessions (talk)	Expand
90		Southend West (UK Parliament constituency) (talk)	Expand
27		Elizabeth Fitzalan, Duchess of Norfolk (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
663		Henry FitzRoy, Duke of Richmond and Somerset (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
27		Ransom of King John II of France (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
55		Kohti Vapautta! (talk)	Merge
9		The Quest for the Historical Muhammad (Ibn Warraq) (talk)	Merge
165		Beheading in Islam (talk)	Merge
271		Beer bottle (talk)	Wikify
12		ANGEL Learning (talk)	Wikify
10		Supplementary school (talk)	Wikify
6		Subhash Shinde (talk)	Orphan
3		Harald Kleinschmidt (talk)	Orphan
2		Dawn-Marie Layne (talk)	Orphan
3		The Good, the Bad, the Average and Unique (talk)	Stub
120		Anna Firth (talk)	Stub
95		Nigel Sweeney (talk)	Stub
15		Michael de la Pole, 3rd Earl of Suffolk (talk)	Stub
5		Liz Obi (talk)	Stub
454		2022 Kunduz mosque bombing (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:50, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Floyd has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. TSP (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Wikipelli Silver seren
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher)Hey, Tol - is your bot going to post this at SN's talk page every month until he runs for sysop? I mean, I'd definitely support if he did, but if he doesn't want to, I can imagine these notifications getting old after a while... Girth Summit _(blether) 20:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, shit - self-trout, I should have actually read the message properly. I thought you were hassling SN to run for admin, not suggesting people he might want to speak to. If he's signed up for this, then fair enough - apologies for the unnecessary snark. Girth Summit _(blether) 20:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: No problem; glad you figured it out! I'm happy to see the system's getting some use. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Atsme 💬 📧 20:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He's already run you know. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on military logistics and rebuilding Nagasaki

Happy to see you're still keeping an eye on this article after all your hard work on it earlier. But can you explain your objection to my |ps=none amendments? Sorry, I don't understand Wiki jargon like WP:CITEVAR. Currently in the short References list, MOST of the entries DON'T have a full stop/period after them. In fact I see SandyGeorgia inserted a lot of |ps=none on 4 March with the summary 'citation consistency' to remove a couple of dozen occurrences of full stops. Nobody objected at the time, so I assumed it was the agreed format for this article. I've looked back at earlier versions eg 23 December 2021, and even then all the short refs have |ps=none. I had begun working through the entries using |ps=none to get rid of the remaining full stops - for consistency! I think many of the short refs that DON'T have the |ps=none tag were ones that came in with your own major update - some of these may be ones that SandyGeorgia later added the |ps=none tag to. John O'London (talk) 20:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John O'London, just to clarify, all your edits to that page can be undone per policy, tragically! BTW, are you out o' London? Kilburn here :) SN54129 20:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Must admit I'd never dared edit a Featured Article before. But I've long had my eye on Green Children, worried about the content (out-of-date, unbalanced, inaccurate), and when I saw it was to be reviewed - and then saw your own very bold (and worthwhile) additions - I thought I'd try some of my own. Sorry, I've never understood Wiki's Featured Article policy, which doesn't actually seem to require an article to be 'accurate'. What I've been doing is largely checking back on the references and making sure they are accurate, and actually say what the original contributor says - and tidying up typos and inconsistencies. Perhaps we can regard that as part of the review process? I don't think the article has been moved to FARC yet? In the past when I've tried to raise a discussion on an article's talk page it's usually been met with no response! PS perhaps someone needs to consult the latest academic paper on the subject, just out:

James Plumtree, 'Placing the Green Children of Woolpit', in Strangers at the Gate! Multidisciplinary Explorations of Communities, Borders, and Othering in Medieval Western Europe, ed, Simon C. Thomson, Explorations in Medieval Culture 21 (Leiden: Brill, 2022), pp. 202-224

John O'London (talk) 20:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

1. Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
2. AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
3. Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
4. Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
5. Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
6. Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
7. Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hello, Serial Number 54129! i had two questions regarding this article and the associated blurb.

