User talk:Amakuru/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33

Caroline Flack

I removed this negative comment about Caroline as she is no longer alive to defend herself. Similar comments on Wikipedia in the past have also been put up by liars and trolls. I can site Michael Jackson and Lord Dannatt as examples. In both of these cases trolls attacked these people on Wikipedia based on data from the tabloid press. They were found to be false and intended to attack a person's character. The best way is not to have a discussion, but remove the lies once they are found out. Anyway, Caroline's or any other person's Wikipedia life is not determined by whether or not they were arrested for some minor offence, which may not even have happened. Innocent people are arrested all the time. Wallie (talk) 17:43, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

I have been banned now. At least I tried to protect Caroline's memory. Wallie (talk) 08:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Wallie: thanks for your message and I'm sorry to hear that you've been banned - that's not a good situation for any editor to be in. But as an experienced editor, you must know that an outcome like that was inevitable when you were promoting a point of view in the article that had a clear consensus against it. The facts around her being charged with assault and having a trial coming up are indisputable, they are not just tabloid gossip. Your concern for Flack's memory and wellbeing is admirable, it really is. But it is not the place of an encyclopedia to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS by airbrushing out verifiable information that is relevant to a reader in understanding her life. And it is not a violation of WP:BLP to do so,if it is presented in a neutral and balanced fashion, reflecting all the sources. I hope you will move on from this, and either have a break or move on to other areas of the Wiki so that you can move on from this and continue to contribute positively to the Wiki. All the best  — Amakuru (talk) 09:29, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Andrew Weatherall

On 18 February 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Andrew Weatherall, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:06, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@MSGJ: thanks for this! I feel a little guilty about this one, as I was busy nominating and taking the limelight while others were quietly fixing the article up. I've probably done my share on other RDs though, so probably fair's fair. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Don't sweat it! You do so much good around here — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

revert

about the closed discussion on the current 'China' virus related article, why did you revert?[1]--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@Ozzie10aaaa: usually archiving should not happen on the same day that the discussion was closed, it should wait a few days until the discussion is stale and no longer of significant interest. Reasons for this include the fact that many people who participated in the discussion may not have seen the result yet, and would be surprised to come to the page and find it had disappeared already. Also, it is not impossible that the requested move might be challenged at a move review discussion, in which it would be labelled as under review and visible for the duration of the review. Again, that should be on the main talk page not on an archive page, in case it is reopened or a different close applied to it. I get that the talk page is quite large at the moment, but it's not a major emergency and it can wait a few days before being archived. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for José Bonaparte

On 19 February 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article José Bonaparte, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:29, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Fernando Morán (politician)

On 19 February 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Fernando Morán (politician), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Special occasion hook for February 22

Hi, I don't understand your edit. This hook for Feb 22 belongs in Queue 4, not Queue 5. Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@Yoninah: ah... my bad, it looks we've moved back to one set per day and I hadn't noticed - I assumed that someone had just made a calculation error and put it in the set designed for the afternoon of the 21st. Usually there's a ping to admins who regularly promote sets when it changes between one and two per day, but I guess I can't demand that you do that - I'll just have to keep watching the threads more closely in future! Thanks for the spot, and I've reverted the hooks back to the correct sets.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:45, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! Yoninah (talk) 10:21, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, Amakuru, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Bobherry Talk Edits 02:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Thich Quang Do ITN/RD

Good morning sir, the image of concern has been removed Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:43, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Lead expanded. Thanks again Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
User_talk:TDKR_Chicago_101#Thich_Quang_Do. Since you're active with ITN, I was wondering if you know the procedure for renaming abusive file names. A photo was uploaded with an obscene file name and has been unwittingly added onto the page. I couldn't work out how to navigate the processes on Commons. Kind regards Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
@Bumbubookworm: I'm not particularly active on Commons, but from a quick look it seems that C:Commons:File_renaming#How_to_rename_a_file is where you need to go to request it. The "reason number" for the move you want is #5. "To change a filename that would be a violation of Commons’ policies and guidelines if it appeared elsewhere on the project as text. This includes gratuitous vulgarity, personal attacks/harassment, blatant advertising, and cases where revision deletion would be authorized." Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 13:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks again for your help Bumbubookworm (talk) 22:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:53, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@CAPTAIN RAJU: thank you very much! I do enjoy getting these "birthday" greetings, always a happy surprise in my day.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Abwehr

