User talk:Serial Number 54129

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You're all aving a laugh, int ya?!




Thanks[edit]

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

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Special Barnstar
For literally being a special editor and a source of inspiration to me for four solid years and counting. Celestina007 (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Celestina007: I'm only grateful for one thing—that whatever happens in the future, I've been lucky enough to have had the chance to watch you grow and develop onto one of our strongest contributors—front and back of house—while not shying away from the sensitive areas needing a nuanced touch. Keep up the (very!) good work! ——Serial 18:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You know when your superiors at work make a remarkable comment about you and you literally can not at that moment articulate a proper response that mirrors your inner feelings, that’s me right now. I literally do not have the right words to use to appreciate this statement. Celestina007 (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
I would like to thank you and User:Levivich for you help on Fielding L. Wright back in 2020. Sorry for taking so long to give you a barnstar. Jon698 (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers Jon698; it was Levivich who did all the "heavy lifting", actually helping you—I just did a slow burn in the corner. Mind you, did I send you a bunch of books? Anyway, the article's looking dead good. Good work! ——Serial 18:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing[edit]

On 13 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the taxi driver in the Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing was later commended for "incredible presence of mind and bravery"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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) 00:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

DYK for Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines[edit]

On 1 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1354, the Duke of Lancaster compared his heart to the sea, a fox's hole, and a market-place? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

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

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Epic Barnstar
I'm giving you this barnstar in recognition of your impressive expansion of Concordat of Worms. I'm glad to see someone share my interest in this very deserving topic. Thank you! Modussiccandi (talk) 21:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this Modussiccandi, and also for kickstarting it in the first place. What I noticed was that the original merge (so-called) discussion comprised one editor's proposal—in which the topic's notability was actually admitted!—a "go ahead" from a <300 edit account, and no notifications to any relevant project pages whatsoever. Slam-dunk merge!
I don't want to tread on your toes, but there's a bit more I'd like to add (not much—just a few unused sources). I don't know about you, but I reckon there's an FA in there, eventually; thoughts? SN54129 12:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Congratulations on your upgrade, of course. SN54129 12:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. Please feel free to add as much content as you want! And yes, I agree the topic has lots of potential. It might be at GA level already. Is there there such a thing as a joint GA nomination? I know it exists for FAC, but I'm not sure I've seen it for GA. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure...but I know a man who might. RX3, know ye of such a beast? SN54129 13:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Not Ritchie, but yes -- co-noms at GAN level are very common. I don't believe the bot can handle them well, though (the bot in general is rather on its last legs, although someone I've promised to ping every time it comes up until he's finished >:) is working on a replacement), so they tend to be informally done by adding a "[name] is co-nominator" to the |note= section of the GAN template. The unofficial status also means they don't get registered properly on WP:WBGAN, but that can be manually done if it's any sort of concern. Vaticidalprophet 13:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vaticidalprophet: thanks for that. Sounds like you need a nightstick in your line of work  :) SN54129 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ealdgyth is your go-to expert editor on mediaeval history. In terms of GA reviews, one person has to start it, and one person has to take responsibility for closing it. Beyond that, in theory, anything goes. For example, Talk:Elham Valley Railway/GA1 was largely undertaken by other people than the reviewer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ritchie333; obvs, I'll do the Pepsi challenge with anyone on (late) medieval history—although not denying it might be a bit of a stretch call Worms late med—but it sounds like an "anything goes" GAN could be a goer! Cheers mate  :) SN54129 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeeees I really really need to get that bot going. As I have said before, the initial 80% of the work is done, it's now the latter 80%.... :) firefly ( t · c ) 14:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I mentioned them in a recent DYK, go to Queen's first album, track 5 - or side 2 track 1 if you're old school, about 3:20 in. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thank you for notifying me! I have to say that I don't feel a joint GA nomination can be justified at this point: you have contributed much more to this article than I have; all I did really is start it with the most important information. You should do the nomination on your own. Regarding the quality of the article, I think it's in good shape for the GA review: it's comprehensive, well sourced, stable, well illustrated etc. I'm glad you took this article to where it is now. Thanks and best,Modussiccandi (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Wonderful Parliament, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hog Farm (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
February songs
in friendship

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

Lovely message, thanks Gerda! SN54129 11:37, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
thank you! - stand and sing Prayer for Ukraine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Robert de Umfraville, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In appreciation[edit]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your tireless efforts to ensure that Battle of Poitiers is adequately referenced. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Dispute between Darnhall and Vale Royal Abbey, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hog Farm (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Four Award[edit]

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

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

Very kind, Bilorv, thanks very much! Now, about the fifteen Triple Crowns I'm about to log...  :) SN54129 16:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, always happy to check and give out these awards—it pales in comparison to the amount of effort people put into earning them. — Bilorv (talk) 21:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of John Minsterworth[edit]

Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, John Minsterworth, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Dennis Waterman[edit]

On 9 May 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dennis Waterman, 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. Ktin (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Save Award[edit]

On behalf of the FAR coordinators, thank you, Serial Number 54129! Your work on Óengus I has allowed the article to retain its featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. I hereby award you this Featured Article Save Award, or FASA. You may display this FA star upon your userpage. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 18:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of Richard Roose[edit]

Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Richard Roose, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 01:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Six years!

