User talk:Primefac/Archive 44

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40 ← Archive 42 Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 Archive 46

Your draft article, Draft:List of municipal flags in Italy

Hello, Primefac. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of municipal flags in Italy".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 23:43, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

+wikiprojects

hey! thanks for the reminder. i've been under the weather and wanted to speedrun through List of Wikipedians by number of edits. i might instead opt for WikiGnome edits though. 🐦DrWho42👻 22:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Making garbage edits to win fake internet points is a great way to get blocked. I am glad to hear you are going to be doing something more productive going forward. Primefac (talk) 07:54, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
thank you! yeah, i am looking forward to it too. feel free to let me know on my talk page if my edits ever need finetuning, etc!--🐦DrWho42👻 09:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Q28

Hi, since Q28 has disruptively edited on more than one projects, I'm submitting a request to remove their GIPBE permission on meta. Considering you are the blocking admin, mind you sharing your opinion on that page? Thank you. -Lemonaka‎ 14:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

10:49, 21 June 2023 Primefac talk contribs deleted page Draft:VIG Partners (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement)

Hi, could you retrieve your deletion of my Draft: re VIG Partners? I work at VIG Partners and this does not seem to violate the copyright for me... my work is gone! Dl2593 (talk) 01:25, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

If you are looking for something to do...

I have a couple drafts needing a histmerge because the redirects have relevant history: Draft:Dirty Day and Draft:Amity Blight. These are my very first histmerge requests so I am sure I probably did something wrong. S0091 (talk) 14:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

You didn't. I have taken care of one of them as it was trivial, headed home though so I'll deal with the other later. Not often you see articles merged into the draft space! Primefac (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
That was quick service! :) S0091 (talk) 14:55, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Shoot. Can you also delete Talk:Dirty Day when you have a moment? S0091 (talk) 14:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Sure thing. Primefac (talk) 17:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Loss of access to AFCH

Hi - with this edit when you removed me (and others) from the AFC list of participants, it seems I lost access to the AFCH tool. Everytime I visit my user page I get an "AFCH Error User Not Listed" popup message. No amount of cache clearing or use of other browsers or devices seems to resolve the problem. Can I re-add my name to the list to see if that will resolve the problem? Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 01:02, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Goldsztajn: Try removing importScript('User:Enterprisey/afch-dev.js'); from your common.js (it's an older version), then navigate to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, click on the check box next to "Yet Another AfC Helper Script", and hit "Save". DanCherek (talk) 01:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
@DanCherek Thumbs up icon much appreciated, that solved it. Kind regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 08:50, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
I was going to add that to the notice at the top of the Active list but I seem to have not done so. Will do that and hopefully avoid this sort of confusion. That, or just ask for a mass-removal of that script call from everyone's common file! Primefac (talk) 06:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Guatemala 2023

During the 2023 Central American and Caribbean Games Guatemalan flag will not appearBan. Can you please help us with the Centro Caribe Sports flag that will be shown instead?ref. Osplace 00:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Which flag is that? Primefac (talk) 05:53, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
We need a new one, similar to the IOC flag, Centro Caribe Sports rules the Central American and Caribbean Games. Osplace 13:06, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Template Country Data CCS needed at the games, for example Table tennis at the 2023 Central American and Caribbean Games. Osplace 03:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
That last part seems to have already been done, though if the "flag" is deleted it makes it somewhat of a moot point... speaking of which, you can't just "make" a flag, it should be the flag used by the organisation. If they have no flag, then we should not show a flag. Primefac (talk) 12:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Because goats.

Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 20:45, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Yay goats! Primefac (talk) 21:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Rejected CSD for Empty Portal:Current Events Talk Pages

Hi Primefac,

I noticed that you rejected some CSD's for empty Portal:Current Events Talk Pages which I nominated. My thinking is that since the pages were created as a result of spam/vandalism, and are now empty, they do not need to be kept. Could you advise if my thinking is on the right track, and if yes, what's the correct way to nominate the pages for deletion? Carter00000 (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

They don't need to be kept, but they also don't need to be deleted. They are doing no harm. Primefac (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

So you are aware

I left a note for Liz about the whole AfC Db-6 issue. I can't see things from an admin's perspective so you might want to add a thing or two and/or correct anything I stated. Either way thought you should know given this is an ongoing issue. S0091 (talk) 20:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep an eye on the thread (nothing you said looked wrong or incomplete). Hopefully she either sticks with her comment about not actioning these at all, or your comments are enough for her to stop declining them inappropriately. Primefac (talk) 06:40, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Bibleverse template

FYI: PrimeBOT shouldn't embed the {{bibleverse}} template inside of <ref></ref> tags as seen here (Task 24), or you get — Cite error: A list-defined reference has no name — as seen here in the Notes section. Same thing with the {{sfn}} template. Some of these templates weren't designed to be nested inside of ref tags for some reason. I fixed it by removing the ref tags. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 14:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought I had caught all of the conversion exceptions but clearly I missed one. Primefac (talk) 16:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio

Hi, thanks for cleaning up most of the copyvio on User:Maddymangione/Women's tennis, however I believe there's still some left. See the sentences beginning with Serena Williams lost to... which is a clear cut and paste from this article. Cheers! :3 F4U (they/it) 14:43, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, the copyvio check did not match that paragraph which is why I missed it initially. Primefac (talk) 18:23, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Revert

Hello, It looks like you automatically reverted an edit I made; could I ask what could have triggered that? Thanks. 72.213.11.193 (talk) 10:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

It was an insensitive, gravedancing comment that served no purpose other than to be harassing. Primefac (talk) 10:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way.

Edit: and now you've removed another comment. I think you should step away from this. You're abstaining in name only.72.213.11.193 (talk) 10:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

"Step away"? Not really sure what you mean. I also never said I was abstaining, so also not sure what you mean there either. Primefac (talk) 10:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
You abstained in the matter of scottywong's desysop. I'm sorry do you think I'm stupid or something? This is bizarre. 72.213.11.193 (talk) 10:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah, yes, heaven forbid I abstain from voting on a single motion and then decide it's a good idea to revert personal attacks against other editors... I do not think you are stupid but your logic does somewhat baffle me. Primefac (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, heaven forbid you make an official statement effectively in favor of an admin and then delete multiple comments of an unfavorable tone to that admin and his position. Heaven forbid that, as it may smell to some of impriety. 72.213.11.193 (talk) 11:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
The second removal was a personal attack against an editor who was not a party to the case, nor as far as I can tell involved in any way. A personal attack is a personal attack. Primefac (talk) 11:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
The comment was tangential but hardly unrelated. And commenting on behavior is not a personal attack. 72.213.11.193 (talk) 11:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, if you think my actions were inappropriate and require formal review, WP:ANI is thataway. Primefac (talk) 11:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't merit all that but for the little it's worth I'm disappointed. 72.213.11.193 (talk) 11:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
That is unfortunately but something I can probably live with. If one isn't disappointing someone for something they are probably not doing it right. Primefac (talk) 11:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi, question. Would this edit qualify for revdel and if it does, can you please revdel it? Thanks! :3 F4U (they/it) 03:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Maybe. It's not blatant enough for me to jump right on it, but I'll think about it. Primefac (talk) 06:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Eh, being accused of assault is probably enough for an RD2. If any (talk page stalker) want to chime in with a 2O I'm happy to listen. Primefac (talk) 11:47, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Looking to get your opinion

Hello, and thanks for your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#Images in templates. I've updated the templates/documentation for the various templates that previously generated little images of characters instead of the actual characters. As you are more experienced, I want to ask for your input on something.