[2] really?? As you know I'm a graduate of a decent university, I studied science, engineering and language, but under no circumstances would I consider "Abwehr" to have been consolidated into normal language. I inherently trust everything you do, but on this occasion, that's utter bonkers. No way Jose. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 22:57, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: You "inherently trust everything I do", eh? That's good to know . To be honest I was slightly less sure about Abwehr than I am about the usual suspects that people try to italicise such as coup d'état, but per the advice at MOS:FOREIGNITALIC I've tended to use the Merriam Webster as a guide, and in this case it's right there, labelled as "borrowed from German". Would you say this is in a different league from Gestapo then? (Which is actually one of the terms mentioned explicitly at MOS:FOREIGNITALIC). And what about Wehrmacht?  — Amakuru (talk) 23:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
And, in a further twist to the tale, User:Philafrenzy just "thanked" me for the de-italicising of Abwehr... the plot thickens...  — Amakuru (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Name of an organisation isn't it? I was aware of this point but decided to ignore it. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm just sticking with my inherent feeling about such matters. Abwehr is definitely not integrated. Do a quick straw poll tomorrow at work "what does "abwehr" mean?" and "how do you spell "abwhehr"?". It's fine to use Merriam Webster as a guide but in this case it's not real. I can't think of a single case ever where Abwehr means something to usual English readers, let alone American readers. It's two leagues above Gestapo. I guess it's snobbishness on my behalf, but I don't know what it means, and therefore I wouldn't imagine that 99% of our readers would either. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 23:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I imagine that's true, yes. I'd be lying if I said I knew what it meant before coming across this story, and I think my knowledge is maybe a notch below yours, such that if I don't know it then around 95% of readers don't know it either. On the other hand, Philafrenzy may have a point about it being a proper noun... if it refers to the organisation. As with Saint-Yved de Braine we would avoid italicising a proper noun even if foreign.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm sorry, this is a proper mistake. Ask your friends, your colleagues if they know what "Abwehr" means. I work in the industry with people who are commensurate with this kind of terminology and "Abwehr" is certainly not assimilated into natural English. This is a mistake. But it's transient, thank goodness, so the mistake will be moved on in a matter of minutes. But it doesn't alter the fact that your action was incorrect. Bygones. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 23:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Oh well, I've reverted it anyway... I don't really care that much, it's obviously a borderline case. And I'll do as you suggest and ask around at work tomorrow...  — Amakuru (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
The MOS is clear, and I agree, "Names of organizations and institutions should be in roman, rather than italics". My survey of books also finds it normally unitalicised, although there are exceptions. I think Amakuru was right. It's like Gestapo. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:02, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

"I inherently trust", yes, and see you active, so might you give me ITN credit for Jennifer Bate before she falls off the Main page, please. I wonder why those promoting don't do it then - which was yesterday ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

  • @Gerda Arendt: done, thanks. And I will get to the unanswered question soon, I'm wishing I'd never got involved in that issue now... I haven't had a lot of time this week and sometimes things are more complex than they look at first glance. All the best and I hope you're staying well in these troubled times.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:11, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, that was fast. This category thing - although it doesn't look it - is actually quite simple. A user put great effort into a "fix", and others tell the user "not broken". (Francis Schonken found this nutshell summary, but I saw it only today, - too much noise.) I was No. 1 to see no problem that needed fixing, Francis was 2, RexxS was 3, and by now came several others whom I respect. There are different ways to respond in such a (admittedly disappointing) situation. Telling those who object that they come to disrupt (see my call to ANI) seems not the most neutral. How to deescalate from there, that is the true question? - The Unanswered Question. - Back to RD, sadly a woman who was a victim of COVID-19 and is only borderline notable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for June Dally-Watkins

On 25 February 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article June Dally-Watkins, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Kees08 (Talk) 16:57, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Javier Arias Stella

On 26 February 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Javier Arias Stella, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Kees08 (Talk) 22:55, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Emo Nite

@Amakuru Hi, I'm trying to create a page for Emo Nite. I see you have a lock on it so I was wondering if I could access it. Riahconway (talk) 18:52, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Riahconway

WikiCup 2020 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  • New York (state) Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
  • England Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
  • United States Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
  • Somerset Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
  • Pirate flag CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
  • The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included United States L293D, Venezuela Kingsif, Antarctica Enwebb, England Lee Vilenski and Nepal CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 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.

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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup newsletter correction

There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; United States L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, United States Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Mistake?

