User talk:Lankiveil/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RfC on "No paid editing for Admins" at WT:COI

I've relisted an RfC that was run at WT:Admin in Sept. 2015. It is at Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest#Concrete proposal 3 as there are a number of similar proposals going on at the same place. Better to keep them together. Smallbones(smalltalk) 04:26, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Administrator changes

Amortias • Deckiller • BU Rob13
Ronnotel • Islander • Chamal N • Isomorphic • Keeper76 • Lord Voldemort • Shereth • Bdesham • Pjacobi

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
  • Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
  • A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:

  • Scotland Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
  • European Union Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
  • Japan 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
  • South Australia Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 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 equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.

You've got email :)

Hey there! Sorry for writing in English. I just sent you an email about your participation in the Training Modules pilot testing. Thanks! Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 09:23, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
@JSutherland (WMF): English? Here on English Wikipedia, I suppose that's quite all right ;-). Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC).
Serves me right for using MassMessage to send to English-speaking folks... Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 09:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Australians editors speak english? you have to be kidding... JarrahTree 14:05, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Anseo i Queensland is fearr linn an Ghaeilge a úsáid, chomh maith magadh díreach. Kerry (talk) 01:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
@Kerry Raymond: Is fearr le Ghaeilgeoirí "Google Translate"! ;) Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:32, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ali Eren Balikel is not an advertising or promotion.. He is a real man and one of the successful people who inspires Turkish people in entrepreneurship!!

I don't really understand how you come with that idea (Ali Eren Balikel is advertising or promotion). Please relocate the page as he has 2 Turkish restaurants (just like Mr Huseyin Ozer who has a Wikipedia page for a long time) and really inspires Turkish people in entrepreneurship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Fol (talk • contribs) 04:24, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@Dr Fol: The article as it was written not only did not contain any references from external sources, it was also very promotional in tone. Phrases like "(his new restaurant is) expected to be a new success story with its magnificent interior design" don't belong in a Wikipedia article. This doesn't mean that Balikel is not a successful or nice person, or that his restaurants are not good places to eat. But articles here need to stick to a neutral point of view in describing their subjects, no matter how much individual authors might personally admire them. Lankiveil (speak to me) 06:48, 4 March 2017 (UTC).

Ok, I got that, I am again preparing the article about him via using newspaper sources and will submit it to you first. Please review it and give your opinion about it so that I wont come across with the same situation again. Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Fol (talk • contribs) 14:57, 6 March 2017 (UTC) Please check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Eren_Bal%C4%B1kel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Fol (talk • contribs) 16:34, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hey there! I just sent you an email regarding the Training Modules pilot. (Long story short, it closes on March 12!) :) Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 21:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Heads up...

You're involved in this AN/I. Laurdecl talk 09:27, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

GiveWell

Thanks for your intervention in the DRV. Could you restore the talk page? — Charles Stewart (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@Chalst: No problems, done here: Talk:GiveWell. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:12, 13 March 2017 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 March 12

Since you closed the Kekistan DRV as Consensus is against the creation of a redirect, could you remove the existing redirect? Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:48, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

@RoySmith: Oops, thanks. Must have been distracted by something shiny. Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC).

Lord North

Hello Lankiveil. Please can you reconsider your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lord North (disambiguation) and perhaps relist the discussion, instead of closing it as "no consensus"? More editors were in favour of deletion that not and various policies were referred to that effect. Thanks.--Nevé–selbert 03:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