Background: I went through the {{asterism}} transclusions recently to see how it was being used in practice and manually substitute the template before feeding anything to a bot. The original idea behind these templates was that an editor would put them into a table so that a screen reader would say the alt text. Out of the twenty or so pages using {{asterism}}, only 3 were using it in its original intended capacity. A glance through {{hash-tag}} usage shows the same thing. It seems about 1 in 10 pages that use these templates, understand how they were intended. Many use them to generate lengthy tooltips which actually worsens accessibility and many (like Drag Race (franchise)) use them with different alt text between the legend and table which also worsens accessibility. I think it makes sense to replace any usage of the templates with no "alt=" text outright. I have a question about the small percentage but likely large number of pages that did use the templates as intended.

Question: Do you see any value in trying to transition any of these alt text symbols into a template that is more geared towards accessibility and less prone to misuse? Or does that seem a waste of time when the majority of usage appears to be misuse? I'm guessing there are about 3,000 pages (out of the 40,000 or so) that used the templates in line with their intended purpose, and I'm hesitant to substitute all that work. Rjjiii (talk) 04:30, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I've seen this but haven't had a chance to give a sufficient amount of time or thought into a reply. Will try to get to it soon. Primefac (talk) 18:41, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
There's no rush, and you don't owe me an apology. As of right now, the templates all generate just the symbol (which is better than symbol as image hack) and the alt text is still preserved in the article's source. Thanks for considering it, Rjjiii (talk) 19:41, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay, had time to think about it. If the majority of use is misuse, then something is wrong and it needs fixing. If it's a case of "people are trying to use it for things they shouldn't" then we should replace those uses with the proper template/code/text/etc. Of course, if all of the misuse is in the same fashion, then we might want to determine why that is, and either change the template to match the actual use or (per previous) replace current uses with a better template. Primefac (talk) 08:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the input, I appreciate it. I'm going to take some time to think about it, and, as of right now, the template outputs just the character, so only "dagger" is spoken and there's no reader facing problem. I think the original template was made for the right reasons but in a way that encouraged misuse, and the last thing I want to do is make that same mistake. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 06:18, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

AWB classification change

Hi, can you please remove User:CX Zoom AWB from enabledusers group and into enabledbots group, per Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/CX Zoom AWB. I asked at RFP/AWB but the bot marked it as already done. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:31, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac (talk) 07:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi name in template

Hi Primefac, can you please help me with the following problem? I am working on a new "List of 2023–24 Super Rugby transfers" article and tried to use the code {{suboff}} Player X (to {{Rut|Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi|fb=y}}) for a player, who is leaving the Highlanders and moving to Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi. However, that template only worked with the old team name "Toyota Shokki". So I changed the name in the Template:Rugby union team/flags by adding "Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi", at the same time also correcting the name of the destination page from "Toyota Industries Shuttles" to "Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi", so that it arrives there directly without using the redirect. Can you please check whether I've done this correctly?

This change does however not resolve the problem, because {{Rut|Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi|fb=y}} still doesn't work. I am not sure, but is this because the Template:Rugby union team/link also needs to be changed? I see that only editors with extended confirmed rights can change that template, so I don't think I am able to do it myself and I also don't feel comfortable doing it, because I don't want to make a mistake. Can you please do this for me? Many thanks, Ruggalicious (talk) 13:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Help no longer needed (but checking my changes to both templates appreciated). As it turns out, I have the required permissions and I managed to fix the problem. As you can see: downward-facing red arrow Freddie Burns (to Japan Toyota Industries Shuttles Aichi), now returns the result I was after. Ruggalicious (talk) 03:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Apologies, was away for the weekend and only just starting to catch up on things. Glad to see it was sorted, will take a look when I can. Primefac (talk) 11:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
You got a bit excessive with the duplication - if you're adding a new value to a #switch statement, you only need to add that value. I've removed the duplication but that shouldn't affect the visible outut. Primefac (talk) 08:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing that! I admit I don't quite understand why it's still working, because every team name in that list is followed by a vertical bar and the team abbreviation and you've just removed those. But it works and that's what matters I guess. Ruggalicious (talk) 08:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
A #switch statement is basically a gigantic "if" statement that compares the primary value to the items on the list. If it makes a match, then it outputs whatever is after the = for that match. It doesn't really matter whether you have A | B | C = D all on one line or spread across multiple lines, if either A, B, or C is passed to the #switch statement it will output D. Largely for human reading, we group together like objects, which is why (as you say) every team is listed on one line ending with the team abbreviation; we don't have to do it that way but it looks nicer to us. Primefac (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I understand. I really should learn more about coding beyond html and css, but I don't really have the time. Ruggalicious (talk) 10:15, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
No worries, glad I could help out a little (and always happy to do so in the future). Primefac (talk) 10:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't want to start a new section here, for just one minor detail. I just noticed that in the Template:Rugby union team/link, Matatū and Maties have the same acronym (MAT). In the Template:Rugby union team/flags, Maties also has the acronym MAT. Shouldn't both teams have different acronyms? Ruggalicious (talk) 15:18, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Unless they are referred by official bodies differently, I don't think we need to; one is in SA and the other in NZ, so the chances of confusion are fairly minimal. Primefac (talk) 16:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Olivier Guillon

I was not expecting that another editor would send that article to AFD, but Twinkle handled the race condition properly, by telling me that the article already had an AFD tag, and that I could put my tag on it in place of the existing tag, but that was not recommended, or I could cancel tagging. So the rationale that I had written for the AFD became the rationale for supporting the AFD. Were you checking on the other Olivier Guillon, or were you just looking for sports articles that were notable under previous guidelines, or how did we manage to find the same article at the same time? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Someone on IRC was asking about the draft and possibly renaming it, which led me to the article. I suspect that's how we both found it. Primefac (talk) 06:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
I wasn't on IRC. I don't use IRC. I was checking the list of drafts with the same name as existing articles. I made a comment that the existing article should be renamed, and maybe the author saw that I had commented, and went to IRC to inquire. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:38, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant I had seen it on IRC; you had obviously seen it through the AFC process. Primefac (talk) 17:29, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
How do I open an IRC window? Where is IRC documented? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:38, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon WP:IRC has all the deets. It's a bit counterintuitive to set up, but once you have it going it's pretty straightforward. There are a variety of IRC servics available, I prefer one called IRCCloud. IRC is the poor man's Discord (i.e. it was invented like two decades before Discord and thus much of our process remains on there because the cost of switching to new tech is high and the reward low). A lot of secure functionary business happens on IRC, its one of the official places to make OS requests. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Revdel request? (Is this also revdel?)