• was the judge that the villagers appealed to actually called either "chief justice" or "justiciar"? i had added to the blurb a link to the "justiciar" article to conform with the article body. however, that article states that the office (in england) was replaced under edward i and considers hugh despenser (d. 1265) to be the last justiciar. also, in the legacy section of the featured article, the "justice of Chester" (and not "Cheshire") was mentioned, so i am wondering if any of the sources may have conflated the two offices. (also, apparently, the senior justice of chester was called the "Chief Justice of Chester".) if the judge appealed to was actually the justice of chester, i was thinking of replacing "chief justice in Cheshire" in the blurb with "justice of Chester".
• do you have a preference regarding the oxford comma? the blurb's third sentence omits it, but its fifth sentence uses it.

dying (talk) 23:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Dying: a) Excellent points re. justiciarships, clearly the RS occasionally confuse themselves; b) I generally avoid it but don't always spot it, so all things being equal am opposed to it but not religiously so.
  Thanks for asking! SN54129 13:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • sounds good. i have made a further edit to the blurb to conform with your comments. (i ended up removing "King's" so that i could capitalize "Justice" to conform with the rest of the sentence.) please feel free to revert anything you disagree with. thanks! dying (talk) 00:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May songs

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "Pity the poor folk of 14th- and 15th-century Cheshire, with their Rachmanesque landlord in the figure of the villainous Abbot of Vale Royal condemning them to perpetual slavery for fifty years... and the rest! They protest their rights to the Abbot. He finds against them and imprisons and fines them. They protest their rights to the King. He finds against them and returns them to the Abbot. They are imprisoned and fined by the Abbot. They protest their rights to the justiciar. He finds against them and returns them to the Abbot. They are imprisoned and fined by the Abbot. They protest their rights to the King and Queen. The Queen supports them. The King finds against them and returns them to the Abbot. They are imprisoned and fined by the Abbot. You get the picture. Needless to say, there were increasing fatalities among the good brothers, culminating in the eventual murder of—you guessed it—the Abbot of Vale Royal." - I have an imaginary DYK set at the bottom of my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

today more pics, and should this woman have an article? - or only her sons? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:45, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I like my talk today (actually mostly from 29 May - I took the title pic), enjoy the music, two related videos worth watching! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cessna 310 § Cockpit image. BilCat (talk) 00:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a recognition process, I just haven't set up the paperwork yet ... Hog Farm _Talk 17:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
31		Thomas Holland, 1st Duke of Surrey (talk)	Add sources
6		I Blame the Government (talk)	Add sources
19		Thomas de Mowbray, 4th Earl of Norfolk (talk)	Add sources
1,365		John of Gaunt (talk)	Add sources
616		Southend-on-Sea (talk)	Add sources
604		John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset (talk)	Add sources
240		Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (talk)	Cleanup
65		John Neville, 1st Marquess of Montagu (talk)	Cleanup
14		Tollmann's bolide hypothesis (talk)	Cleanup
32		Khadjibey (talk)	Expand
898		Dayton, Ohio (talk)	Expand
295		Desmond Swayne (talk)	Expand
423		Quaternary extinction event (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
150		Iyaric (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
337		International availability of McDonald's products (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
40		Hispanism (talk)	Merge
91		Persecution of Hazaras (talk)	Merge
24		Magh people (talk)	Merge
2,539		Battle of Azovstal (talk)	Wikify
349		Timex Group USA (talk)	Wikify
50		Gerard Kenny (talk)	Wikify
3		Tribal Monarchy in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (talk)	Orphan
2		Issam Amira (talk)	Orphan
162		Melinda Ballard (talk)	Orphan
41		Thomas Howard, 5th Duke of Norfolk (talk)	Stub
4		Dúngal mac Selbaig (talk)	Stub
10		Konstandinos Erik Scurfield (talk)	Stub
2		Túathalán (talk)	Stub
1		Pygora cruralis (talk)	Stub
89		Ty Mitchell (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on a World War II summit and the American space program

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: John of Reading
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at four recent works

The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• BennyOnTheLoose, with 746 points, a tally built both on snooker and other sports topics, and on more general subjects.
• Bloom6132, with 683 points, garnered mostly from "In the news" items and related DYKs.
• Sammi Brie, with 527, from a variety of submissions related to radio and television stations.

Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article nomination, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. WikiCup judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Falklands War artillery and Nick-D on the Battle of the Ruhr

Nice to see you around. I'd always like to agree with you, but I'd rather disagree than not know what you think. Hope you're keeping well. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:14, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the Falklands War

The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

At this stage, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For the remaining competitors, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Australian military leadership and Nick-D on the First Crusade's Byzantine connection

Hello, we have tried to reach you a few times through email with no response. We would like to remind you that two reviewers have provided their comments on your submission on the talk page. If you intend to continue with the submission process, please make changes directly to the preprint or inform me when you will have the revisions completed by. If we do not see any edits or hear back from you within a week (i.e. after October 6), we will assume that the submission has been abandoned and declined for further consideration. Thank you. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since we have not heard from you, we will proceed with a declined submission for this paper. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@OhanaUnited: Many apologies for the lack of involvement: my stats will indicate a general disengagement from WP, not just WJns (for personal, rather than on-wiki reasons, I'm glad too say!)

Ever since I got your recent reminder, I've been working on the piece—my only excuse is that most of Hicks' criticisms of the article were thematic rather than just add/remove this that (e.g, per Hicks, I'm adding a new—small—section on the peripatetic nature of the King's household. But I've been working on the thing most of the week, and could have it on your desk tomorrow evening (UTC), If you could hold off 24 hours?

BTW, if you do, could you email me a reminder of how to link an anonymous WP account with the academic database? Much appreciated, if so. All the best! SN54129 20:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, we will hold off for 24 hours. Please edit directly on the WikiJournal preprint article. Ideally, you should also reply on the talk page (underneath each peer reviewer's section) to address and respond to the reviewers' comments. As for academic database, please check The Wikipedia Library and see if you are able to access resources that way. I don't know how stringent their "10+ edits in the last month" rule is being applied to access, but give it a try. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 20:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We tried to reach you on Wikiversity for a follow-up question. Please reply back asap so we can finalize the process. Thanks. (An email has also been sent to the email address associated with this wiki account.) OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 13:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you get a chance to see our message? We would like a "yes" or "no" answer to our question. Thanks. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Elli
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Serial Number 54129, I just wanted to start off by saying thanks for the great work on the major expansion of Marc Bloch, a historian I've taken greater interest in recently. (I'm also curious about your methodology; do you do a lot of your work offline first, in particular, how did you manage this edit back in 2018?) But I'm really here just to invite you to participate in Draft:List of French historians, if you have any interest. I work on it sporadically, but if you want to join in, that would be most welcome. One interesting question there, is who are the French historians who are present in fr-wiki but not in English, so that we can assess which ones should be added as {{interlanguage link}}s, which might provoke some new articles here due to the red links on our side.

The list format is of course very different than the in-depth work you did on Bloch, and if you like that narrative form better, I've also got Draft:French historiography cooking, but it's very preliminary and raw at this point, with most of it just a bunch of excerpts as signposts to point the way. In the latter draft, what I'm most interested in is just finding out what the salient issues are that are addressed by French historiography, to make sure I don't leave out anything major, and on the flip side, don't include trivialities. I.e., at this point, I'm most interested in just getting the Table of Contents to be comprehensive and have appropriate content, and to be properly organized. Your assistance there would be welcome as well. Mathglot (talk) 01:13, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: Meet some of the project coordinators