@Neve-selbert: The grounds advanced for deletion were purely subjective, and there was not a clear consensus agreeing with you. We do not decide such things by majority vote. I did not relist because the discussion was open for much more than the required period of time, had received plenty of input from a large number of editors, and there is little evidence that kicking the can down the road again will move the discussion closer to agreement. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:00, 19 March 2017 (UTC).
I would argue that the grounds advanced for retention were equally as subjective. Very well then, I get the gist of what you're saying nonetheless.--Nevé–selbert 12:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I am extremely dissatisfied with your closing of the AfD, I can't pretend that I'm not. Is there any way I can request a closure review?--Nevé–selbert 14:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm still not really clear on what you are dissatisfied with, other than not getting the result you hoped for? I'm open to possibly changing the outcome if there's something in the discussion that I missed. Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:43, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
More !votes were in favour of deletion than were in favour of keep. Wikipedia policies were also cited more frequently on the delete side, yet the outcome of "no consensus" is pretty much synonymous with "keep" and thus the whole thing just feels unfair and unjust. I truly deplore that dab page, I gave several arguments as to why.--Nevé–selbert 07:06, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I don't know what else to add that I haven't already. These discussions are not closed based on a majority opinion, they are based on a clear consensus emerging (see WP:CLOSEAFD for the exact wording). AS far as the arguments made, I don't think the argument you make is as strong as you make it out to be. While there were low-content !votes on both sides of this discussion, I think that User:PBS and User:Narky Blert both offer credible rebuttals of your rationale and make decent arguments as to why WP:2DABS does not apply. Because it's not open and shut either way, and it's a subjective question rather than an objective question (as it would be if it were a hoax, for instance), I have no option but to close as "no consensus". I'm sorry if that wasn't the result you wanted, but it's only a single disambig page and a "no consensus" is not the same as "keep", so I would encourage you to continue discussion with the other parties on the talk page if you really think it is not helpful to readers. Having reviewed the discussion for a third time I'm comfortable with my close. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:07, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

Thanks for the heads up Lankiveil. In fact my issue is not directly with the dab page but with the clutter in the hatnote of article about the primary subject. Having a dab page allows for the minimum sized hat note that readers unfamiliar with Wikipedia page layout have to read before the get to the subject matter. Without the dabpage one has to add an additional sentence to the hatnote about Baron Lord, and that is not particularly relevant for most readers. I think that editors as a general rule (like experts in many areas, view their area of expertise differently from the general public -- just go drinking with people who who work in a hospital!) view articles differently from general readers. This is exemplified by the support of some/many editors for a plethora of maintenance templates that have nothing to do with the subject of an article and everything to do with improving articles. -- PBS (talk) 13:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 21

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • #1lib1ref 2017
  • Wikipedia Library User Group
  • Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
  • Spotlight: Library Card Platform

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedian in Residence BoF at Wikimania 2017

Hello!

My name is David Alves (User:Horadrim~usurped), and I'm an Wikipedian in Residence at RIDC NeuroMat (User:Horadrim). I've reach your contact through the Wikimedian in residence page in Outreach. As you may know, Wikimania 2017 is coming! I am here because, as a fellow WiR, I believe this would be a great opportunity for us to share experiences, discuss difficulties and exchange solutions, creating a community among us capable of supporting in other projects that would benefit from residents. In that sense, I have submitted a proposal of a Birds of a Feather activity to Wikimania that you can check out here. I hope to count with your support in this project and would like to invite you to join us if you participate in Wikimania. In case of any doubts, please feel free to contact me, either in my talk pages or by e-mail at david.alves(at)outlook.com.

Thank you very much! ‎Horadrim~usurped (talk) 00:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@Horadrim~usurped: This looks like an interesting meeting and I'm sure it'll be informative, although obviously different WIR positions end up doing very different things depending on what the goals of their employer are. Unfortunately I won't be able to make it all the way out to Montréal this year, but I wish you the best of success with this session. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC).

Lord North cont.

Hello again Lankiveil. Would you mind clarifiying (with respect to your closure of the AfD) whether or not there may have been consensus to remove the listing of those named "Lord North" at the AfD? I have tried to remove them in this edit (directing users to Baron North#Barons North (1554)). My edits were reverted (most recently yesterday) by a user who was involved in the deletion discussion (arguing for keep), so I was just wondering whether or not you can broker a compromise here. Given that there were more !votes for delete, this may have been why that was.--Nevé–selbert 13:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@Neve-selbert: I've had a look and I don't think that that question was addressed enough to say there was any consensus either way. I am seeing a disappointing lack of discussion at Talk:Lord North (disambiguation) about how to proceed, and slapping questionable tags on articles and making edits that you know do not have consensus are not going to help, and are only going to entrench those that disagree with you. I suggest using the talk page to draft an RFC, with questions jointly drafted by yourself and those that want to keep the page in its current form to ensure fairless, and seek wider opinion from the community. Without the Sword of Damocles that is AFD hanging over it, you might get some more useful feedback. But you also need to accept that consensus might not develop in the way that you want, and walk away from this article if it doesn't. You can't win them all. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC).
OK, I'll think about launching an RfC in a little while, and I'll accept any eventual outcome. Thanks for the kind reply.--Nevé–selbert 10:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
@Neve-selbert: No problems, and best of luck. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC).