Hey, I'd like to request a revdel request (or whatever it is that suppresses a log). I've found a particularly atrocious move log while looking through the move history of an article. :3 F4U (they/it) 20:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Sure thing. Primefac (talk) 08:41, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Were you able to do it? I can still see it on my end. :3 F4U (they/it) 12:34, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, might be a cache issue? Primefac (talk) 12:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah, it's updated on my end now. No worries and thanks! :3 F4U (they/it) 12:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Drmies

Hi sorry, the talk page for Drmies says "view source" instead of "add topic" to reply to him? Emmmm.Ayyyy. (talk) 20:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

It would appear that Drmies is experiencing high levels of vandalism at the moment so the talk page has been protected in an effort to curb that. I do see you have received a response to your query from a different editor, though. Primefac (talk) 12:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Your partial block of 62.74.61.123

They hopped.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 12:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I protected the page instead. Primefac (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox/Category check

Template:Infobox/Category check has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

A little birdie told me you don't like the mobile site

I don't either: User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/unmobilePlus.js :P Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Excellent. Primefac (talk) 08:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

AfC participant

Hi @Primefac, I've been having a little Wikipedia break, and as a result, I think, you removed my name from the AfC participants list. I quite understand that, but I would like to continue with this. Would it be possible for you to put me back on? Doric Loon (talk) 11:07, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLPCRIME issue

The name of a child accused of a crime was mentioned here

I am uncertain, but I think this might warrant removal from the article history and I think you have the powers to do that.

I think, but am also unsure, that posting this to a notice board will attract lots of attention, so I am doing the right thing to low key mention it you.

Hope I'm on the right path, apologies in advance if not. CT55555(talk) 15:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

There are even more subtle ways of requesting this sort of thing, but I've taken care of it. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 16:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. I'll save that link in case I see this again. CT55555(talk) 16:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Sudanese Sovereignty Council

Hi, I see you reverted my move for the First Sudanese Sovereignty Council to the 1955 Sudanese Sovereignty Council. The naming here is similar to the 1969 Sudanese coup d'état and the other Sudanese coup d'état. As per Wikipedia:Article titles, using years is more precise and consistent, and the use of the convention of “year”+”the event” is what is used in the literature. That is why I changed the title and the template (which you reverted too) and requested the deletion of the redirect page 1964 Sudanese Sovereignty Council to move the current page. You argued that your justification of reverting all of my edits and denying my request for deletion was “over redirect” which I had already took care of. FuzzyMagma (talk) 08:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

No, my justification for the revert was that what references I had access to and could find mention of all used "first", "second" etc. If something is called something, we don't change the name simply because our manual of style says otherwise. If you think these page titles should be changed, you are more than welcome to file a move request. Primefac (talk) 09:07, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Your other reason is that the move was not discussed which is not needed when the move is uncontroversial, (not to sound like I own the articles but) I wrote all of the Sudanese Sovereignty Council articles and I’m correcting my mistakes that I discovered when started writing articles that mentioned them which either use the convention used before or use “Sudanese Sovereignty Council (start - year)”. But not normally the 1st and 2nd FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Filling a move request is similar to “drawing someone in paper work” so they just give up! I do not think is needed and I had already finished correcting all the pages except the one that I needed the redirect to be deleted. Anyway, if you insist I will just leave it as it is 🤷‍♂️ .. I don’t have energy for “grinding to prove a point” tbh FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Revdel request

Can you please revdel all comments before the current revision on User talk:궁금한 이야기 와이? The stuff the Korean LTA said was calling Zzuuzz a bunch of Korean obscenities and slurs. — Prodraxis {talk • contribs} (she/her) 11:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Maybe Google Translate is being nice to me, but the worst I'm seeing is "disabled bastard"? Not really sure that merits RD, but if I missed something let me know. Primefac (talk) 11:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, based on the nuance and tone and stuff it translated more to “retarded son of a b****”, IMHO. Google translate is just being nice to you. — Prodraxis {talk • contribs} (she/her) 11:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Fair enough. Primefac (talk) 12:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Threshold for CNP histmerege?

Per your edit summary here, I curious how much of an article has to be CNP to warrant a histmerge. Comparing this version of the original (draft) with this with this version of the new article, the text is 90% the same (exactly quoted) with the same references, plus new sources for the pretty new graphs. The editing periods do not overlap. I thought I had requested histmerges for similar cases in the distant past, but I don't want to waste time if only exact CNPs are eligible. Thanks. —  AjaxSmack  13:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Um.... no it isn't? I'll take another look later but from two checks now to me they're different enough that it's plausible that it was not a copy/paste. Primefac (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Izno, if you've got a mo' I think I could use a third set of eyes on this. Primefac (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
So, I agree between Ajax's two versions listed there's a clear copy-paste to some degree and that's probably sufficient to me to merge (I've got WikEdDiff, in case you can't see it with the normal differ). But after that, there's also this edit which has an explicit reference to the other page from Ajax himself.
I'd only merge the non-overlapping edits ofc. Izno (talk) 15:36, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
With Compare Pages, the copying of the article text gets lost in the all of the Wikitext differences. I don't have WikEdDiff, but this comparison shows the text matches better. —  AjaxSmack  20:56, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks all for the opinions on the matter. While I do recognise the shortcomings of ComparePages, when I compared them myself I was apparently picking out every set of sentences that wasn't the same between the two!
That being said, I do agree there was a merge (and I'm really not sure how I missed this edit summary) but the parallel histories makes it a bit awkward to do an actual histmerge. Thus, I have tagged both talk pages with merge attribution, which should hopefully sort everything out (legally-speaking anyway). Primefac (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your time. I didn't know about {{Merged-from}} which seems like an easy fix. —  AjaxSmack  14:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, if things can't be merged properly that's the best solution. Primefac (talk) 19:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

OccideFascists

Hello Primefac,

You blocked OccideFascists (latin for "kill the fascists") a couple of days ago for violating the username policy. They appear to have just created a new account (it edited the same article to add the same person), Interfice proditorem, which is latin for "Kill the traitor". This new username also a violation of the username policy, and given the previous block I'm having difficulty WP:AGF here. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Primefac (talk) 12:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio on talk page

This is a copy-paste from here. Please deal with it. 〜 Festucalex • talk 13:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. Primefac (talk) 13:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Bloody Sunday (1972)

Thanks. Could you Revdel/protect this for the same reason/same user. DeCausa (talk) 18:46, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

they're back at the talk page here. Can it be protected? DeCausa (talk) 18:48, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
And again. Feel free to also delete my reply there. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 18:59, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 Done, thanks for the notes. Primefac (talk) 19:18, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

PrimeBot 41

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PrimeBOT 41 has been approved. Happy editing! TheSandDoctor Talk 16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Primefac (talk) 16:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Primebot: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment notices

Shouldn't the Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment notices posted by Primebot go at the bottom of talk pages rather than the top? It seems to me that these notices should either follow the "boxes at the top" convention (e.g. WikiProjects box), or else go at the bottom as part of the regular discussion, inserted with a chronologically correct date, or at least at the bottom in a new section and signed on the date of insertion. People who start by scrolling through the most recent talk page contents to see if there's active editing won't notice that the top-placed "discussion" is recent. Boud (talk) 11:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific about where you saw this happening? I haven't run the bot for this task in almost a year; there were some issues when it first ran but they got ironed out later. Primefac (talk) 11:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Moving Template:Top ten NN male singles tennis players to Template:Top NN male singles tennis players:

Hello, I have noticed that after you moved the pages mentioned above (NN is for any country) and changing it to an automatic update, the increase and decrease icons are now wrong. Players moving up have a decrease icon and players going down in the rankings the other way round. Would be great if you could review this and change it. Many thanks. Sherman1998 (talk) 13:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hah! Good catch. Mathematically sound coding but not when it comes to "rankings". Sorted. Primefac (talk) 14:00, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

On Template:Wikisource

I have made an edit request on the talk page of template. See here.