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

April songs
my story today

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

I still wonder if you see the same? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Subhead format, outstanding use of[edit]

Just wanted to give an admiring thumbs-up for your subheads for Index, A History of the. Bravo! Flaggingwill (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Henry II[edit]

Brilliant. Just brilliant. I just saw the edit you made to Henry II regarding the FA nomination, and I am impressed and astounded beyond words. The writing and academic research present brings my history-nerd eyes to tears. In all seriousness, I have been quite troubled by personal matters (as reflected by my slow activity recently), so I really appreciate the helping hand with this burdensome task. You have outdone yourself yet again. Once again, thank you so much for your assistance. If there is anything I can do for you, just let me know. Cheers, Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now then, Unlimitedlead, the last time I brought tears to someone's eyes, I was a railway ticket inspector, so I hoped I wouldn't do it again  :) but seriously, no—you wrote the article, it's a fine piece of work. An excellent summary of the historiography of the reign. It's a shame that we're (presumably?) running out of medieval English monarchs to work on, otherwise I might've dared suggest a collaboration... and thanks for your offer by the way, much appreciated! SN54129 20:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well now, there's always Henry V, the prize of all prizes. Reach out to me about that sometime if you'd like; I've been eyeing it for a while now. Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:17, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Unlimitedlead: I must apologise to both you and SN54129 for my incessant butting-in here and at your talkpage, but I've been eyeing up the triumvirate of Henry IV, V, and VI for a few weeks now too. Maybe I'm still high off the adrenaline that GA-ing Charles III gave me, but I would like to sink my teeth in to a more substantial project now; I've also taken a glance to see if I can FA Tony Blair or Oliver Cromwell, although both would involve months of work. Henry V and VI's orange-tagged articles are obviously subpar, so if you want to collaborate on one of them, Unlimitedlead? Just ask. I've the Wikipedia Library, Internet Archive, and a bookshelf of G. M. Trevelyan (amongst others) at my disposal to get the article into better shape. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 15:30, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would Oliver really be that difficult? I mean, yes it's an FAC and yes it's a bio, but most things about him seem pretty nailed down. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think so, yeah. The article, and the references especially, would need a fair bit of reworking to get it anywhere close to FA. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 16:16, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn’t even looked at the existing article, I had assumed that I would need rewriting from scratch. If there is usable material already there that should make it even easier. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Tim O'Doherty Sounds good. Just wrapped up Edward I and am almost done with Henry II, and I am still deciding who I want to take on next. I likely will not be in a position to work on anything that substantial until November (due to the WikiCup), however, and I am not sure if I want to tackle any of the Henrys just yet. I have a few other candidates up my sleeves ;) Unlimitedlead (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I think I'll start work on Henry VI over the week, as upon closer inspection it is probably the worst article on post-1066 English/British monarchs (unless you count Henry the Young King) on the site. The lead section is badly written, and the article cites YouTube, which, if I'm aspiring to FA, is doubleplusungood. May well be my first FA; if not, second (or third, depending on what happens between now and then) GA. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:02, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Tim O'Doherty: No apologies, you're always welcome here. Those are some interesting ideas! And, in happy coincidence—almost bizarrely so!—you reminded me of something sitting in my sandbox... for nearly the last five years! Incredible! Although it's looking a bit tatty of course, by today's standards. I'm not sure now why I stopped—except, perhaps if I realised how big the job would be for one editor... SN54129 15:47, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Replying to my 15:30 6/6/23 comment) - How out of date that comment is now, looking back. Very little work on Blair, a bit of work on Henry 6 and a minute amount of work on Crommers. Also, now have 7-ish GAs and an FA under my belt. Unfortunately, cannot see that I will ever "finish" my Henriad project, but never say never, I s'pose. Sorry, SN and Unlimitedlead: looks like I lied to you both. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 23:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim O'Doherty, no you didn't! If real life—or even wikilife!—circumstances change, that's not your fault, in fact, it's not a fault at all. Everything to its own time! As I said, I've done a fair bit of work on Henry VI already. Splitting the work would make it more manageable for everyone! Keep it in mind. Anyway, thanks for popping back, and apologies for my delay in replying. Hope you're well! ——Serial 11:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. SN's played a blinder on Edward III as well. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 16:29, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tim (again!) very kind, thanks! It's a job of work, to be sure, but slow and sure wins the race. Luckily I've gotta bit of time right now; it'll probably be like painting the Forth Bridge! SN54129 20:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In appreciation[edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
Because we care. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:24, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thaaaanks Gog But can you imagine me ever being anything other than helpful, polite, and respectful at FAC? Yes, I suppose you can... You know where the bodies are buried  :) Thanks for the Barnstar, I ain't had it in ages! SN54129 20:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ummm, ahhh ... No, actually I can't. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:05, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Order of Brothelyngham, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • omg congrats!!! Lourdes 10:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In this case, I think 'omg' must stand for 'oh my gog'  :) SN54129 18:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks[edit]