/* thwacks SN upside the head (gently, to avoid accusations of WP:THREAT) to see if that resets things. */ --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was a knock on the head that caused most of my problems in the first place Floquenbeam...currently keeping my head down and away from nearly every noticeboard bearing the same case. Hoping this finds you as grumpy as ever! (After all, it is only Wednesday...). All best, SN54129 16:44, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No violence needed, a simple talk page notice seems to have done the trick. Rest assured I am as Grumpy as ever. Hope all is as well with you as can be expected on a Wednesday. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is

• Lee Vilenski (1752 points), who won in 2020 and was runner up in both 2019 and last year. In the final round he achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on cue sports. He was closely followed by
• Bloom6132 (1732), who specialised in "In the news" items and DYKs, and who has reached the final round of the Cup for the past three years. Next was
• BennyOnTheLoose (1238), another cue sports enthusiast, also interested in songs, followed by
• Muboshgu (1082), an "In the news" contributor, a seasoned contestant who first took part in the Cup ten years ago. Other finalists were
• Sammi Brie (930), who scored with a featured article, good articles and DYKs on TV and radio stations,
• Kavyansh.Singh (370), who created various articles on famous Americans, including an FA on Louis H. Bean, famed for his prediction of election outcomes. Next was
• PCN02WPS (292), who scored with good articles and DYKs on sporting and other topics and
• Z1720 (25) who had DYKs on various topics including historic Canadians.

During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or the overall leader in this field.

• Lee Vilenski wins the featured article prize, for a total of 6 FAs during the course of the competition and 3 in the final round.
• Kavyansh.Singh wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 2.
• Adam Cuerden wins the featured picture prize, for 39 FPs during the competition.
• Z1720 wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 35 FARs in round 4.
• Epicgenius wins the good article prize, for 32 GAs in round 1.
• SounderBruce wins the featured topic prize, for 4 FT articles in round 1.
• Lee Vilenski wins the good topic prize, for 34 GT articles in round 5.
• Sammi Brie wins the good article reviewer prize, for 71 GARs overall.
• Sammi Brie wins the Did you know prize, for 30 DYKs in round 3 and 106 overall.
• Bloom6132 wins the In the news prize, for 106 ITNs in round 5 and 289 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on the 1991 Gulf War air campaign Op-ed: Meet some more of the coordinators

The file File:Prometheus (Orozco), 1930.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Prometheus (1930) de José Clemente Orozco en Pomona College.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:51, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at British Territorials in India Interview: On turning 200 (issues of the Bugle!) Review essay: Coordinators' 2022 reading list Op-ed: Meet some more of the coordinators

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: MB
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - just wanted to wish you a happy new year, when it comes along. Hope 2023 isn't rubbish for you. Cheers Girth Summit _(blether) 20:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Happy New Year!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:06, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Novem Linguae
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the key contributions of two Australian scientists in World War II Review essay: Nick-D reports on his recent visits to British military sites

Re your comment here, it's almost certainly trolling by blocked sock Radio Sterling. It would be interesting to locate the sock master. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Quiet Man edit
	Sorry, I would have messaged you earlier in response to your thanking me for the 'The Quiet Man' edit I made a while ago, but didn't know how to do this before now: You're welcome! :-) Hatwoman (talk) 20:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a geniune argument. [8] You could have pointed to a relative talk page discussion regarding the subject and I would have gone. Assuming good faith is Wikipedia policy. Not everyone who is editing a right wing related page is a Hindu nationalist trying to whitewash the page. Akshaypatill (talk) 14:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Serial Number 54129,

I haven't run into you lately, I hope you are doing well these days.

I came across this page on database report and it looks like you created this archive talk page but there is no talk page Talk:Late 19th– that it could be an archive of. I think this page needs to be moved to the correct article talk page, whatever that might be. It could be that the dash is confusing Wikipedia's data processing and it could require a different type of dash, I'm not really up on all of the MOS rules and regulations.