This is to include "lang" and "type" parameters for adding functions of Template:Wikisourcelang and Template:Wikisourcehas.

Thanks. Sarangem (talk) 07:48, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

A10 deletion

I'm confused about what you said here:[1] I don't recall deleting anything. I proposed an A10 deletion. Did I miss something? Best wishes. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Is this the A10 you mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Witchcraft_(diabolic) - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:53, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Indeed it is. Primefac (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
With the deletion by Versageek somewhat hidden by the page recreation as a redirect by a different user, combined with all the similarly-named and now-deleted POV forks, it really is a confusing tangle of articles, templates, and redirects. And this isn't helped by the accusations flying around. It's such a mess that, for a moment, I started wondering if I'd deleted something and just forgotten! Best wishes, - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 21:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

AFD comments

Hello, Primefac,

There are two AFDs, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ross Lazaroo-Hood and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zubin Dowlaty, that ordinarily would have been closed a long time ago but have instead been relisted several times. I think that is because of comments you made that implied that deletion might not be the best option. However, that has been the primary outcome put foward by the nominator and discussion participants. Could you close these in a manner you think is appropriate? Much appreciated. Liz Read! Talk! 00:55, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I have zero interest in closing the discussion. I also do not think that ArcAngel should have been relisting that a third time - the consensus seems to be clear enough, and I am not advocating for either position (delete or draftify); my note is purely a note and thus should not factor into the final close. As a minor nitpicky note, saying "final relist" is kind of a misnomer, since it could be relisted a fourth time, though that would be even more unnecessary than the third one. Primefac (talk) 06:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Template:Infobox YouTube personality reverts

Hi,

Firstly, the MOS specifically discourages using the specific styling of trademarks for article organisation. Secondly, {{Youtube user}} is a sub-template: you've just broken its transclusion at Scott Manley. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Firstly, if you feel strongly about it, start an RM. Secondly, {{youtube user}} has been a redirect since 2015, and is not a "sub-template". You gave an invalid input and thus did not get what you expected out of it. Primefac (talk) 09:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Just to be clear here: your revert broke more than my move did, and the revert of the user template was egregious (doing literally nothing except breaking the sole transclusion). I'll waste the requisite minutes on the RM at some point, but more of your own life was pointlessly wasted here than anything else. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 00:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
If I have nothing else to do when I see something like this, is it really wasted time? I would also not call "restoring the status quo" to be "egregious" (and for the record, I fixed that sole transclusion after restoring). Primefac (talk) 06:45, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
MOS specifically discourages using the specific styling of trademarks for article organisation This is a stronger claim than what WP:MOSTM actually says about trademarks. Izno (talk) 19:40, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Interesting AFC track record

Examined 2,045 reviews:

  • Accepts: 962 (93.22%)
  • Declines: 59 (5.72%)
  • Comments: 11 (1.07%)

Please look at https://apersonbot.toolforge.org/afchistory/ for Graeme Bartlett who seems to have amazing lucking the drafts revised. Note particularly Philip Agbese where I have flagged major deficiencies post acceptance. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:11, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

That is a rather interesting track record; usually the stats are the other way around...
Not sure the implication here, whether it's that an admin is a rabid inclusionist or we somehow have a rogue admin (who for the record has been one since 2009) taking pay or other incentives for accepting drafts. If it's the former, a nice talk page discussion may hopefully alert him to any potential problems. If it's the latter... kick any evidence to ArbCom.Primefac (talk) 14:08, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
I've left a very nice (I hope) message. I'm not sure I'm competent to investigate deeply, but I will take it to Arbcom if I have to. Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest solution may be a mixture of inclusionism coupled with an odd idea of what the acceptance criteria are. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
There is an answer Graeme's talk page, and I understand it, though disagree with it wholeheartedly. What is pleasing is that there is no dark secret, simly goodwill, though what I see as misplaced goodwill. I have tried to ask for a modification of their thought processes now that I understand them.
I am wholly unsure what to do with the Agbese article. My instinct says draftify, but I am not sure that is a valid approach. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 23:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
If the subject meets our notability criteria, there might be nothing to do other than stubify if there are quality-related issues; I've certainly done more than a few of those in my day. Graeme appears to be taking the approach that if a page meets GNG, then everything else is somewhat immaterial (i.e. puffery, V issues, etc can all be fixed "in post" after acceptance). It's a valid viewpoint, though as you mention one that is not generally held by many AFC reviewers. That being said, our biggest critics are often complaining that we are somehow letting perfect be the enemy of good and should accept crappy-looking drafts with terrible sourcing if "they are notable" is obvious. It's a delicate balance to pull off; maybe we all need to move somewhere more towards the middle... Primefac (talk) 06:16, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
I'm pleased in one way that another editor in good standing has rendered it down into a stub, yet disappointed that the cues in it that required references are now gone. My view is that this would have been handled better by leaving it as a draft. But that is history and this is Wikipedia, and I am not Don Quixote. I took the simple step of marking it as unreviewed.
Some of us may ask for too much. I'm sure I used to a lot and may still do at times. We need to get ever better at accepting borderline work. I applaud Graeme's quiet call to action on that, yet it feels like exaggeration for effect if all but the very basic fact that meets GNG is allowed to pass unreferenced. It puts an undue burden on NPP, while simultaneously devaluing AFC in the eyes of many. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

retracted comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zafar Mahmud (3rd nomination)

Hi, would it possible for you to explain why my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zafar Mahmud (3rd nomination) was retracted. The comment relates to a potential conflict of interest that was flagged in the user talk, see User talk:Shahidm#Welcome!. I do not think there is anything wrong with pointing that out, sincee the same user is the creator of the article and he was the one who added his name to the article, i.e., Survivors include his son, Shahid Mahmud and his daughter Nevin (Chandi), but you maybe disagree hence why I am here FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:58, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Unless someone has disclosed their real-life identity on-wiki, or it is very obvious, we should not be making claims as to who they are, who they work for, etc. This one was a bit on the borderline due to the name similarity, but fails the "very obvious" bit so I opted to redact. Primefac (talk) 19:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Misplaced autocommenting

This user was far too tentative. Absolutely the bot should not've been placing Wikicourse notes at the tops of talk pages instead of the bottom (example). The previous reply was similarly tentative, but hopefully it has already fixed by now or the use of the bot for that purpose discontinued. [Edit: Oh, from the redirect, I assumed this was just a renamed page for comments on the specific bot project. Since this looks like a personal talk page, (a) thanks for your help with the project, (b) sorry for the overly brusque tone above, and (c) the bot in question is/was "PrimeBOT".] — LlywelynII 15:40, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Genuinely curious, are you trying to chastise me further for something that happened more than a year ago, or are you actually looking for something from me? Primefac (talk) 15:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Andrew Road triple murders

Thanks. Sorry about that, I thought I was putting the capitalization back, but I got confused reviewing the diff because two of the changes made by a vandal (115.134.232.191) were actually retained. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

No worries, I've done similar things before. Primefac (talk) 07:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Rugby St Andrews RFC:Rugby St Andrews RFC

Could I ask that you undelete the Rugby St Andrews RFC page, I am the owner of the Rugby St Andrews Website, and the information that is on there is my work as well.