May 2017 WikiCup newsletter

The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:

  • Scotland Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
  • Japan 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
  • South Australia Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
  • Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

Administrator changes

added Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
removed Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Korea Kent Foreign School

I think I'm counting 12 or 13 to 5 here. Both sides have valid arguments AFAICT. Would you still do this at 12 to 1? 12 to 2? I'm not sure how that isn't an overturn. Hobit (talk) 05:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Also, are you claiming that the DRV concluded the sources found in the AfD and/or the ones found in the DRV aren't enough to support an article? If so, I'd really like to know how you reached that conclusion. If not, I'd like to hear why you disregarded them. Hobit (talk) 05:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Finally, I just noticed you !voted in the underlying RfC. Hobit (talk) 05:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I make it 13-6 at the most generous. A "no consensus" is a no consensus and I don't believe it is reasonable to draw any conclusions from the discussion in either direction. Yes, I agree that both sides make some reasonable arguments which is why I suggest a proper discussion on this rather than a time limited one at AFD/DRV. If we hammer out a consensus there to reverse the deletion then so be it. Unfortunately at this point everyone is wikilawyering and talking past each other rather than coming together to try and solve the underlying issue. Lankiveil (speak to me) 08:24, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
Three things I'll ask (mostly again again):
  • That's still about 70%. Given those same arguments, what % would you feel you'd need to close that to overturn?
  • Are you claiming that the DRV concluded the sources found in the AfD and/or the ones found in the DRV aren't enough to support an article? If so, I'd really like to know how you reached that conclusion. If not, I'd like to hear why you disregarded them.
  • You obviously have an opinion about SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Do you think it a good idea for someone who !voted on that to close this DRV? Hobit (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Hobit (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Just briefly as I don't have time for meatspace reasons this evening for a verbose explanation:
  • I don't consider ~70% to be a consensus in a hotly contested issue like this, unless there's a clear disparity in the strength of argument.
  • As I said earlier, as a "no consensus" I don't see that the DRV could conclude anything authoritatively in either direction.
  • If you're looking for an admin with no opinions on anything you'll be looking for awhile. I try not to resent the implication that a vote made in good faith in an RFC months ago would somehow interfere with my ability to neutrally judge consensus as an administrator.
Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC).
  • Meatspace pretty busy for me too, sorry I let this sit.
    70% is enough for a clear promotion at RfA these days. And frankly sources are always the better argument. There was no serious debate about most of them that weren't in the AfD. Unless you consider "not in English" to be a serious argument.
    I'm assuming based on this you wouldn't consider it an inappropriate recreation to recreate it with the new sources. But let me know if that's not the case.
    And yes, I do feel this would have been better left to someone who hadn't weighted in on the underlying RfC. On either side.
Hobit (talk) 19:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobit: Normally I prefer some sort of consensus to be gained before overturning a previous consensus, but in this case I see there's been a bit of blowback recently on the notion of using DRV as a forum for that, even given point #3 of its purpose, which I think that would come under. So I don't know how you'd actually go about that. Certainly if you feel you can address in good faith the objections made by those who wanted the article deleted I'd say to have a crack at it. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:33, 27 May 2017 (UTC).

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Possible G4

Hi Lankiveil! One of many AfD's you closed was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Panther-Yates. Today pops up Donald yates which is about the same person, so I'm wondering if you can use your sorcery to see if this is a G4 case or whether that's new content. Thanks! CrowCaw 21:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Crow: Both articles look to be abot the same person, but they're also clearly different articles. Frankly, the one that was deleted at AFD is better written than the current incarnation, but as they're not substantially identical I don't think that G4 would apply. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:34, 6 June 2017 (UTC).


strategy

At this stage I am in process of writing a report about discussions in Australia about https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017 the cycle 2 of the broader wikimedia strategy -

You may well have responded elsewhere - but if you at all interested - not the slightest bother if you are not - please feel free to contact on or off wiki - thanks - JarrahTree 05:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: It was good to catch up with you the other day. Would it be better to provide any feedback directly to you as part of the WMAU submission or are you just encouraging me to participate generally? Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC).