[3] this messed up a lot of things including my reviews. Can you fix it, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

One of my submissions was removed by that edit and was coming here to query it. Kosack (talk) 16:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
User:Dr. Blofeld User:Kosack Urggh, hitting the edit button on an old version of the page strikes again. I wish there was a better warning when that happens! Hopefully now sorted, including the re-adding of one other entry that was added after I made the error. Apologies.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Shoji

Every example in the link you gave italicised the word. "loan word"? How funny! The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 01:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: oh heavens, not this again! I'm just fresh from an Abwehr in my shoji as we speak, actually. To address your point, the Merriam Webster actually italicises all words, in quotes and elsewhere. See for example: [4]. As noted on the article's talk page, shoji is found in dictionaries such as the Cambridge as well, not just MW.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
I'll try not to bring it up again...! You've got mail, by the way. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Draycote Water, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Lound Hall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Gamston and Neo-Georgian
Ipswich Building Society (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Woodbridge

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 16:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Purim

100+ references seems fine — also, were you aware of this conversation? Please consider undoing your edit. Thanks. El_C 17:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@El C: ah, I did see that response to my comment on ERRORS, but I was busy at the time and didn't manage to circle back to it. On the point itself, it's not the number of references which is important, it's whether all the major points covered by the article are cited. And the citation-needed tags that are present on the article are just the tip of the iceberg - it has entire paragraphs and even sections with no citations at all. I will go through and tag/mark the relevant things when I get a chance, but I won't reinstate it to the OTD template for that day, because it certainly doesn't meet the standard for main page linked articles. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Amakuru, I couldn't find sections with no citations at all. I could be overlooking something so I would love to help you fix this. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:39, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
@Sir Joseph: - well, perhaps not whole top-level sections, but several of the subsections are unreferenced, for example "Purim meal (se'udah) and festive drinking" and several of the subsections of "Customs". Cites should be at least one per paragraph, as well as any contentious points, as well as ideally the less contentious ones. I'm sure most of this could be cited, but someone has to actually go through and do it because otherwise readers have no way of verifying that what we're telling them is accurate. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
It's mildly troubling to see an experienced admin giving out the absolute number of refs as a good reason to publish things to the main page. Crikey. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:37, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Fair enough. Thank you for taking the time to answer in detail. Hopefully, it will be ready for next year. El_C 17:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
The Rambling Man, just a misunderstanding on my part. Not a modus operandi. El_C 17:40, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
El C, also, it was good enough to be on the main page until I asked for a name change for the label. Nobody who looks at the articles or browses ERRORS a day or two prior said anything about this page. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:45, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Well, once someone identifies problems with the article to the point of deeming it unsuitable to the Main page, that's that. Now the work of correcting these issues can get under way. El_C 17:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
El C, to be fair, they didn't identify problem. They just said there are problems. For other articles that I look at for the main page that have issues and are tagged, it's a lot easier to go through and fix, if it's tagged and fix the tags. Just removing and saying "it has issues" doesn't do any good. I went through the entire article yesterday and while it's not an FA, it is in my opinion well cited for the main page. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:52, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Sir Joseph, that certainly is something that can be discussed further, but I I'm not sure there's a need to add all the specific {{cn}} tags for overall problems to be identified — that general identification being sufficient to pull the page. El_C 17:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Sir Joseph: unfortunately we don't always have the time or numbers of editors watching the main page to spot everything that doesn't meet the standards, and evidently this one was missed when it ran on the first day. That doesn't mean that it was approved though, just that nobody spotted it. OTD probably gets less attention than other sections as well... if you'd put a request up using that article at WP:ITN/C I think it's likely that many users would have opposed it until the refs were tidied up. Anyway, as El C says, hopefully it can be pulled into shape by next year! Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:51, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for review

Hi Amakuru! I would like to request you for reviewing my draft page Epos 257 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Epos_257). I know that it was already reviewed and unfortunately declined, nevertheless I have rewritten it and I would like to ask you very much to check the article if at least a little possible...Thank you very much! Regards Jiří Jiří Gruber (talk) 12:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

WP:ERRORS

Okay, I've had my 3 days. (I'm actually crap at coming up with answers to tough problems quickly, but I'm amazingly good at knowing how long it's going to take me to sort through my own confusion.) I've just invited discussion at WT:TFA on the question of what to do about unpleasantness at ERRORS while I'm on sabbatical. Have you had any thoughts on why I got upset? It has to do with your inviting a question about TFA and ERRORS, while simultaneously using admin tools to enforce one of the possible outcomes from such a discussion. I'd welcome your participation ... you'd have a lot to offer ... but leave the admin tools at the door, please. - Dank (push to talk) 15:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

"Talk:911 (disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Talk:911 (disambiguation). Since you had some involvement with the Talk:911 (disambiguation) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 17:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1990–91 Coventry City F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Downs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Peter Whittingham

Looks like you edit conflicted with Black Kite re-opening Indefensible's original nomination. Perhaps he should get a co-nom credit?-- P-K3 (talk) 14:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Pawnkingthree: ah that would explain why it seemed to be behaving oddly when I saved the edit. Feel free to edit it any way you see fit, drop me from the nom if you like or include someone else. THanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Peter Whittingham