If you would be able to help me create the wiki page for the club that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spanner240884 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

In a word, no. The page was directly copied from another site that did not have a compatible license (e.g. Creative Commons) and thus cannot be undeleted. Even if y ou wrote the content on the other site, the content you wrote for them is under their copyright, not ours. You are welcome to start again using new words. Primefac (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

ANI notice regarding your acceptance of another user's request to become an AfC reviewer

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:OlifanofmrTennant's review history at Articles for Creation. Thank you. Fork99 (talk) 08:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Once again I offer you thanks

Good judgement call on the ANI you just closed. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Ta. Primefac (talk) 13:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

A question reguarding a statement by you

On my ANI you said that "I do sometimes miss obvious things; normally a 0-percent-success participant at AFD usually gets a  Not done from me, but... I think I saw a lot of approved drafts and said why not." I was wondering what you meant by that? :ᗡ OLI (she/her) 18:26, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

You have not had an AFD vote in line with the close, hence 0% success. Primefac (talk) 18:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Okay, Thanks :ᗡ OLI (she/her) :ᗡ OLI (she/her) 18:35, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Request

Greetings Primefac! I see you are interested in granting Page Mover rights to interested candidates. I was wondering if you can grant me Page mover rights. As a new page patroller I often move pages to draft space with leaving redirect, so want to move pages without leaving redirect. I am familiar with page move process, My Move log. If not, that’s completely fine. Many Thanks. Maliner (talk) 06:54, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

You are welcome to apply at WP:PERM/PGM. Primefac (talk) 07:06, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Meatbot question

I'm reaching out for some advice on handling a situation. There is an AWB approved user who has done big runs of edits using JWB that had a high rate of error in the past. It was pointed out to them in ANI (by me as well as other users) that this was likely because they were going too fast, operating at that time sometimes 30+ edits per minute. I suggested to them that they report as a meatbot if they were to continue at that speed. For awhile, they did seem to slow down their JWB edits, but recently, they have ramped up again. And again, it appears to result in a high error rate. A review of their edit history shows that at one point they were doing 40+ edits per minute. They do show a willingness to clean up their mess, but IMO, there wouldn't be as much of a mess if they would just slow it down. As an AWB user myself, I know that no one is perfect. But this editor is showing a pattern of problematic editing with the tool, IMO; and in the past, it has seemed they were more concerned with speed simply for increasing their edit count. As far as I know, they are not registered as a bot. Would you advise bringing it up to ANI, or rather to an individual admin with bot/AWB expertise? Or am I just being to knit-picky and should let it go, considering that they are willing to fix their errors? TIA for your wisdom and input. ButlerBlog (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

If the user has been warned in the past (and there's clear evidence/acknowledgement) then any admin can pull their AWB access if they have started bad behaviours again. I would ask them once more to stop, and if they don't contact an admin. They might turn you down, at which point ANI would be your best bet. Primefac (talk) 20:05, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks - I'll reach out to them and see where that goes. ButlerBlog (talk) 20:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
FWIW, I reached out to the user. Not only did they not slow down, they actually increased further edit runs to as high as 67+ per minute. Errors continued to be made and ultimately, someone else brought it to AN/I. I did comment on it there. If you want to look at it, it's here. If not, that's fine, too. Just wanted to make this complete, considering where it went. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:12, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. Those are some ludicrous numbers, and Fram's initial post is enough for me to pull immediately just as a stopgap. Primefac (talk) 13:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Good idea. If it becomes needed, I can go back and find what date/times those runs where for specific review, but that's probably more likely to come up in ANI (if at all), so I won't bug you on it any further unless you ask for info from me. I appreciate your looking at it - the stopgap is definitely reasonable. ButlerBlog (talk) 14:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Tennis templates

Could you take a look at the "Top ... male singles tennis players"-templates? They keep appearing at Templates with disambiguation links but I can not find links to dab-pages in the templates. The Banner talk 23:41, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

The base module is using Module:Disambiguation - could that be triggering the tool? The module is checking a list of names against whether they are disambiguations (using "title.exists" and "isDisambiguation") and then formatting them accordingly to avoid the dab. I feel like pages using the Disambiguation module shouldn't be triggering the tool, though, since that's the entire point of the module... Primefac (talk) 06:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
To be true, I have no idea what triggers the listing. I tried to solve it but failed as the links go to normal pages. The Banner talk 08:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Troubleshooting thread started here. Primefac (talk) 09:31, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
I really appreciate that. Thank you very much! The Banner talk 14:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

It looks like there is no solution in sight. Would reverting be an option? The Banner talk 09:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Unless you want a dozen or two templates with dab links showing, not really. I'll have to think about it. We sort out some of the unusual dabs right at the start, but the most common disambiguator is "(tennis)" so we need to check whether that's a valid option if the page is disambiguated. Otherwise, there's no real way for us to track outliers. Primefac (talk) 09:58, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Forgot about this, will try to get to it this weekend. Primefac (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC) Seems to have been sorted? Primefac (talk) 05:33, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
No, a series is back on the maintenance list. I am sorry, but after the weekend I will start reverting those edits. The Banner talk 18:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
We're still working on a solution at that talk. Please be patient. Primefac (talk) 18:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
I am impatient with this issue. The Banner talk 22:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
I can see that. It's a good thing this is a minor external tool that is throwing all of a dozen false positives that can easily be ignored while we sort it out. Primefac (talk) 06:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

AfC participants

Hello!

Thanks for adding me to the project! But, as far as I understand, you missed me when adding a few of us to the list here: Special:Diff/1173404355/prev. Suitskvarts (talk) 13:29, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I did indeed, thanks. Primefac (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

PrimeBot edit question

In edits like this one, why all the added spaces? This makes it hard to see what the bot is trying to accomplish. Dicklyon (talk) 05:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Infobox genfixes; standardising spacing. The diff viewer is terrible at showing a single line removed, so instead of just showing minus  |picture_format = NTSC with nothing on the plus   side, it takes the next line and puts it in the plus  . It's dumb, and it would be nice if it could get fixed. Primefac (talk) 06:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Is standardizing spacing really an approved fix? And why is it standard to use so many spaces where one looks good? It looks like someone is trying to line things up in the source with some particular font. Perhaps a monospaced font? Dicklyon (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

That same edit resulted in the weird phrase "an English dub has been made aired, and released on home video". This looks like a bug, no? Dicklyon (talk) 05:19, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Uh... no it didn't? The same text appears before and after the bot edited. Primefac (talk) 06:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, I must have been looking at diff since mine – this bug came in with the edit before your bot's. Dicklyon (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

im slightly mad abt the user about me page...

You've been whacked with a WikiMinnow..

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you might have done something silly.