much Elinruby (talk) 11:42, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image on user page blocking right sidebar on timeless[edit]

As much as I like the picture :) [1]

If you can find a way to get that image to not stick until scrolling down on Timeless that would be great. As for your talk page, I could care less about the images blocking the footer, but you might want to figure out a way to get those to not stick as well.

PS I think you would make a great admin. Knowing how to serially (yes that pun was intended) handle problematic and communicate with good faith editors. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 01:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Almost there... the user page still has the sidebar buttons blocked...
Maybe make the side image collapsible so that I can hide the image when I need to access those side buttons. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 12:20, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Awesomme Assimm, I'm afraid I'm not that great, I don't really see what you mean. What image specifically? Don't you see the same sidebar on this page too? Help! Serial 12:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129 Okay I went ahead and fixed it for you. There might be an annoying button but I can't figure how to make that work a bit better. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 13:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adamson Tannehill FAC review[edit]

Hello Serial, Thanks very much for taking the time for the review of Adamson Tannehill!! I will take a good look and get back to you when I've addressed all your comments or until I stop because of a question (if okay). I'll say up front that I had a lot of trouble with the military chronology myself. His military service overlaps with most of his civic/political service, so I had to decide whether to go strictly by chronologic order or as I did and mix military with civic a little. I'll try to mix it a little, but it may also sound disjointed. Also, just quickly, the U.S. military style of using rank before a name is to use an abbreviation before his/her full name vs. using a full expansion of the rank spelling before only the surname. For example, Capt. John F. Robinson vs. Captain Robinson. Does this follow the MOS? Again, many thanks! Tfhentz (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations from the Military History Project[edit]

Military history reviewers' award
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (2 stripes) for participating in 6 reviews between January and March 2022. Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 06:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Coord discussion[edit]

Hi -- I thought I'd take this here rather than WT:FAC, though we can move it back there if you feel that's more appropriate. I'm sorry to say I'm really not sure what I said that came across as a put-down -- do you mean the comments about length of service? If so it really wasn't meant that way, and I can comment there to that effect if you'd like me to. I just meant that David is a strong candidate because he's been around (and around FAC) for a long time, so those of us who have also been around a long time have had more opportunity to get to know his editing. It certainly wasn't meant to downgrade the concerns of anyone who has been here a shorter time, or to imply any kind of seniority effect. I'm happy to apologize for any aspersion you saw in my comments -- I hope you can believe it was careless phrasing on my part rather than bad intent.

Re transparency -- I think there are pros and cons and would probably not oppose if there was a consensus in that direction -- but I think your comment on that was more general, and not really directed at me? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:11, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: NO—apologies are due from me; I misunderstood, and that's what we call ABF I think. I understand that's what you meant; re-reading it's also how it reads at first glance... second time around! I'm afraid I'm seeing spooks where there aren't any these days. I'll strike that portion of my comment at WT:FAC. Re. transparency, as you say, that's also a broader discussion for another day, and I'm certainly not holding you responsible for either its presence or absence. In fact, I'll remove those edits to save distraction from business. Thanks for bringing it here, and apologies again for misunderstanding you. I think if umbrage cost twice the price today, I'd still take it! Cheers, Serial 16:19, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Phew. Thanks for the quick reply! Glad I didn't screw up; I know I'm capable of it .... Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:28, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FAC review[edit]

Hi Serial, I have completed my responses to your review comments for FAC Adamson Tannehill. I know the article hasn't been the easiest to review. Is there more to come, or has the article been rejected? Thanks very much for your very helpful comments! Tfhentz (talk) 14:51, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tfhentz: I've replied there. Apologies for the delay. Serial 15:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:'This user misses Slim Virgin' final.png[edit]

Hello. Why do you think that the file can be on Wikipedia, but not on Commons? — Ирука13 09:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hullo. No broader appeal, I suppose, pretty much en.wp-specific, but you do what you want of course. Serial 10:19, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RSN[edit]