Any thoughts that might have come to mind since conversation - or even just a recapitulation of where you are thinking re the issues

can be simple or whatever you want - best to me if possible - thanks for answering JarrahTree 09:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Kekistan

I see that you closed the DRV on Kekistan and Republic of Kekistan, I do understand why, given the meme associated with it and the hoax articles that have been made there. However, there are now some third party sources that support the notability of this topic. However, I am not suggesting that we create an article at those locations but rather that a redirect be placed there leading to Pepe_the_Frog#Kekistan, as the Kekistan meme is a submeme of the Pepe the Frog meme. If you could put a redirect headed in that direction (and probably protect the redirect from meddling with indefinite semi protection or something similar) that would be great. Thanks. — InsertCleverPhraseHere 12:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

  • @Insertcleverphrasehere: Normally if this were an endorsed deletion of an article, I'd suggest that a protected redirect as you've suggested would be a good idea. But that discussion came out specifically against a redirect for this and I feel it probably should be re-discussed rather than have me unilaterally reverse that decision (even though I think the SPLC source is an improvement). I guess DRV is probably the best place to do that, in the absence of any other good location. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC).
Thanks, I'll get onto it when I have time. — InsertCleverPhraseHere 00:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
@Insertcleverphrasehere: I've listed it at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 12. -- zzuuzz (talk) 07:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Invalid A7 Scripps Center

Hi. For my own information, is there a valid speedy deletion criteria for an article about a building which makes no claim of notability, or should I just PROD them? Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: Not really, sometimes you can get them on the basis of promotional/no content, but in this case there is enough there to get it past those. PROD is probably your best bet, I'd say. Lankiveil (speak to me) 14:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC).
OK, thanks very much. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

  • New and expanded research accounts
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

AN/I

As you participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive957#Godsy back to Wikihounding - how to stop it?, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposing IBAN between Godsy and Legacypac. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 03:54, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter

The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

added Happyme22 • Dragons flight
removed Zad68

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
  • A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
  • Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:56, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Lankiveil. You have new messages at Talk:Farmdrop.
Message added 21:51, 30 July 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please see the talk page. Since you closed the recent AfD discussion, I am requesting a review of the article, which I feel has a neutral tone at this time. Another user keeps blanking content with copy/paste rationales, but won't discuss on the talk page as per WP:BRD. North America1000 21:51, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

Administrator changes

added Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
removed Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Woodward Camp

I noticed that the article was recently deleted today. Is it too late to reopen the discussion? I actually found a lot of sources on the subject and I believe that it is notable. Sources: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 00:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Woodward Camp

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Woodward Camp. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 03:14, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Your comment at Gary Renard

Your post at Gary Renard gives me pause.  Yes, I know that you know that I am well familiar with the DRV process.  The RfC stated the policy.  It seems unlikely that you think that Iridiscent has the authority to define for DRV their workload.  So even if you think DRV should start handling content disputes, how do explain supporting a decision without authority?  Thank you, Unscintillating (talk) 01:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

I think that the perspective that the consensus reached at "Artices for Discussion" is nonbinding for some reason is an unorthodox one, and as the almost universal response on that talk page shows, one that is not widely accepted by the rest of the community. Lankiveil (speak to me) 00:20, 20 August 2017 (UTC).
I still don't know where you are going with this.  Of course, AfD is not "Articles for discussion", which is a proposal listed at WP:Perennial proposals.  If AfD content decisions are binding, that would bind closers into subsequent content disputes, which would seem to turn AfD into the biggest bureaucracy on Wikipedia.  Note that Alex Shih was pinged and declined to close the RfC.  Unscintillating (talk) 05:48, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 23

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017

  • Library card
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
  • Bytes in brief

Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 September newsletter

Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

Administrator changes

added Nakon • Scott
removed Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
  • Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
  • In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

  • Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Augie March has been nominated for discussion

Category:Augie March, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Should I take this subject to Deletion Review?