𝒞𝑜𝑜𝓅𝑒𝓇 𝒢𝑜𝑜𝒹𝓂𝒶𝓃 (talk) 15:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Sarcopterygian taxonomy templates

Hi, I was wondering if you could reduce the page protection on a few taxonomy templates, as their transclusion counts have gone down by a lot recently. The templates in question are:

—Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 14:28, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Tristan comar

I'm not particularly sure if I want to bring this to SPI again after what you said to me last time, but while browsing through more albums, it seems this user has once again reappeared under a new Tristan the smart account that they alternated between from June to August before switching to Tristan comar. since you talked to me previously about this user, I felt it'd make sense to bring it up to you and not risk the SPI not working again—my apologies if this disrupts any work you're doing. dawnbails (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I would file an SPI for those, yes; I'm not seeing any direct match from a CheckUser perspective, but if there is a solid behavioural match that should be looked at. Thanks for checking. Primefac (talk) 08:05, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
It's ok Tristan the smart (talk) 00:08, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
SPI filed here. dawnbails (talk) 20:01, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
....... Tristan the smart (talk) 00:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
I hit my arm so hard that i have bruse Tristan the smart (talk) 00:11, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

RevDel?

Hi Primefac. Do you think this edit requires RevDel? I wasn't sure, so I'll leave it up to you. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 10:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

No, but thanks for checking. Primefac (talk) 10:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for my edit on Robert Bray

Thank you for reverting my inadvertent (and incorrect) edit on Robert Bray. I intended to click the "thank" link, but apparently I clicked "undo" instead. I apologize for doing so. I am a strong believer in not having unsourced content in Wikipedia articles. I regret that I made such a foolish mistake. Eddie Blick (talk) 23:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries, you'd think they wouldn't put two completely different buttons so close to each other, but they do! I think there's a script out there for adding an "are you sure" button for rollback, but I don't know where it is. Primefac (talk) 06:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Tennis templates 2

No, the issue is not solved yet.

This is what I see in the summary of both templates after your revert: Undid revision 1176379501 by The Banner (talk) it *is* fixed. The Testcases page hasn't been purged yet) Tags: Undo Disambiguation links added. The Banner talk 11:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The only place that was calling the disambiguation page was the testcases page, because it hadn't yet been purged. The module checks the exceptions file and (tennis) disambiguators before it can even get to a dab check, and I have put in all of the exceptions now. Primefac (talk) 11:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
I stand corrected, I did not realise the title.exists check was also being considered as a "link" (which is dumb). I have once again refactored the code and it does indeed appear to be working as intended, with no dab links if there are none. Primefac (talk) 11:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
I hope so. I will waiting impatiently until they disappear from the maintenance list. The Banner talk 12:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

FIFA Mobile

What I said is sourced. I literally play FIFA Mobile, so you shouldn't revert my edit. 202.84.42.187 (talk) 12:44, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

"I play this game" is not a valid reference. If there is a reliable source, then by all means please re-add the content, being sure to include the reference as well. Primefac (talk) 12:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Striking my vote?

Sorry, I don't see how I made a duplicate vote...? I did leave a facetious comment next to Extraordinary Writ's vote (277)... is that why you counted a second vote? Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 08:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Indeed you did, which is why the tool showed it as a duplicate (your signature is the last one on the line). I have reverted and fixed the issue. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 08:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

You will recall the brouhaha over a new reviewer at ANI and WT:AFC

With regret I still have concerns about that reviewer, and have expressed then on their talk page. I choose not to link it here because I do not wish to create a pile on. There are sufficient concerns for me to suggest you might wish to take another look. You will either remember the editor or be able to look at my today's and yesterdays contributions. I will drop the full user details here if you ping me and request them. I suggest you archive or delete this after looking at it. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:36, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I will take a look when I get a chance. Primefac (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
User removed. Primefac (talk) 12:25, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Could you possibly reconsider, I feel as I have improved and been justified in my recent actions ~~~ Questions? four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:05, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

AfC

So you removed me from the list following a string of problamtic acceptances, which I completelly understand, but as you know I have been taking steps to avoid this doing work at AfC, reading up on vandalism, ect. I really want to participate in the project and would like to know when an approate time to reapply is. I had already taken a break and planned to abstain from reviewing until the end of the month if not mid-october to participate in the backlog drive.~~~ Questions? four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:40, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

I think a productive few months outside of AFC will demonstrate your capabilities. Re-apply in the New Year and I'll see about getting you back in. Primefac (talk) 19:18, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
I was hoping to participate in the November backlog drive is that still a possibility?Questions? four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:44, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
You are welcome to make a post at WT:AFC asking what steps you can or should take to be reinstated for the drive, if at all. Reviewers making mistakes normally is usually not a big deal, but overenthusiastic reviewers sometimes start making silly mistakes on a much larger scale during backlog drives, and I do not want to greenlight you for that unilaterally. Primefac (talk) 06:28, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

A request

my AFC rights was renewed by you few days ago. but when I renamed the right is gone. can you please reinitiate it again. Akshithmanya (talk) 03:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Someone has beat me to it. For future reference (not that I expect it to happen again for you personally, but just on the off chance someone is reading this and they also get renamed) it is generally a good idea to give the old name along with the new so that I don't have to go hunting through the logs to find your previous name ;-) Primefac (talk) 06:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Minor edit marking

This bot is marking regular edits, that have discussion support and are unlikely to reverted but should be reviewed, as minor edits. That is not how I expect minor edit convention to be used and should be changed. "A good rule of thumb is that edits consisting solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of the content should be flagged as minor edits." Formatting changes does not imply removing information. Removal of information from the article that is quantitatively large (-300+ vs -1) by default is not a minor edit.MJHTrailsolid (talk) 14:51, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi MJHTrailsolid, could you please give an example or two of the edits the bot has made that you disagree with? Most of the edits my bot makes are minor, usually to fix template syntax or remove deleted templates, and thus fall into the "minor" category of cleaning things up, but if there's something I missed please let me know. Primefac (talk) 16:01, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Well, in that case its a matter of disagreement on what is minor rather than example. Thanks for the reply. [2]MJHTrailsolid (talk) 22:41, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
I suppose, though I would argue that removing text in an infobox that was not triggering any output or otherwise showing on the page (i.e. it's essentially hidden) does not modify the viewed page, hence marking it as minor is acceptable. Primefac (talk) 06:46, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Query about a template for discussion

Hi Primefac, I am writing as I am wondering if you could please help me. Is there a template that can be placed on the top of the Records and statistics of the Rugby World Cup article to alert potential editors to the discussion ongoing here and if so, is it possible that you could place it there?. Kind regards 79.154.65.115 (talk) 13:04, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Not sure how much good it will do (you might be better off asking for a WP:3O) but I've added something in that might help. Primefac (talk) 13:11, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Ok I didn't know about that. Thank you for your help. It's very much appreciated 79.154.65.115 (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

One thing

Don't put random titles to anyone's talk page like "one thing", "two things", "three things" etc. It's quite rude and disrespectful. Just get straight to the point you want to present and don't talk in circles. Your message can be heard even without dramatising it. Regards! — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 08:42, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I had two disparate subjects to bring to your attention, and thus a header with only one of those (which I had originally intended) would be insufficient, and I do not really care for overloaded headers. In other words, I had two things I wanted to mention, so I titled the header in that manner. My intention was not to be rude or disrespectful. Primefac (talk) 09:08, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

College Fraternity/Sorority Founders..