I'm genuinely sorry if you felt that my comments at RSN were not helpful or constructive. That was not my intention. My apologies. Banks Irk (talk) 01:29, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, overreaction on my part too. all the best, Serial 10:34, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Um, well, that is impressive! I hope you will contribute to At the Drop of a Hat, At the Drop of Another Hat, and any of the other F&S articles! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ssilvers. Actually, I'm embarrassed now that people will think I'm some sort of nutter. Or just even more so, perhaps. Are you a F&S fan yourself? I came across the song while looking at British stereotypes in another article, and one thing led to another. But it does touch on many different themes: self-perception, nationalisms, anti-nationalisms, satire, contemporary politics, the 1960s... quite good fun, but pretty rough, too. I totally get your "Um"  :)
And thanks for your edits to the page just now! Serial 17:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not particularly an F&S fan. I'm a Gilbert and Sullivan fan and have also contributed to the F&S shows since F&S a literary descendant of G&S. But I certainly never did the depth of research that you did. From a quick look at your article, I'd say that a lot of the stuff that you say about F&S generally ought to be incorporated into the other F&S articles as background there. All the best. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:54, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw the impressive canon of G&S on your page just now. We did Trial by Jury at school; I still love the line, "...in the dusk with the light behind her"! OK, good idea re. the background stuff, and thanks for the encouragement. Serial 18:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bis :)[edit]

Hi, in this edit to A Song of Patriotic Prejudice you introduced several sfn references that were not defined, adding the article to Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. If oyu could fix these it would be appreciated. DuncanHill (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you realize that you just reverted all the careful edits I made to the article today? -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:54, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't it just the {{cn}}? I addressed that with ODNB, well-spotted. Serial 18:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wasn't. Now I've gone through and tried to reinstate my edits. Please review. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Very sorry, Ssilvers, I didn't get an edit-conflict alert. Thanks for doing that though! Serial 11:19, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help with identifying a file[edit]

Hey, I noticed you uploaded this file. Would you mind providing some details about the location of the pub so that I can properly categorise the file and give it a more descriptive name when I move it to Commons? Thank you, —Matr1x-101 (Ping me when replying) {user page (@ commons) - talk} 14:09, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matr1x-101: no problem at all. It's the bar of the Railway Tavern, 131 Angel Lane, London E15 1DB (you've already got the pub exterior, courtesy of User:Oxyman), the entrance is on the corner ([2]). Hope this helps. Anything I can do, just ask! Serial 14:26, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

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

Sorry for the hassle, this is about the RfA of 0xDeadbeef. Fermiboson (talk) 08:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't see the point in opening a noticeboard filing against another editor (and, all due respect, it really was, whatever caveats swooned covered it) if one is merely going to not only close it almost immediately, but then archive it at subsequent request. It's just wasting time, tbh. But no worries, and thanks for the heads up, however unnecessary it turned out to be :) Serial 19:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, everything comes to a natural end, and with this, a 'new-if-equally-tiny-in-the-great-scheme' chapter begins. My respect for Lourdes has certainly increased—now sharing the pantheon with Edgar181 as they do—but I'm rather surprised (slightly dismayed, actually), that so many editors—including the illustrious, the great and the good—never realised the likelihood. The dogs on the street suspected this. Personally, I always assumed Quillercouch. Jusqu'ici tout va bien Wikipedia  :) Serial 12:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About the “attack page”[edit]