Thanks for seeing to this, whenever it is convenient. Take care, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Liz long time no see! Thanks for this, I hadn't realised what an utter mess I'd made of the thing. Briefly, it was part of a longer page title―I think it's the oblique that confuses the software, because it sees what follows as a subsection? Don't know either! Anyway, I think it's tidied up: have redirected that archive to the proper archive, which means this can be G7 deleted as I created the l.ink myself from the page move. That should cover everything? Apologies for creating more work for others! SN54129 15:07, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on translation and Eisenhower's armies Review essay: Catlemur on military museums in Athens

Special:Contributions/Commandur user and talk pages deleted, rants against lefty Wikipedia. Doug Weller talk 19:59, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shit, that's /my/ Wikipedia! Apologies and thanks Doug Weller SN54129 20:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What’s that’s/my /Wikipedia? Doug Weller talk 21:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Not sure deleting the user talk was the best idea. Don't think deleting admin realized its full extent. Not that I mourn the loss, you understand. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. It's quality over quantity😜 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:06, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I hate is that when blanked it looks like a new user. I think it should be restored so editors can see the problem. As it is we seem to have done that editor a favour Doug Weller talk 21:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

merde -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was gonna remove th bad content and not delete, but was overwhelmed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• @Deepfriedokra and Doug Weller: Apologies (again) to you both (and also to Star Mississippi who I inadvertently confused - although no more than myself now!). I'm not quite sure what I've done, it seems to have caused the usual amount of trouble  :) basically I thought it was a new user who had made problematic edits, then caught up with the ANI thread, so removed my welcome per DW here - obviously by then I couldn't see the polemics, but the general suggestions of trolling/abuse were sufficient for me to not to want to seem their cheerleader! Thanks for the info everyone, and sorry once again for sowing extra confusion. SN54129 13:22, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  No problem but should the issue of what happens when a page is deleted be raised at the VPT. Doug Weller talk 13:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Serial Number 54129: No need to apologize. You did the right thing based on what you knew. You had no way to know of the ongoing debacle. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  You caused not trouble. The trouble was caused by the user who added provocative, inflammatory content. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:01, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  If editors stopped doing things that confused me...I love content, but behind the scenes and syntax? Yuck.

  You did nothing wrong, don't apologize. The confusion chain started with the deletion of the Talk, which I thought was slightly odd.

  @Deepfriedokra @Doug Weller and the community had a warning for what they could expect engaging with that editor. Somehow I have a feeling we'll be dealing with them again unfortunately. No one gets that angry and then walks away. Star Mississippi 17:14, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  We live in hope of constructive edits from all people. Hopefully, they will find a way to be constructive. As to the talk page deletion, an IP came to my talk page asking me to delete Commandur's talk. I deferred to SM and DW as I'd seen their names on the talk page. The IP tagged for U5, which JimFBleak graciously honored. (I did not think we ever deleted a user talk page). I restored the talk, redacted the problem passages, and asked Commandur to consider creating a project space essay if they felt they must restore the content. On the other hand, it's been a long time since they constructively contributed and they returned to Wikipedia with a burr in their saddle.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:39, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Consent (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stylist.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
• Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
• FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
• TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
• Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SN, I wonder if you would contemplate removing that comment ? I honestly have no idea what has their knickers in a twist, but continuing it beyond my talk page is unlikely to help calm the situation. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Like the Anglicism, Sandy; apologies, I'll do that now. I was thinking more about the dangers of too personal an interpretation of 'discretion', rather than your particular case specifically, but I quite undertsand. Stand by! SN54129 19:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:19, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Curses, I added 1 byte! SN54129

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rose Street Club, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page History of politics.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to Rodw for fielding this! (And, in fact, another too!) Cheers  :) SN54129 19:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hog Farm on the Trans-Mississippi Theater of the American Civil War

This is to let you know that the John Hastings, 2nd Earl of Pembroke article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 16, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 16, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/April 2023.