I'd appreciate your comments on the subject at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fraternities_and_Sororities#More_general_comments Naraht (talk) 08:31, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Naraht (talk) 08:31, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Huh, thought I had already. Will do. Primefac (talk) 08:48, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Your Tidy Font Delinting Offer

Good morning Primefac,
As I said on Wikipedia talk:Linter yesterday, I'd be very interested in the proposal you floated for allowing me to have temporary access to the various admin talk archives with Tidy Font errors in an effort to eradicate to Tidy Font error from Wikipedia.
I've done some temporary access edits with help from User:Courcelles for about 100 or so full protected pages now since April 2023 on various non-admin pages like deceased users and LTAs, so I have a running history I can point to for similar edits on equally sensitive or watched pages, and can give you diffs of either those conversations with Courcelles, or the diffs of some of the actual edits if those are desired.

For your offer for accessing the remaining Tidy Fonts on the Admin's talk archives,
How do you see this arrangement operating?
Do you have any additional stipulations for this editing arrangement beyond the standard delinting rules stated at WP:LINT?
I am assuming release in batches rather than all at once. What batch size and time frame were you thinking about?
Any other things that are important to you for us to discuss for this agreement?

For the benefit of information, I compiled this which is the current list (as I know it to be) of all the full protected pages with Tidy Fonts. First table is stats of this error per user's set of pages, and the second table is each page I know to have this error.
And just to be clear, I will be addressing all lint errors found on each page, not just the Tidy Fonts, so that each page is one and done, free of all remaining lint errors.

Looking forward to this agreement and thank you for the confidence in my delinting abilities. Zinnober9 (talk) 07:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Batch size largely depends on how quickly you go through these pages, I suppose. My initial thought was batching them per-admin, at least for those with 10+ affected pages, but from your list it might be easier for you to just give me a range of pages and I'll un-protect that group. I've watchlisted your /lint page so feel free to shift the technical/procedural discussion there.
As far as "criteria" go, you're clearly experienced in this so I don't really feel like I need to add any extra stipulations. Primefac (talk) 07:29, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
I’ve just been batch lowering the former admin protections to EC. I’m not sure we should be fully protecting talk archives anymore, ECP seems to be enough except for perhaps admins attracting the worst harassment. @HJ Mitchell, @Juliancolton, @MastCell, opinions, since you three have the most of these? If we didn’t have as many full protected archives, this wouldn’t be a big deal if it was needed again in the future. Courcelles (talk) 11:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm fine with that, never really understood the purpose in the first place. Primefac (talk) 12:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
This list from March User:ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ/protected pages with Lint errors might have additional pages not listed in Zinnober9's list. Gonnym (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
I've unprotected mine. My "friends" seem to have moved on and filters etc are much more sophisticated these days. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:31, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Unprotected mine as well. – Juliancolton | Talk 20:18, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Julian, HJ, both of your archive sets are now free of the Tidy Font error. Julian, your archives are free of all errors. HJ Mitchell, yours are free of all tidy font errors. The HJ archives I edited are error free. The ones that didn't have this error or other editors got to before me still have some other lint issues like Obsolete tags that would be bot-able. Thank you both! Zinnober9 (talk) 23:25, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
@ Primfac True, it would be very clear to keep up with if it's done in batches by user, so let's do that. I'll go through HJ and Julian's first since those are roughly 25% of the remaining TF errors, and then start requests on my page after these.
@Gonnym My list was focused on only of active admin's pages, since the other 128 full protected pages with this error I had identified as either autoqualifing for WP:RFPD, or would get action from either contacting the protecting admin (or an RFPD if no reply). I'll add those two sets in separate tables now to complete the full-protection Tidy Font set since knowing about them might be of interest to you / @Courcelles.
@HJ Mitchell @Juliancolton Thank you both! Zinnober9 (talk) 05:04, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
@primefac I'm ready for the first batch when that suits you. Orangemike's archives 1-18, 24. I updated my lint page the other day like this, so if that works and is clear for you, I'll make future requests there like that. Thanks again, Zinnober9 (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 Done, will keep an eye on your work page. Primefac (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Section issue

Hi Primefac, Hope you are doing well. Can you tell me, How to solve the issue of expanded section in wikipedia articles? Look at this article, in mobile view all the sections are opened and it is hard to view even though I didn't enable Expand all the sections through my settings. Fade258 (talk) 09:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Genuinely couldn't say; I'm not a dev and I'm not a mobile user. Try the Help Desk? Primefac (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Ok, Thank you for your suggestions. Fade258 (talk) 12:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Account creation guidance

Hi Primefac. It's taken me a long time to follow up because, honestly, I don't have the energy for it, but this still bothers me, especially the snide aside about "bean counting". The username policy currently says that a username can be your real name if you so choose. The last well-attended RfC that proposed similar language to yours found no consensus. So do you really think that giving new users a strong instruction to choose a username that is different from your real name reflects community consensus on this matter? To be clear, I'm 100% aware that you and many others think that editing under your real name is a bad idea, and have good reasons for that, but that is not the issue here. The question is whether an extremely prominent interface guidance reflects broad consensus, and I don't think that's "bean counting". – Joe (talk) 05:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Part of the pushback in that 2021 RFC was that the username guidelines were not "strong" enough to have such a change. And yet, in August 2022 it was strengthened. This, along with the other reasons I gave at the "revisited" discussion, was the reason I was proposing changing the language. A "no consensus" close allows for further discussion, which is why after more than a year and multiple other significant events happening I felt it was appropriate to start a new discussion. If only the people who care about these sorts of things comment on these sorts of things, and there is little participation, then it simply means that not many people care about it. However, I believe the people who do care about it, including the WMF, should not be shut down simply because they are the only ones that showed up. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Username

Hi, Prime recently i have renamed my username from User:Citadeol to User:Xegma and my AfC right has gone, could you please re-add my name to AfC reviewers list. Xegma(talk) 08:01, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 08:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Editing of Talk Pages

Hi. I found your name on DavidElit's user page regarding a block on Papua editing, so I thought you might have some knowledge of Indonesia. Quite a few years ago, I cleaned up Wali Songo which he (or perhaps SatuSuro) cautioned is still based mostly on folklore.

I looked at the Talk page today and saw something under Ancestal Genealogy dated 2017 which is attributed to me but I do not recognize. Not only the content, but also the horrible grammar (inc misspelling of section heading). I suspect that someone simply cut-pasted their own Talk content into a previous Talk comment I made, thereby hiding their identity.

Have you seen this happen before? What do you suggest as a way to correct it?

And more generally, what is the policy for deleting Talk sections? I've seen some on various pages in WP which are 10-15 years old, on topics LONG since corrected. When and how is it ok to delete such sections? Martindo (talk) 20:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Martindo, unfortunately I have almost no knowledge of Indonesia. Any blocks I have made or edits to pages in that topic area were likely to stop disruption. If you have questions about Indonesian-related articles, I would suggest asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indonesia.
To answer your general question, though, talk sections should not be deleted outright. Discussions are all timestamped so if someone has raised an issue in 2007 there is a reasonable chance that it is no longer an issue. However, I do recognise that such posts can be confusing, so if a page has a lot of old or outdated threads on it archiving the page may be appropriate. See Help:Archiving a talk page for more; happy to answer any questions you have about it. Primefac (talk) 09:33, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

an epic Barnstar, deserved by the most epic of epic editors, awarded to you for your epicness.