I was recording the apparent stance of editors of the Gilbert and Sullivan project on infoboxes to make a case about systemic bias on the project as almost all active users don’t seem terribly fond of infoboxes. Even if you disagree with the categorization that hardly constitutes an “attack”, especially in comparison with Cassianto comparing me to the Schutzstaffel. Dronebogus (talk) 20:47, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You either have not read, or have read yet still munderstand, WP:POLEMIC. It does not matter how you interpret it. It is defined by itself. And if you don't think random lists of names are creepy, then there's more recent, anglocentric examples. ——Serial 21:05, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh for god’s sake it’s about systemic bias on a WikiProject it’s not a hit list! Dronebogus (talk) 21:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it your intention to piss off as many people as possible, Dronebogus, or are you short of constructive things to do? CassiantoTalk 21:08, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Calling people nazis is constructive? Dronebogus (talk) 21:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't call you a nazi - more lies. I said that your list, which features the names of editors who dare to disagree with you on infoboxes, was akin to what the SS did to dissenters 90 years ago. I've asked you a few times now, please remove my name. CassiantoTalk 21:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your friend SandyGeorgia copied it for god knows why. Unless he agrees to delete the copy it’s pointless for me to delete it. Dronebogus (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, she is my friend, and I'll thank you kindly not to misgender her. I think you've annoyed enough people here over the last few days, you really don't want to be adding to it. Delete my name, it's a simple request. CassiantoTalk 21:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) - Why don't you just remove it yourself? Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’ll delete it, but if there’s a copy floating around it’s pointless. I’m on my phone at a restaurant so it’ll be a minute Dronebogus (talk) 21:46, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That must be some restaurant, if you feel that arguing the toss over a simple deletion is better than participating in some light dinner conversation with friends or family. Deleted it yet? CassiantoTalk 21:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not my user space. CassiantoTalk 21:47, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So? If you'd just edited it in the first place with the edit summary "Removing my name as I don't want it here" and left you could have easily avoided the unecessary kerfuffle. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you're so sure of yourself, why don't you do the collegial thing and delete it for me? Mark my words, if I interfered in someone else's user space, which I wouldn't as a mark of respect, there would be a tonne of admins lining up to take shots. CassiantoTalk 21:59, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Believe me when I tell you I couldn't give less of a toss whether your name's on some tinpot hitlist. Just baffling when some people get upset over things like this. Starting to belive there are individuals here that are simply addicted to confrontation. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:06, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I already explained it’s not even a “hit list” but it’s clear some people don’t want to listen either. Dronebogus (talk) 22:16, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The reason you don't care is because your name doesn't appear on that list; and the fact you call it a "hitlist" [sic] should tell you why this has caused me to worry and feel the need to engage in this "confrontation". CassiantoTalk 22:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can assure you I have more important things to worry about than my username appearing on some Wikipedia subpage. I don't sit in my house and fret over a conflict on a website with no bearing on my safety in real life. At the end of the day it's some letters moving on a screen. Not worth the trouble of bullying an editor into submission. As the kids say, "touch grass". Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:27, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing further to say to you. Good evening. CassiantoTalk 22:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not really evening for me anymore, dunno why you'd assume my time zone. But in any case, good day / evening / night to you too. Also, apologies to SN for having this stupid proxy war spill out onto his talk page. Best, Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn’t know what her gender was Dronebogus (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can't click onto her user page? Not a good look, assuming someone's gender based on their user name. I wonder what our friends at the WP:GGTF would have to say about that? CassiantoTalk 21:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was a mistake. Please stop finding reasons to be offended. Dronebogus (talk) 21:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't tell me what I can and cannot find offensive. This really isn't your finest hour. Still waiting for your kind confirmation that my name has disappeared from your list. CassiantoTalk 22:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This isn’t yours, either, but in any case I’ve blanked and U1’d the stupid page. Now go do these productive things you accuse me of not doing. Dronebogus (talk) 22:19, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're too kind, thank you. Serial Number 54129, as you were - sorry for the disruption. CassiantoTalk 22:26, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resource request status[edit]

Do you still need the Smith source you asked for at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request/Archive_157#A Useful Fiction: Adventures in British Democracy? If so, I can send you a pdf if you email me so that I can reply with an attachment. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Shane MacGowan[edit]

On 30 November 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Shane MacGowan, 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. Stephen 22:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editor experience invitation[edit]

Hi Serial Number :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 01:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays![edit]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Patient Zerotalk 05:49, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays[edit]

Happy Holidays
Hello, I want to be the first to wish you the very best during the holidays. I know that we may not have been on the best terms in the past, but I offer you peace in 2024! Lightburst (talk) 18:34, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of Thomas de la More[edit]

Congratulations, Serial Number 54129! The article you nominated, Thomas de la More, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!


Have a great Christmas, and may 2024 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls, vandals or visits from Krampus!

Cheers

SchroCat (talk) 09:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:A possible consequence of biting.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:A possible consequence of biting.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Queen of Hearts ❤️ (she/they 🎄 🏳️‍⚧️) 01:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfA[edit]

Would you mind terribly deleting the first two sentences of this comment? Goes a bit too far, me thinks. Merry Christmas though. – bradv 05:55, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year too. :) – bradv 06:02, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bradv: Well, OK, as you wish. I am forced to remain patronized, then! :) no worries, and apologies. Still: I've been paddled over the occasional oppose before, but this one can pound sand. Happy Christmas and New Year's to you and yours! ——Serial 06:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah this is quite ridiculous, and I really don't blame you for responding the way you did. But in the interest of avoiding even further ridiculousness, I appreciate your prompt response. – bradv 06:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbs up!![edit]

You were mentioned on another talk page, which I hope you know about. I believe you're doing the right thing. Coming from the Bronx, animosity is the way of life and I've come to know my share of do**** bags ... and you're definitely doing the right and moral thing. I felt the same way when HMIJ was getting in. Be free and say what you want, God bless you! Always here in your corner, Bringingthewood (talk) 01:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bringingthewood: Well. Thanks! No, I didn't know I was "mentioned on another talk page", but as the fella said, if there's one thing worse than being talked about, it's being not talked about  :)
I remember HMiJ's RfA had an odd oppose that I called out, something to do with that? In any case, judge a man by the quality of his enemies, I settle for nothing less than admins and arbs nowadays. "It's purely business, Sonny"  :) thanks for the message; good to hear! ——Serial 16:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree 100%. Double-Big Thumbs up!! Have a Happy New Year ... to you and yours. Regards, Bringingthewood (talk) 00:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Season's greetings[edit]