On March 18, 2017, after the deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Normani Kordei, you redirected Normani Kordei to Fifth Harmony (by the way I recently refined the target to the specific section on Kordei, that is recent). You rejected arguments based solely on the prospect that she could become notable through Dancing with the Stars per WP:CRYSTAL, as you rightly should have.

But now, it seems that Kordei has come in 3rd in DWTS and seems to have received a significant amount of independent coverage as a result of her high-profile participation and her reaching the finals. She is now a much more high profile figure in general. I think this may be grounds for restoration, Should I take this to Wikipedia:Deletion review? — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  03:25, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

  • @Mr. Guye: Can you show me some of the best of these sources? If they are substantially about Kordei herself then I would be willing to restore the article to draft space for you to update and bring back to mainspace. If they're just brief mentions of how she got third place, then perhaps not. Lankiveil (speak to me) 03:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC).
  • You know what? Never mind. Because of the nature of entertainment in the U.S., many sources are unreliable and what RS there are associated her w/ Fifth Harmony or someone she has begun to collaborate with, Khalid. I'm not particularly interested this subject, so I would not be the person you'd ask to update it. Forget about the deletion review thing. But I still think there are possibilities in the Normani Kordei subject. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  03:55, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Lankiveil, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 21:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

AfD Normani Kordei discussion page

Am I a bad person or something? I'm messaging you back responding politely and just feed back and mutual understanding. The article Normani Kordei was activated and published by another user then weeks later it was deleted after a conscious decision was reached by many users. However, in the future post the first redirect she has made massive media coverage and has been featured in many different things they go as follows.

  • Competing on a dancing competition show placing it to the finals with a high profiled ballroom dancer.
  • Interviewed on TV, Talk Shows, Sitcoms, Magazines, Newspapers and different articles on the web.
  • She has been featured on the cover of Magazines disucssing Bullying that she has experienced on the internet the subject became so prominent that she was interviewed on talk shows covering the subject. She was featured on the CyberSmile Foundation.
  • She has released a couple of dance videos and singles post the deletion/redirect of the articles and is in the process of working on future projects with an R&B artist.
  • She is a Global Ambassador for the American Cancer Society Foundation. A huge foundation thats supported by many famous figures and a huge cause talked about.
  • She is the only member of the group Fifth Harmony that has competed and appeared on another reality competition show other than The X Factor.
  • I know I'm comparing her to other members but I feel like in this particular subject it's fair to mention. Members (Camila Cabello and Lauren Jauregui) have released music as well as Kordei. She has released the same amount of music as the other two members have. Her media coverage is different than them but her coverage is still notable and sourced. The difference is the two members I mentioned above have articles but her's is redirected.

On a side note before she competed on The X Factor. She received media coverage and was feature in HBO short films Book and Young Dumb & Broke. Also, mentioning she was a competitive gymnast and competed on the national level. She has competed in beauty pageants and entered the Miss Texas Pageant making it all the way to the finals but dropped out in order to compete on The X Factor. Her article was going to be created back then in 2012 but was deleted when she was put into the group. It's now 2017 and her article is still redirected on a side note her AfD was closed back in March and has been closed for about 6 months at least.

You have an opinion, I have an opinion as well as everyone else has an opinion. Tell me why her article is still closed after all these years? Is she not notable and worthy enough? Is the AfD too recent and we need to wait time until it's activated again? What does this page need into be qualified for Wikipedia standards? I'm asking you and others on ways on how to make the page better and coming up reliable sources to broaden her page. Instead of reverting why not enhance it? Also, maybe explain on why the artist is notable too. I'm asking nicely and just for concerns to work with me. I promise I'm not a terrible person I just want a better understanding. Welcometothenewmillenium (talk) 00:20, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