On 19 March 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Whittingham, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Kees08 (Talk) 17:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I figured it best to ask for review since you brought the issue up. Since I mentioned you, here's the obligatory notice. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1990–91 Coventry City F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springfield Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I see from User talk:Floquenbeam #ANI closure that you have a problem with one of my comments. Don't you think it would be more productive to raise the issue with me directly, rather than posting about me without even the courtesy of a notification? Of course I regret being baited into responding to her "angry-but-clueless newbie" in similar vein, but you don't seem at all troubled by the dozen or so personal attacks she directed at me. Is there a reason for that? --RexxS (talk) 16:56, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Look, just treat it as a rhetorical question. My anger has subsided, and it all seems like water under the bridge now. If you ever do have issues with me, please do come and discuss them, though. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
@RexxS: thanks for your message(s) here, and apologies for not replying to you earlier. My main issue that I raised with Floq was not so much with the dispute itself, but that BHG had raised a complaint about civility, with several comments from other users seemingly backing up that point, that had apparently been closed without action. After you raised the question above, suggesting that my reading of the dispute may have been incorrect, my intention before replying was to go back and have a deeper look at what had transpired to see if it really was a two-way flame war as you suggest, or whether there was merit in BHG's assertion that you had attacked her first. But given that it looks like the situation has now moved on peacefully, and few seemed to agree with me that the ANI thread close was premature anyway, I don't see much value in my going back over that ground now.
I will certainly take on board your advice to talk to you in person if I see issues in future, and I have nothing against you personally. I was supportive of the crats' decision to promote at your RFA, and I stand by that view today. All the best  — Amakuru (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 1

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

North Lanarkshire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Central Valley and Airdrie
Brynmawr rubber factory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Western Power
Gemma Garrett (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dundonald

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine opened

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/Medicine. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 21, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 20:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited North Lanarkshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Airdrie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't know how ...

... To reverse your no consensus name change at Dr. Sebi. would you do it, please? Thanks. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 07:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 07:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
@Roxy the dog: you're welcome, no probs. There were no objections at the time I closed it but it will now be relisted for a week so you're free to give your opinion in the discussion. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 07:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Happy Easter or whatever you celebrate

or: the resurrection of loving-kindness --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: many thanks, and a very happy Easter to you too, hope it was a good one for you despite not being able to do the usual Easter morning masses. We did some singing with family over Skype.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:39, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Yes, it was good in it's different way. look! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
... today Credo, or this is the day from Psalm 118 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 1990–91 Coventry City F.C. season

On 14 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1990–91 Coventry City F.C. season, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Coventry City defeated Football League Cup holders Nottingham Forest 5–4 in 1990, with a player from each team scoring a hat-trick before half-time? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1990–91 Coventry City F.C. season. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1990–91 Coventry City F.C. season), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Queue 4 is not yet approved for promotion

Amakuru, I remember that you had pulled a hook from Queue 4, which is probably why you didn't insert the usual {{DYKbotdo}} template at the top. It is now full; is it ready to be promoted yet? If so, please add the DYKbotdo template; if not, then we have about 22 hours before the bot's going to want to move the queue to the main page to fix whatever's not yet right. Thanks for taking a look at this. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: thanks for the ping, and that's very impressive that you spotted that! I have completed the checks this morning, and approved the set. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 08:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@CAPTAIN RAJU: many thanks for the message! Always nice to get these birthday greetings from my fellow Wikipedians. 🎂  — Amakuru (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

The 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Summer Focus of the Week

Hi, just to announce that I've filed a £250 grant request for a "Summer Focus of the Week" feature for destubbing articles which will be run from May 1 to the end of July. £20 is planned to be rewarded each week, £10 most articles destubbed for the allocated focus of the week and £10 for the most destubbed for any topic of choice in total, a full £20 if most for the focused area. While it is intended to be more relaxed and open than an official contest, allowing editors to take a break some weeks from staying on focus and editing as they normally do, the winner will be whoever wins the most prize money at the end, so it is likely that some weeks they will need to tackle entries from the regional area allocated. The Summer Focus of the Week is planned to commence on May 1 with a 10 day focus on SouthEast England but will cover many regions of the globe by the end of the scheme. S E England was originally planned as a full blown contest (which you signed up for) but it will now be run as part of this 50,000 Challenge and I will redirect the contest page to the 50,000 Challenge. Please sign up on the Wikipedia:The 50,000 Destubbing Challenge page if interested if you haven't already and hope this will be something enjoyable over the next few months!† Encyclopædius 13:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/H. E. Merritt