Christmas postcard featuring Santa Claus using a zeppelin to deliver gifts, by Ellen Clapsaddle, 1909
~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~
Hello Serial Number 54129: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas1}} to send this message.
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
[reply]

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 23[edit]

Reader[edit]

"Old school villain" sounds... informal, and a bit too much of an opinion. How would you feel about "gangster" or "criminal" ? DS (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DragonflySixtyseven: It always amazes me, the leaps that Wikipedia allows us to make, and so quickly... I mean, who would have thought one could get from Ababio IV in draftspace to Brian Reader in mainspace like that...?  ;)  :) ——Serial 19:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
With a quick stop at "hm, don't recognize that name, wonder who that is, let me look at their contributions", yes. DS (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Quite! Anyway, combined with SchroCat mentioning it on the article talk page, your suggestion here, and me knowing it would be eventually moved but preferring to write the thing than get bogged down in discussions, I think we can take it that Brian Reader (criminal) has probably established consensus... ——Serial 19:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year[edit]

Happy New Year!
Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year![edit]

Happy New Year!
Hello Serial Number 54129:


Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Come out to Black and Tans, and check my edits if you can[edit]

Hi Serial,

I took your advice to edit the page to add the views of scholars on the definitions they use for what a Black and Tan actually is without waiting for Leabharlanna Éireann. This went down like, well, a request for a pint of black and tan at a SF Ardfheis.

I'm not getting much sense at the talk page, so I wondered if you could have a look and see if anything I've added looks unbalanced, and maybe edit it if it does.

All the best for the New Year. Boynamedsue (talk) 10:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac opened[edit]

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/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 30, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/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 17:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"curb kissers"[edit]

What kind of thing causes someone to call people "curb kissers" at a GA review? I would advise you to strike this comment. jp×g🗯️ 12:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the term refers to folks who drive too close to the curb and scrape their wheels. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chris is, of course, absolutely correct. JPxG, on yer bike. And don't don't scrape that curb on your way out! ——Serial 16:10, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"On yer bike"? SN behaving normanly... Tim O'Doherty (talk) 16:20, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Showing our age, Tim...?  :) ——Serial 16:33, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Still celebrating the repeal of the Corn Laws. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Editor's Barnstar
I like ur userpage. happy editing! Babysharkboss2!! (Hells Bells (Talk Page btw)) 14:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024[edit]

RfA religion comment[edit]

I encourage you to strike your description of a good faith editor's comments or religious values as "divisive and exclusionary superstition" found here. I believe it attacks a living person. I also strongly disagree with the rest of your comment (and am an atheist) but I believe you are entitled to express an opinion about how RfA should work. — Bilorv (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jumping on others' coat-tails is not a good look; it is certainly bad for the posture. ——Serial 18:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stopped participating at RfA years ago once it stopped being a legitimate vote, so if you're offended that a bad rationale stands on par with a good rationale: it doesn't. Our editor cohort often differ in what they value in admins and some of us would decry those rationales. If a Wikipedian supported (or opposed) based upon some tribalism, you might bristle but condemning that identification slanders everyone in that group. As you don't necessarily know who all on this platform is some variation of monotheist, speaking of religion in such divisive terms can only further alienate you.Chris Troutman (talk) 18:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, CT, wise words indeed; however, I think it was after about a year that the sudden realization hit me that alienation, aggravation, extemporization and, frankly, near-excommunication were either an inherent component to the project or an inevitable consequence of participation in it. Cheers, ——Serial 18:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It took me like three years to realize that. I don't know if that makes me an optimist or just slow. Levivich (talk) 18:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, first time I've seen a support reply moved to the talk page, quite the achievement! :-D Levivich (talk) 18:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Very droll. And unfortunately even more accurate. Thanks Levivich. Law of unintended consequences, and all that, I guess  :) ——Serial 18:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, IMHO "God made us imperfect so it's OK to make mistakes" is some good opium for the masses. Why call that out? That is objectively a better RFA vote rationale than many others (including the classic "they made this mistake once"). If it's good morals, who cares if it comes from superstition? My philosophy is to save the opprobrium for the "God said to kill you" types. That is the bad opium. Levivich (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of all the inflammatory anti-opiates that discussion needed, it was me mentioning opium. Now, that would have been burning oil on troubled waters. Would a quote from Dawkins have gone down any better, I wonder. (I assume not, since if there's one thing people can't seem to live without, it's the opportunity to get incensed over something.) ——Serial 19:11, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 214, February 2024[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's kinda ironic that the first relatively peaceful message left here this week should be devoted to, err, war. I mean, who needs the New Lodge Road when you've got RfA :D Vive la différence! ——Serial 19:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