@Welcometothenewmillenium: I don't think you're a bad person, I would just like to see some evidence of this massive amount of coverage of Normani Kordei that I'm told exists, but nobody has ever been able to show me, apart from a list of articles that mention her in an offhand sort of way. As I noted at Talk:Normani Kordei, I don't have any issue with any of my fellow admins restoring this, once there is a reasonable chance that the restored article will actually stick. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC).

http://abc.go.com/shows/dancing-with-the-stars/cast/normani-kordei http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/dwts-normani-kordei-harmony-dealing-horrific-cyberbullying-carry/story?id=47427362 http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/television/7808551/dancing-with-the-stars-finale-winner http://modelistemagazine.com/model-diaries-harmony-normani-kordei/ https://www.cancer.org/our-partners/normani-kordei.html http://ew.com/music/2017/09/26/fifth-harmony-singer-normani-kordei-acs/ http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/normani-kordei-fights-racist-online-bullies-w443621 http://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/normani-kordei-reveals-her-favorite-dwts-performance-so-far-w483286 https://www.teenvogue.com/story/normani-kordei-cyber-bullied-twitter http://www.eonline.com/news/849473/normani-kordei-reveals-why-she-opened-up-about-cyber-bullying-on-dancing-with-the-stars-it-s-a-very-scary-thing http://www.essence.com/celebrity/normani-kordei-cyberbullies-racist-trolls http://hollywoodlife.com/celeb/normani-kordei/ https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/normani-hamilton-29878.php https://www.romper.com/p/does-normani-kordei-have-dance-experience-dancing-with-the-stars-allows-her-to-fulfill-a-passion-53245 http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/dance/7940907/fifth-harmony-normani-khalid-collab http://www.rap-up.com/2017/08/28/khalid-teases-normani-kordei-collaboration/

I was going to post some of these links to her page and some of them are linked referenced on her page. Just something to look at even though these articles only cover some topics. The said artist is releasing her own music, competing on other shows and releasing future projects. Guidelines for General Notability she clearly meets the qualifications ... Her stand alone article is enough to surpass the rules. She has evidence to prove it. If your asking for more references to be put on to her page then yes I will get other admins to contribute to her page and add more references. I'm speaking on your be half for when it does get published and stick. I think it's time and it's ready to be final and stay there. Welcometothenewmillenium (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

@Welcometothenewmillenium: I'm happy to lift the page protection, but mainly only because of the EW article and this E Online article. The rest of the links you've provided are either casual mentions (for instance, an article about Dancing with the Stars that mentions she was in it, but isn't about her), or are not independent (be wary of those ABC articles, which are likely cross-promotional in nature and where ABC has a vested interest in promoting her since she's on one of their programmes). These sorts of sources can be used to verify things, but not to demonstrate notability. I've gone ahead and unprotected the redirect, I suggest that if you revert to the version with the article, that you immediately add these sources in so that it could survive another AFD challenge. Lankiveil (speak to me) 00:55, 2 October 2017 (UTC).
Thank you I really appreciate your generosity. I will make sure that the article Normani Kordei is in perfect quality standards and yes I will be aware of the differences of articles using more that support Kordei for notability and use others to reference things. Welcometothenewmillenium (talk) 01:25, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

added Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem
removed Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
  • A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Please help! Are you willing to provide copies of my deleted articles?

Hi Lankiveil, very nice to meet you. Well my situation is quite messy and odd. Basically, I've been struggling to write articles using one account, so I created new multiple ones to do it instead. The administrators then accused me of creating sock puppets and webhost abuse (the latter is absolutely nonsense, if you care you can do further reading here). They deleted all of my drafts from all of these accounts and I really need them back. I’ve spent more than a year writing them. Please help Lankiveil! I’m waiting patiently for your reply. Thank you... Beyoncetan (talk) 03:10, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