Amakuru, the nominator of this DYK has come back, after your approval, and proposed a couple of new hooks, since on reflection they are not fond of the original one they proposed and you approved. Do you think you could stop by again and check the two new hooks? I struck the original hook because of their belated issues with it. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:54, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Duncraig Castle

On 23 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Duncraig Castle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Duncraig Castle has been a summer home for the wealthy, a naval hospital, a girls' college, and a B&B, has its own railway station, and was the subject of a reality television show? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Duncraig Castle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Duncraig Castle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Blurb for Israeli government

Hi, while the current blurb is good, the words 'to share power' doesn't really lend itself to understanding what the situation is. How about those words be changed to 'to share the office of prime-minister'? This would also sound a bit less like the two men are dictators ruling a country according to their whims. Let me know what you think. Thanks. Mrclapper1 (talk) 07:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Integer BASIC

Amakuru, the nominator has responded to the issues you raised, but (as is too frequently the case) didn't ping you from there. Please stop by when you get the chance. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Amakuru, there's been another response, and the article has been edited. Unfortunately, pings from the nomination template do not seem to be getting through, so if there are any further issues, please post a note directly to their talk page, as I've been doing when there hasn't been a quick response. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week

Hello there. This is an invitation to join the 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week. £250 (c. $310) up for grabs in May, June and July with £20 worth of prizes to give away every week for most articles destubbed. Each week there is a different region of focus, though half the prize will still be rewarded for articles on any subject. Sign up if you want to contribute at least one of the weeks or support the idea! † Encyclopædius 19:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Art pottery

Thanks for asking, but this was off the main page before I saw this. A pretty fair heap of crap OR is what I think, which I could reference with a deal of typing. None of these are kitchen wares, as the article says. Apparently the experts say that if you have a glass cabinet full of the stuff, & rarely open it. You might well be advised to open a window, open the cabinet & vacate the room for half an hour before handling your collection. Johnbod (talk) 14:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Seattle Jörg please note. Johnbod (talk) 14:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
@Johnbod: fair enough, thanks for the reply. I wasn't sure if it made sense to change the hook as suggested or not, so I didn't dive in and change it straight away. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Good call, thanks. Shame the great pic didn't make it to MP. Btw, Seattle Jorg may be thinking of America's most popular range of cereal bowls etc, which continued to have some radioactive colours until they needed the uranium to make bombs in WW2. But that's completely different to art pottery. To a physicist it apparently seems unnecessary to mention that something is "still" radioactive after a century, but not to many of our readers, I'm sure. Johnbod (talk) 14:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
No, it's not whether it is necessary to mention it, but rather that to me "still today, after a century" suggests that perhaps after a millenium, it won't be radioactive any more. And that is a wrong impression. It is today as radioactive as it was when it was produced, and as it will essentially always be. In my view, when dropping the still, there is nothing that won't guide the reader along wrong paths. As regards fiestaware: I am not familiar with that, all I know is that if you have uranium in amounts so that you can actually see it (which by definition is fulfilled for these glazes), you will be able to measure its radioactivity. Working sometimes with radioactive materials, I know how much precaution would be taken with such amounts, specifically it would be unthinkable to keep it in your home. I don't want to make the point that it is dangerous, but it is definitely significant. Seattle Jörg (talk) 11:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 May newsletter

The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

  • New York (state) Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
  • England Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
  • Botswana The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
  • Somerset Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
  • England Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Gondor Hog Farm with 801, Venezuela Kingsif with 719, Cascadia (independence movement) SounderBruce with 710, United States Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and Mexico MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kigali

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kigali you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 07:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kigali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arusha Accords (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kigali

The article Kigali you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Kigali for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Moves

Amakuru, thanks for opposing at Talk:Woman_Suffrage_Procession#Requested_move_11_May_2020. I was distracted with other things, and didn't pay enough attention to some RMs in that time frame. Oh, well. Dicklyon (talk) 04:13, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: ah yes, that's an annoying one. I've also been distracted of late - I've been trying to spend more time on article writing so I haven't been at RM that much. I !voted on the woman suffrage thing but then forgot to follow up, so I wasn't able to counter the arguments made. It really irritates me when the WP:COMMONNAME vs WP:OFFICIALNAME issue is dismissed so readily. That's been established naming policy since forever, usually without controversy. But as you say, oh well. Can't win them all! @Andrewa: FYI too, as someone else who gets frustrated by similar issues...  — Amakuru (talk) 10:18, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kigali

The article Kigali you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kigali for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:02, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Long-running edit war at Geoff Marshall