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

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
28 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Eleanor Neville, Countess of Northumberland (talk) Add sources
37 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Thomas Holland, 1st Duke of Surrey (talk) Add sources
26 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Thomas de Mowbray, 4th Earl of Norfolk (talk) Add sources
110 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Albert Spaggiari (talk) Add sources
397 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Bank robbery (talk) Add sources
436 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C October 1997 Loomis Fargo robbery (talk) Add sources
252 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Buster (film) (talk) Cleanup
98 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: GA Proactiv (talk) Cleanup
84 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Pandaemonium (film) (talk) Cleanup
426 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Thérèse Coffey (talk) Expand
10 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Knock Knock Live (talk) Expand
630 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Phil Wickham (talk) Expand
696 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Wimpy (restaurant) (talk) Unencyclopaedic
8 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Epitaph for George Dillon (talk) Unencyclopaedic
197 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Computer-assisted translation (talk) Unencyclopaedic
14 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Swansea Bay and West Wales Metro (talk) Merge
77 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Beaver eradication in Tierra del Fuego (talk) Merge
15 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: GA 1986 Pacific hurricane season (talk) Merge
119 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Shoehorn (talk) Wikify
64 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: FA John Neville, 1st Marquess of Montagu (talk) Wikify
128 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Train robbery (talk) Wikify
3 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Paul-Alexis Mellet (talk) Orphan
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Alex Sander (talk) Orphan
6 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Averroes International School, Dhaka (talk) Orphan
103 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Kellie Shirley (talk) Stub
22 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Michael de la Pole, 3rd Earl of Suffolk (talk) Stub
20 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub The Gold: The Inside Story (talk) Stub
10 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Wensley Clarkson (talk) Stub
201 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start The Curse (British TV series) (talk) Stub
106 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Colton Simpson (talk) Stub

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of administrators without tools[edit]

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

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sex Pistols FAR[edit]

Hi, long time no talk. I think you are being waited for here for a sign off. Hope all is well, no news here except that Damo Suzuki died yesterday so I am sad. Here is a tune in return [3]. Ceoil (talk) 04:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ceoil I must've let that drop away. Yes, shame about Damo. Hope he had enough Vitamin C! Good tune that... Bring on the CAN-style drum solos. :) ——Serial 11:15, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surprised to read that he spent a few weeks in Ireland before absconding to Cologne. <raises a pint of Guinness to me could have been mucker. RIP>. Ceoil (talk) 11:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just played Yard Act three times on the trot. Fckn hell they're a rattling bunch! Great find. ——Serial 11:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah same here, they are amazing, that bass sound...and the vocal trawl...wow. This is a top ten of all time favourite [4]. Ceoil (talk) 11:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter[edit]

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:@Bureaucrats[edit]

Template:@Bureaucrats has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. — xaosflux Talk 16:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024[edit]

Notification of administrators without tools[edit]

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

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inter Milan - RN[edit]

Hi, I welcome the tidying up exercise you have just done. I need to ask if it is ok to amend my initial oppose to provide the more detailed policy references I have made in one of the hatted sections? The user concerned is relatively new and an obviously enthusiastic football only editor. I have encouraged him to look at the previous "no change" rationales and wider perspective but I'm not convinced he has done so. For the benefit of ensuring visibility of the associated policy / guidelines for other contributors to this RN, can I move the relevant text currently under the final hidden section to my original "O"? Advice appreciated, please. Leaky caldron (talk) 16:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leaky caldron, thanks for message. First things first: you don't need my advice or permission for anything. If you think it was over the top (bathwater/baby together), then adjust, reduce or revert my hatting as you see fit. Absolutely no hard feelings. You did a good job trying to get them up to speed, though I suspect IDHT might apply. Nowt wrong with effervescence. Perhaps it's been too long since I was effervescent about anything! Happy Sunday  :) ——Serial 16:15, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've been around long enough, I should know. But I'm a bit more thoughtful and less confrontational these days. Cheers. Leaky caldron (talk) 16:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch  :) ——Serial 16:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inter Milan[edit]

@Serial Number 54129 @Leaky caldron I accept that there is consensus opposing the move, so I will stop requesting it. Thanks fir your advice and contributions; kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 18:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification[edit]

FYI, I think you misunderstood my close (in which case I may not have written it clearly enough). I did not intend to imply that there was no consensus for anything - in fact, I saw a rough consensus to admonish Nihonjoe and remind all editors of our policies on COI editing. My closing note was intended to *be* that admonishment. When I wrote, "There is no consensus for any further action here", I meant action beyond admonishment. —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter[edit]

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks[edit]