@Beyoncetan: Is the intent to move these drafts into the main space at any point, or is this simply so you can save the content into Word for personal purposes? Berean Hunter, as the one that originally deleted these drafts, did you have an opinion here? Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC).
@Lankiveil: Yeah, I think I'll just save them as Word documents in order to avoid people deleting them this time. If you can help me, I'd be very, very grateful for it! About Berean Hunter, I've written to him five days ago and he hasn't replied. Maybe he's still looking for those fan sites and weblinks that he accused me of. If you can, please help me Lankiveil. Sincerely thank you again. Beyoncetan (talk) 05:39, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
If Berean Hunter doesn't respond in the next 24 hours with a reason why I shouldn't, I'll email these to you via the email function. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:20, 1 October 2017 (UTC).
First, no such email was received and the checkusers have the ability to check the veracity of their statement by seeing whether the account sent email. Second, this user does not seem to curate these pages to move them into mainspace (have you taken a good look?) and their story about needing many accounts because of writer block? Please. I suggest that you dig around in their deleted contribs as well as try to figure out why they created so many userspace pages and large number of unnecessary redirects. I think that you will have questions for them. Oh, as you look through those pages, you should find one where a question is left in the content area to some other person giving me the impression that they are working with someone else but it is not apparent whom or why. To me, it looks like inappropriate use of subpages as a webhost and illegitimate accounts. This is not an article nor this as examples. And from their account named Wanbi0901, we have this, "The performer's prominent genre at the time, pop ballad, heavily influenced Wanbi 0901's musical style." Too many problems like that.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 10:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
I've rechecked my notifications and there is nothing about an email.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 10:32, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
@Beyoncetan: The couple I looked at appeared to be genuine articles, but I'm not going to restoring links and such like highlighted above. Also, I strongly recommend that you stick to one account from now on. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC).
@Lankiveil: Thank you Lankiveil. I've learned my lessons. Beyoncetan (talk) 12:34, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
They need to give a clear answer to this question: Do they have any other accounts that they have not declared? They are a 2009 account but all of the accounts in the report were created from June to August of this year. Beyoncetan, why did you believe that you were allowed to create multiple accounts in the first place? (I need this editor's response without anyone (tps) supplying an answer for them).
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
@Berean Hunter: No, I don't have any left. For your second question, it is because I thought that I could create multiple accounts as long as I don't try to start an edit war and/or do anything bad with them. I'll remind you again, the accounts were purely made for my drafts. Beyoncetan (talk) 14:20, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
And no, I'm not "they". "They" are one person and they're me. Beyoncetan (talk) 14:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
"I thought" is not the answer that I was looking for regarding my second question but rather "the sockpuppetry policy". That policy tells you that you are allowed to have multiple legitimate accounts but it also tells you that you must link them. I was trying to understand how you know about the one without knowing about the other. You had alluded to the policy without citing it above but if you knew that then why didn't you know that you had to link them?
"Me" isn't an acceptable pronoun in my sentence above. :) My use of the gender-neutral, third person pronoun "they" is actually meant as a courtesy to you. Some editors do not want their gender indicated anywhere for various reasons. I use "they" where other editors might use "S/he" because I don't like the latter pseudo pronoun. I believe that I understand which gendered pronoun would apply to you but have not expressed that because I don't know what your preferences are. Speaking of which, if you wish to let other editors know how you would like to be addressed, you may select this in your preferences where it asks "How do you prefer to be described?".
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
"I'll remind you again, the accounts were purely made for my drafts."
Perhaps, but let me remind you of how you used them. This history of an article that you didn't write has two of your accounts editing. This one, also. In this first history page alone, I count six of your accounts and you are reverted on two of them by Drmies. These are just a couple of examples.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:13, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
@Berean Hunter: I'm not sure what is the point that you're trying to prove here, but like I've said, whatever account that I was on, I used it to directly edit the user pages/pages/drafts because I was too tired of logging in and out these accounts. And I've also said that If the accounts were made for bad intention, I wouldn't not have used them like your "examples" above, I wouldn't have left traces of my accounts all around like that. About my "I thought" answer, that's just me telling the truth. Like I've said, again, If I knew about that policy I wouldn't have lost all of my drafts. I wouldn't have to go around and beg people for my old drafts' copies like this. Beyoncetan (talk) 00:26, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
@Lankiveil: So... can you help me? :(... Beyoncetan (talk) 00:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
@Beyoncetan: I'm still happy to do so, but I've looked through your deleted contribs and there is a lot of stuff there. Can you give me some direction to exactly what you want me to pull out? Keeping in mind that it takes quite a bit of time for me to do this stuff, and my time is quite limited? Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:53, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Lankiveil: Well this is my list, and yes it's quite long:

And please, please, please, can you possibly find me a draft from my Beyoncetan user that was about the song "10 Minutes" by Korean singer Lee Hyori. That page is very important to me! Please try your best! And thank you so much for your help, good lord you've been so kind to me for the past few days. I am grateful to you for your help. Thank you! Beyoncetan (talk) 11:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I will look at what I can do about this in the next few days. Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC).