I find your supporting the edit-warring at Geoff Marshall that the editor has admitted is based upon bad faith assumptions to be completely ridiculous. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 23:42, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Looks like this is a part of a slow edit-war that's been going on for years, where Rhlon has been involved for over a year [5]. Yikes. Your suggestions would be appreciated. I'll continue to look at what's been going on. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 00:27, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Behavioral problems aside, all sources that I've been able to find in the editing history say he was born in '72.
Marshall in numerous cases has given the '72 date. Most are not longer available, but we have a YouTube ref that has been verified by the editor who first found it, which I've double-checked as well.
As for independent sources: While editors have mentioned a BBC source verifying his age (giving a '72 dob), I have not been able to find it. One independent, primary source (a business record) gives '72 as well, but it was removed because of the personal information it contained [6].
I don't see why the material should not be restored at this point. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 04:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Any objections or alternative suggestions? --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 17:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
@Hipal: apologies, I forgot to reply to this earlier. I have had a look again, and there is an additional point that we need to consider - per WP:DOB, part of the BLP policy, to respect privacy and avoid identity theft etc. we should avoid publicising the date of birth of someone who's not a major celebrity, and whose date of birth is not widely known. It looks to me, based on the fact that Tweets have been deleted and he's never mentioned birthdays on Twitter or elsewhere recently, that Marshall is trying to avoid his DOB being public knowledge and we should respect that. WP:DOB suggests simply sticking to the year of birth without listing the specific date. On the specific question of which year it is, it would be useful if you could give some indication of what it says on p308 of the USA book because I'm not clear about what that says that backs up the 1972 suggestion. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:24, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
My understanding of the general consensus around DOB is that if the adult subject of a BLP article has publicly announced their DOB many times, then it's fine to use. If the subject later makes a statement indicating privacy is wanted, then we rely solely on independent sources.
No one has ever provided any reliable source for '73 as far as I can tell. Assuming that a reference used for '72 actually says something else is a waste of time, especially since it's just another self-published source from Marshall.
Thanks for providing thoughtful, policy-based discussion. I don't think the article should be changed as long as we're getting commentary of this quality. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
@Hipal: Thanks to you too for engaging in the discussion, it's always better to talk through the issues! I'm not certain how we'd normally proceed with regard to the privacy issue. It might be one to raise at the BLP noticeboard to see what they think over there. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 20:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm ready to restore the material, with or without BLPN help. Did you see the history that I put together of the edit-warring:Talk:Geoff_Marshall#Edit_history_around_birth_date? I think there's a good case for a block or ban against Rhlon, and Rhlon's edits only look worse as a whole. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 15:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Erling Haaland

I've reopened the Erling Haaland move discussion based on your initial move request. I think it's an obvious move that should be made, but review when you get a chance. Cheers!--Ortizesp (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi Amakuru, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

1981 UEFA Cup final

Hey, can I take you up on your offer of a source review at the FAC? Inevitably it'll be the thing that's holding up promotion so anything you could offer would be gratefully received! Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: OK no probs, I'll have a look at it either later tonight or tomorrow morning. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Perfecto, thanks. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Kigali DYK

Thank you for your excellent work on the article, I've approved it for DYK. Warofdreams talk 18:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Warofdreams: thanks for your message, that's very kind of you to say so. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:44, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Prep 1

Hi, you promoted Prep 1 to Queue 1, but didn't erase the hooks in Prep 1. Yoninah (talk) 20:02, 10 June 2020 (UTC) ...Ditto for Prep 2. Yoninah (talk) 20:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Yoninah: ah sorry, it slipped my mind. Done now. Thanks for the heads up!  — Amakuru (talk) 21:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Yoninah (talk) 22:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Kigali

On 15 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kigali, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the annual film festival in Kigali is known as "Hillywood"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kigali. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kigali), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: a belated thanks for this. Nice that this got its half-day in the sunshine!  — Amakuru (talk) 10:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
I was interested to read the article. My family visited Kigali in 1973 on a trans-Africa journey, at which time it was just a small town with dusty streets, the only paved road being the one that linked the centre with the airport. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:28, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: wow, that's fascinating. I would love to have a time machine and go back to visit the place back then, it must have been such a different feel. (I'd also make sure to pick up lots of newspapers and other archive pieces, as there is very scant referencing that I can find for that period and the earlier colonial days now!) I lived in Kigali in the mid-2000s, and even on the few occasions I've been back since it seems to change massively every time. Do you have any photos from back then, that could be uploaded to Commons?  — Amakuru (talk) 21:43, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Liskov substitution principle page