Apparently you don’t know what a personal attack is. That’s unfortunate. Guy (help! - typo?) 00:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate?[edit]

Not for me, pal. I'm glad to see you got up the courage to comment after the thread was closed, but better late than never, I suppose. In the meantime, feel free to get on yer bike and move along—your presence here is wholly unhelpful. Your advice as an editor is about as useful as it ever was as an admin. Don't post here again, you know the drill. ——Serial 01:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 24[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024[edit]

Recusal?[edit]

Hi, it's been nearly 36 hours and nobody else has mentioned it, including any of the potential parties. On what grounds do you think I should recuse? Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:48, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Serial Number 54129,

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/Conflict of interest management. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

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

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
1,069 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Great Train Robbery (1963) (talk) Add sources
734 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B 1996 (talk) Add sources
159 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Bakarkhani (talk) Add sources
423 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Soan papdi (talk) Add sources
46 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Knightsbridge Security Deposit robbery (talk) Add sources
48 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Michael McKell (talk) Add sources
385 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Humphrey Ker (talk) Cleanup
6,245 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Amsterdam (talk) Cleanup
471 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Hypnotherapy (talk) Cleanup
7 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Fire Services (talk) Expand
12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Battle of the Ailette (talk) Expand
6,393 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Super Bowl (talk) Expand
5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Philippa Neville (talk) Unencyclopaedic
1,994 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Chipotle Mexican Grill (talk) Unencyclopaedic
88 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Beary (talk) Unencyclopaedic
85 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Apotropaic mark (talk) Merge
107 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Sons of Iraq (talk) Merge
646 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Sobel operator (talk) Merge
28 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C George Bain (academic) (talk) Wikify
16 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service (talk) Wikify
59 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Pope Gregory VIII (talk) Wikify
5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Gilles Ramade (talk) Orphan
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Aleksei Rogachyov (talk) Orphan
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Benjamin Fung (talk) Orphan
18 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub FocusWriter (talk) Stub
89 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Keema matar (talk) Stub
17 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start My Life (Mosley autobiography) (talk) Stub
30 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Lloyd Woolf (talk) Stub
17 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Amelia Marshall (talk) Stub
18 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Mangalore taluk (talk) Stub

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of administrators without tools[edit]

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

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 215, March 2024[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The grass[edit]

is always greener . . . . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I[edit]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

  • Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
  • Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
  • Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
  • Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
  • Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
  • Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
  • Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
  • Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
  • Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
  • Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
  • Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
  • Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
  • Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
  • Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
  • Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
  • Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
  • Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General[edit]

@Serial Number 54129 I hope you will be less aggressive and as kind and respectful in your comments to a middle school boy like me in future. I assume good faith and favour the retention of the article Where is Kate? for the longer term. In any case, it was I who brought her article to GA status and also garnered more views for her hook than any other in January, coinciding with her 42nd birthday. Regards MSincccc (talk) 17:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc. My dear fellow! I do apologise! But please; where was I aggressive to you on that page? I admit to agreeing with the Ignatius chap, but that was over an important issue of clarity.
Although now you mention her article's GA status, it seems that @Aintabli has noticed a similar pattern to myself regarding your occasionally excessive claims regarding 'authorship' of an article—e.g.,—which often seem not to equate to actual 'involvement' in it. Anyway. All the best, and keep up the good work! ——Serial Number 54129 17:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I have 4.2% of the article attributed to myself and have been actively editing it for the past 2 years. What Aintabli mentioned at the time was relevant as I was then not among the top five authors, but now I am. I have contributed to 5% of William's article being its fourth highest author. Anyone who has a place among the top 5 of a page in terms of authorship is a major contributor as such. Also I am working actively on that page. Its not possible for everyone who actively edits a page to have 10% or more of the article under his authorship. Hence the fact that I am among the top 5 authors is justified. I honestly appreciate any changes as long as they have the support of the community. Well lets hope to collaborate in future and work towards quality and accuracy. Regards and yours faithfully, MSincccc (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TPSs: (Having let the infernal AfD close first) the aggression MSincccc suggests was aimed at him must refer to either my saying Absolutely, IgnatiusofLondon, and thanks for pointing that out—pretty bland!—or the deboulding that went with it, a purely stylistic alteration which neither refactored MSincccc's words nor attacked his views. Curious, and verging on the aspersive. ——Serial Number 54129 12:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129 Let's bury the hatchet and move on. Apologies for any unintentional hurt caused by my words. Let's hope to collaborate in the future. Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Perihan Çınar[edit]

Hi! May I kindly ask you what happened to my DYK-nom? CeeGee 07:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have a nice day[edit]

I have some serious doubts about that editor. Their article creations smack of promotional editing, and--you can't see this, sorry--they also moved highly promotional drafts like Sani Usman Kunya into mainspace. Drmies (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]