I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And another! This is to let you know that the John Minsterworth article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 27, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 27, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/April 2023. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:45, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

Congratulations! - Mozart: I used your wording ("cogent"), for the reasoning of Voceditenore. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April songs

my story today

Thank you today for John Hastings, 2nd Earl of Pembroke, introduced: "A joint nomination between myself and Gog on one of the many curious individuals populating late-medieval England. This chap starts off as a bit of an arse, frankly—a plutocrat forced to work with men of greater ability though less lineage, and who clearly can't decide whether he prefers fighting the French or cutting off relatives, as he spends his time doing both in almost equal portions. But—but—whose story ends with, really, some poignancy. This started off with me piling in my editorial size nine boots some years ago, throwing in everything I had on him, following which it was reviewed for GA by Iazyges of this parish (shout out!). More recently Gog has shown me how it's done—as usual—with a fantastic copy edit."! - I'm still curious about the question above. I like to see the ice age of the "infobox wars" melting, and wonder if you see the same. - My stories on the Main page today are about Johanna Geisler and Huub Oosterhuis. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing the review, and a bonus point for the time travel (Back to the Future) comment joke. :-) CT55555(talk) 16:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Index, A History of the, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Index.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SN54129! You might be interested in endorsing an essay in which creation I participated – WP:NOCONFED. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 02:17, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words as part of your endorsement! Also, if you know some other users who might be interested in this essay and its topic, please inform them! — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 20:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I nominated Li Rui for FA status, but the review is now at risk of being archived because there have not been many comments. Would you be willing to jump in and share your thoughts on the article? You previously were a reviewer for one of my other two FAs (Mary Jane Richardson Jones), which I really appreciated. Thank you! —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ganesha811. I can't promise to get to it today, but I'll leave a note there now and get to ASAP. Hope you're well! SN54129 14:27, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Socking in the USSR.png.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:13, 26 March 2023 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:13, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...but my better nature got the best of me. Also, it's good to see an old Bathrobe Cabal member still around and kicking. That's a blast from the past; i'm not sure there's more than 3-4 of the originals left. I don't think anyone in that gif has edited significantly more than a few times in a decade or more... --Jayron32 15:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on the Australian War Memorial and the South China Sea raid, Hawkeye7 on the 1999 East Timor intervention

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 26 May 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 26, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanking you Gog. A shame, in a way because the anniversary of his grisly end is in eight days time. Seems a shame to miss it. SN54129 18:57, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had missed that. Given the late notice and that the currently scheduled article is also an anniversary I don't think that it will get in for this April. But I have made a discrete enquiry, just in case. Assuming that doesn't happen, I could pull it from this May and you could "book" 15 April 2024 at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not your fault Gog, I missed it too until now, and I'm sure Louis H. Bean is equally worthy; its creator is FAR more worthy than me for a 1/365 slot. Thanks anyway! 🙂 SN54129 19:40, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably I got a polite "Thanks, but no thanks." I'll leave it down for the 26th, but if you decide over the next couple of weeks you'd rather go for 15 April 2024, let me know. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Gog the Mild, if you could cancel it this year, I'll book it in for next. Also, while you're here, I've got two more lined up for 12 and 27 April, John Minsterworth and the earl of Pembroke. Seems odd to have two so closely connected characters in such a short space of time. I think Pembroke is a death anniversary, but could we save Minsterworth for another time too? Cheers! SN54129 16:42, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Roose pulled from May.

Re Minsterworth, I didn't schedule April, but let us ask. Jim? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minsterworth will be pulled too @Gog the Mild: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jim. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to thank you for your comments on the Li Rui FA review. I appreciate your assistance in getting it to the state it's in today! —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
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) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, Serial Number 54129. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Ingenuity
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:

• Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
• Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
• Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
• BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
• FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.

Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie, Thebiguglyalien, MyCatIsAChonk, PCN02WPS, and AirshipJungleman29.

So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the Western Allied invasion of Germany Op-ed: Hawkeye7's tips for writing articles on military logistics

You have made an accusation against me that seems to be made up from whole cloth.[9] This is WP:aspersion. Please strike or delete the comment. —Michael Z. 13:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]