Dear Amakuru, You reverted my edit where I replaced the Liskov substitution principle page with a redirect to Behavioral subtyping. You suggested that it was because I had insufficiently discussed this. I did discuss it at User_talk:Jennasloan after user User:Jennasloan reverted my earlier attempt. I have also attempted to start a discussion on this topic a while ago at Talk:Liskov substitution principle § LSP, substitutability are misnomers, but I received no response. Please advise on which other actions I should take. Many thanks in advance. Bart Jacobs (Leuven) (talk) 10:19, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear Amakuru, Update: I nominated the article for deletion as per the official procedure. I guess this closes this discussion here. Thanks, Bart Jacobs (Leuven) (talk) 11:14, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bart Jacobs (Leuven): thanks for your message. I did see the discussion at Jennasloan's talk page, but it doesn't look like they agreed with your point there, and they also explained there why the redirect was not an appropriate one. You have said that you think the Liskov substitution principle is a misnomer, but that looks like your own opinion rather than something that is said in reliable sources (other than the single quote you mention by Barbara Liskov). I'm not an expert in the theory of these things, but I am an IT professional, and the SOLID principles, of which Liskov is one, are all regularly discussed and used in IT circles and there's plenty of sourcing using that term, which means that trying to "erase all traces of the terms "Liskov Substitution Principle" and "substitutability" from the Internet", as you said here, is a case of trying to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. As Jennasloan said, much of what is at Behavioral subtyping is already covered by Liskov substitution principle, so the content should be WP:MERGEd from Behavioral subtyping to LSP. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
I have also added a comment to the deletion page. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Morning Gerda Arendt, it is a pleasure as always to receive this annual reminder of my precious award. Thank you again for doing this, and all the best to you.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 July newsletter

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

  • New York (state) Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
  • Botswana The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
  • England Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, Denmark MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leaves of Grass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classic FM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi User:Amakuru, I am Boris from Rwanda and would like to talk to you about this Wiki project Rwanda and how to contribute to it. Best regards, Mrbobax (talk) 13:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

"Dragon One" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Dragon One. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 20#Dragon One until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 11:31, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Tim Smith (Cardiacs)

On 22 July 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Tim Smith (Cardiacs), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 23:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

July
pale globe-thistle above the Rhine

Have some flowers for this, DYK error fixing and overall helpfulness --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

  • @Gerda Arendt: thank you very much for the flowers, most thoughtful of you! I hope you're having a good week. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:27, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
    It's a particularly important day ;) - I was called awesome 10 years ago, and so was Brian (who deserved it more, of course). We got a topic to "featured" today. Leon Fleisher's article was expanding for RD, - would you agree it's ready. - Now to an English lesson, please. How is "prominent" (rising above) better than "important" (carrying weight) for these operas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
    @Gerda Arendt: oh yes, that really is an important day - happy "awesome" anniversary to you and, of course, to the late great Brian... you both deserve it fully for your incredible contributions here! Many thanks for Leon Fleischer as well, all looked good and I've posted it up for you. Regarding the other question, it's a little hard to describe but I've partially addressed this in my reply just now to Steel1943: 'Prominent carries a suggestion of being well known and highly regarded in society as a whole, while "important" is more of a personal thing - I might think a particular opera very important while you think it's junk'. According to the Cambridge dictionary, the definition of prominent is "very well known and important". The "very well known" qualifier carries some importance (!) here I think, because it adds a requirement that the thing be regarded as important by a lot of people, not just one person. Out of interest, what is your reason for preferring "important" to "prominent"? Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
    Thank you for posting Fleisher, - that's an extra gift! - I think I explained by translating: I feel (but no more) that "well-known" (popular) is less important in these lists (the nine lists from which the article is drawn) than "being of influence in music history" - known or not. The Monteverdi operas are highly influential, but many of the Mozart/Verdi/Wagner (mainstream) lovers may never have heard one, may not even have heard they exist. Still: when the Berlin State Opera was reopened after years of reconstruction, one of them was the second piece played, and I enjoyed it immensely! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

"Dragon One" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Dragon One. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 31#Dragon One until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 08:59, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded Euryalus • SQL
removed Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2017 EFL Trophy Final

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2017 EFL Trophy Final you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2017 EFL Trophy Final, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Stuart Beavon and Chris Stokes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:40, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2017 EFL Trophy Final

The article 2017 EFL Trophy Final you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2017 EFL Trophy Final for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Notice of ANI that mentions you in passing

Greetings, FYI I filed a request at WP:ANI titled "CIR-based community-imposed site ban re: RTG". In providing a basis for my request I mentioned you and your prior dealings with this editor. Your input at ANI is optional, i.e., invited but not specifically requested. Thanks for reading. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