The Epic Barnstar
Your an epic person, and epic editor, so you deserve this EPIC BARNSTAR!!!!! :) Babysharkboss2 was here!! 13:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Aww, thanks! Primefac (talk) 06:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
no prob! Babysharkboss2 was here!! 13:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Probationary Participant

Hi, I see that you have added me as a probationary participant on WikiProject Articles for creation. What would this mean, am I already able to review articles or do I need to wait until I am included as a full participant. ᚴᛁᚾᚷ ᚼᛒ Talk, Guestbook

It will be hard to evaluate your reviewing if you do not review any drafts during your probationary period. Primefac (talk) 14:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
How do I mark an article as reviewed?
ᚴᛁᚾᚷ ᚼᛒ Talk, Guestbook 13:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Instructions for using AFCH are at WP:AFCH. Primefac (talk) 13:45, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Reverted redirect from article Solar eclipse of January 4, 1992

Hello! I’ve reverted your change from earlier on August 28 to redirect the Solar eclipse of January 4, 1992 article to List of solar eclipses in the 20th century. I’m not sure what you mean when you provided “nothing here” as the summary of your edit—there is information not provided on the redirect such as a summary of the eclipse’s path, an animation, and related eclipses. Additionally, virtually all solar eclipses between 1901–2100, save for a few marginal events at the poles, already have their own standalone article. I cannot think of a sound reason why the article should become a redirect. Tinh1000000 (talk) 07:39, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Parallel to this, I looked into it for a minute or two and found a ton of newspaper sources that describe stuff that happened (gatherings of skywatchers, descriptions of the event, etc). I added a couple -- I'm a bit hamstrung because Newspapers.com's redesign completely busted PressPass and I have to type the cites manually, or else I'd have more. In the meantime, though, I see that you redirected a whole ton of them... oh noes! Might you reconsider letting some of them roam? I would be glad to attempt finding some more in-depth coverage for them. jp×g 02:24, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

I reverted a redirect; Solar eclipse of July 16, 2186

Good evening! Like the person above, I've reverted the redirect you've placed on Solar eclipse of July 16, 2186. While I understand why you may have wanted to revert it, I believe that this eclipse would be considered notable, as it is confirmed that it will be the longest eclipse in thousands of years, and several sources have confirmed that it will happen despite the date being so far out in the future. I can see other future eclipses not ready for an article, but I strongly believe we can keep this one. Thank you! 2603:8000:CD02:FC64:5C33:A4A3:FBCA:2A3F (talk) 05:17, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

(replying to all three threads) ​​ If folks want to revert my actions, that's fine; I was honestly a bit surprised that 80s/90s eclipses (which were a HUGE deal in my school at the time) didn't have more non-database-dump statistics on it (and I wasn't finding much myself from a quick check), so I took a BOLD action in redirecting. I am all for additional expansion and cleanup, and happy to help if and where necessary. Primefac (talk) 06:26, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't mean to poop on your efforts here. There really are a lot of articles that need to be redirects. Of the ones I've looked at there were a few where I really couldn't come up with any coverage whatsoever, despite lost of newspaper trawling, so I've left them. I guess if we are all coalesced here to poke through them I may as well post the list:
  1. Solar eclipse of May 25, 1808 (couldn't find anything)
  2. Solar eclipse of July 9, 1888 (couldn't find anything)
  3. Solar eclipse of January 14, 1907 Green checkmarkY
  4. Solar eclipse of September 10, 1923 Green checkmarkY
  5. Solar eclipse of January 14, 1926 Green checkmarkY
  6. Solar eclipse of June 19, 1936 Green checkmarkY
  7. Solar eclipse of June 8, 1937 Gray check markYg
  8. Solar eclipse of September 21, 1941 Gray check markYg
  9. Solar eclipse of February 25, 1952 Gray check markYg
  10. Solar eclipse of June 20, 1955 Gray check markYg
  11. Solar eclipse of May 30, 1965 Green checkmarkY
  12. Solar eclipse of February 16, 1980 Gray check markYg
  13. Solar eclipse of July 31, 1981 Gray check markYg
  14. Solar eclipse of January 15, 1991 Gray check markYg
  15. Solar eclipse of January 4, 1992 Green checkmarkY
  16. Solar eclipse of November 3, 1994 Gray check markYg
  17. Solar eclipse of April 29, 1995 Gray check markYg
  18. Solar eclipse of December 14, 2001 Gray check markYg
  19. Solar eclipse of June 10, 2002 Green checkmarkY
  20. Solar eclipse of May 31, 2003 Green checkmarkY
  21. Solar eclipse of April 8, 2005 Green checkmarkY
  22. Solar eclipse of June 1, 2011 Gray check markYg
jp×g 06:42, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Came here through New Page Patrol - I agree with both of you. If the article has only generic astronomical info and nothing about the observation of the eclipse itself then it doesn't deserve an article, but if you actually add newspaper reports then having a separate article makes sense. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:19, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Okay, I have expanded the ones that are Green checkmarkY, and I've found references to populate the ones that are Gray check markYg; I intend to go back through and flesh out the Gray check markYgs from the refs, but of course whoever else feels like doing this is welcome as well. jp×g 01:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Most excellent, glad to see these could be improved. Primefac (talk) 07:00, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Guatemala at the 2023 Pan American Games

Hi, the Guatemala NOC is suspended and will compete as the "Independent Athlete Team" (Equipo de atletas independientes) with the code EAI in Spanish, presumably (IAT) in English. Is it possible for this code to be setup with the Panamsports flag? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 21:45, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Also any idea how to switch the US Virgin Islands to just Virgin Islands? Here is an ex [3]. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:38, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Yes to the first, I can try to get it to it later today. I have reverted the name change, but please be prepared to discuss this change and why you feel it should stay that way if it is contested again. Primefac (talk) 06:39, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. This issue stems from the fact that in Olympic/Games contexts "Virgin Islands" seems to refer unambiguously to U.S. Virgin Islands, but in a more general context Template:Country data Virgin Islands is a disambiguation between U.S. and British Virgin Islands. I decided to resolve it by adding a new countrydata_name property to disambiguate in cases like this so that all the IOC* templates will work the same, but {{Flagg}} will use the correct disambiguated name if the "i" parameter is provided. --Habst (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

botched-up page move/hist merge

Hi. I just realised I messed up with a page move. Basically, I manually undid a page move, but I had not realised the original page move was incorrect. A user moved Wikipedia:RFR to Wikipedia:WP:RFP. I didn't catch the double prefix, and mistakenly, I moved the new redirect to Wikipedia:WP:RFR. Would you kindly delete current version of Wikipedia:RFR, and move Wikipedia:WP:RFR to Wikipedia:RFR? —usernamekiran (talk) 22:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

never mind, I did it myself. —usernamekiran (talk) 01:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Always happy to help. Primefac (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

mail

Hello, Primefac. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I think I sent it yesterday, or day before that. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:20, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I did see it, some things have kept me from responding. I meant to send a "I got this" reply but even that got sidetracked. I will respond as soon as I am capable. Primefac (talk) 14:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
no worries, I thought it got lost in spam, or got overlooked. Take your time, but one request: kindly let me know after responding, or use email function, as I am rarely checking that email these days. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Primefac/Archive_44&oldid=1185048277"