"User:User:Amakuru/USS Akron (ZRS-4) in flight over Manhattan, circa 1931-1933" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect User:User:Amakuru/USS Akron (ZRS-4) in flight over Manhattan, circa 1931-1933. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 7#User:User:Amakuru/USS Akron (ZRS-4) in flight over Manhattan, circa 1931-1933 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

2018 EFL League Two play-off Final

Just to let you know this has been taken for review and I've addressed all the comments. Feel free (if you have time) to check in, otherwise no stress and I'll see it to GA no worries. Then you'll need to think about how it can get to FA! Hope you and yours are well. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:44, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @The Rambling Man: Hi, thanks for the message and yes, I haven't forgotten about the GA. I've just been on holiday with the family for a few days - touring around various sites in Suffolk actually, such as Bury St Edmunds, Lowestoft and Dunwich Heath. Very nice part of the world. I will hopefully get back to addressing the points you raised tomorrow. Hope things good with you as well.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
    No stress at all, the note was definitely not to encourage you away from you famalam. Also perhaps you were confused, this wasn't the review I did of your article (that's on hold, and chilling out fine), I was referring to the 2018 article which you helped finesse. So no action required! In other news, Bury St Edmunds, probably my number one place in Suffolk. Enjoy the down time! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:52, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
    @The Rambling Man: Ah, got you, that makes sense. Will have a gander there too, but sounds like you've done the heavy lifting. And yes, a lovely town with proper medieval architecture... Sort of how Coventry would look if it hadn't been blighted by a succession of shortsighted town planners and German bombs.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
    It's promoted, now for you to decide if you'd like to take it one step beyond..... The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
    @The Rambling Man: ah cheers, great news and thanks again for your work on the article. I'll add the FAC idea to my to-do list and will probably nominate it soon. It probably more or less covers everything it needs to for that anyway. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 13:59, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Naki Sumo Crying Baby Festival

No one that participated in the DYK nomination added their input to the DYK talk page discussion. Maybe the hook should just be pulled for now? SL93 (talk) 05:12, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

@SL93: personally I would be happy enough with the change you've suggested, it seems to address the issue and I could just change it to that (and apologies for not replying at WT:DYK yet I had seen your response and planned to circle back to it today). But if you think we should await input from the nominator etc then also happy to pull it too. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 05:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
I would be fine with changing it to my suggestion. I guess I was just surprised that 3 of the pinged editors have been editing, but they gave no input. SL93 (talk) 05:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

A Man About the House

Hi Amakuru,

there are two articles, A Man About the House (play) and A Man About the House (novel) which have the same title. I wonder why you think that the film is the primary topic. The discussion you are referring to is several years old and does not reflect the current situation.Inwind (talk) 16:51, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

@Inwind: it's not a question of what I think, it's just the guidelines we follow. The rules at WP:RM state that bold moves should only be made where there is no chance of controversy. Otherwise, you start a discussion. In this case, since there was a prior discussion which explicitly arrived at the present arrangement, it is clearly controversial to change it. Even if its obvious to you, it just needs to go through a discussion to make sure others agree. A crucial consideration will be the page views, currently we only have one day with the new articles in place:[7]. The film seems to have the edge but We will await more data on that and can make a final decision on that basis. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 PGA Championship

On 12 August 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 PGA Championship, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 15:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Seminci

Can you please explain how you decided to move Seminci to Valladolid International Film Festival? Did you see my comment on the talk page? This festival is commonly known as "Seminci", is branded as "Seminci", and even uses Seminci.es as its website. If you didn't already do so, take a moment to Google "seminci". Mo Billings (talk) 21:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Mo Billings: well, in pure vote terms there were two editors in favour of moving to "Valladolid International Film Festival", citing consistency with the Toronto International Film Festival (not TIFF), and the actual name of the event as used by the organisers. Which seems to be correct as per articles such as [[8]]. Your response mentioned that the festival has a common name of "Seminci" in English, but that doesn't really seem to be the case. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 21:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Ignoring your other points for now, are you saying you decided to move the article based on votes? Mo Billings (talk) 22:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
@Mo Billings: well obviously I didn't exclusively consider votes, because per WP:CON it's the strength of arguments and policy/guideline considerations that are important. But really I considered the two support votes much stronger than the one oppose vote, for the reasons I've mentioned above. Anyway, since you've raised a query here and you're not happy with the close, I've now reverted the move closure and have instead given the reasons why I think the move is appropriate. Hopefully that will give a clearer consensus and it can then be closed by someone else. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
So you gave more credence to an IP with two edits saying "per nom" than you did to me? Interesting. Thank you for reopening the discussion. Mo Billings (talk) 14:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Angela Buxton

On 21 August 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Angela Buxton, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 04:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amakuru/Archive_20&oldid=1113330176"