Request for Ombudsman commission

Triglav, an administrator with check user privilege in JA wikipedia, frequently performs range blocks, and its frequency is prominent among Japanese Wikipedia administrators.[1] The large number of Triglav's range blocks is a topic of Japanese Wikipedia, and it is discussed in ja:Wikipedia:コメント依頼/Triglav 20170928. In the discussion, an administrator has inferred that Triglav is carrying out the above range block after checking himself/herself at his/her own discretion without check user request. This administrator himself/herself does not think that this act corresponds to abuse of the check user privilege, but I think that it is the abuse of the check user privilege. So please check about the above points. Thank you.121.129.94.41 (talk) 14:14, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@121.129.94.41: If you have a matter for the Ombuds to look at, please contact us as a whole as described at meta:Ombudsman commission. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:22, 9 October 2017 (UTC).

Books and Bytes - Issue 24

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 24, August-September 2017

  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
    • Star Coordinator Award - last quarter's star coordinator: User:Csisc
  • Wikimania Birds of a Feather session roundup
  • Spotlight: Wiki Loves Archives
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Kiswahili and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

added Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93
removed Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 November newsletter: Final results

The final round of the 2017 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2017 WikiCup top three finalists:

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

  • Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a two-way tie with themselves for an astonishing five FAs in R2 and R4).
  • Good Article – Adityavagarwal had 14 GAs promoted in R5.
  • Featured List – Canada Bloom6132 (submissions) and Japan 1989 (submissions) both produced 2 FLs in R2
  • Featured Pictures – Cascadia SounderBruce (submissions) improved an image to FP status in R5, the only FP this year.
  • Featured Topic – Denmark MPJ-DK (submissions) has the only FT of the Cup in R3.
  • Good Topic – Four different editors created a GT in R2, R3 and R4.
  • Did You Know – Adityavagarwal had 22 DYKs on the main page in R5.
  • In The News – India MBlaze Lightning (submissions) had 14 ITN on the main page in R2.
  • Good Article Review – India Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (submissions) completed 31 GARs in R1.

Over the course of the 2017 WikiCup the following content was added or improved on Wikipedia: 51 Featured Articles, 292 Good Articles, 18 Featured Lists, 1 Featured Picture, 1 Featured Topics, 4 Good Topics, around 400 Did You Knows, 75 In The News, and 442 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.

Regarding the prize vouchers - @Adityavagarwal, Vanamonde93, Casliber, Bloom6132, 1989, and SounderBruce: please send Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) an email from the email address to which you would like your Amazon voucher sent. Please include your preference of global Amazon marketplace as well. We hope to have the electronic gift cards processed and sent within a week.

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2018 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018

So the 2017 WikiCup has come to an end. Congratulations to the winner, to the other finalists and to all those who took part. 177 contestants signed up, more than usual, but not all of them submitted entries in the first round. Were editors attracted by the cash prizes offered for the first time this year, or were these irrelevant? Do the rules and scoring need changing for the 2018 WikiCup? If you have a view on these or other matters, why not join in the WikiCup discussion about next year's contest? Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Talk page access

Could you revoke talk page access for 2003:6:23BF:E563:C93B:50B7:BF12:A654, please? Thank you. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 00:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup - Sunday 10 December 2017 at The Edge, State Library of Queensland

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Sunday 10 December 2017 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 21:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Barstar

Don't ever stop being so kind

Hi Lankiveil,

I really want to award to you the Kindness Barnstar, for the patience and soft touch with which you replied in otrs:10459395. I can only imagine this ticket being representative for all your work on OTRS and I absolutely applaud those volunteers that take the time to reply to a ticket like you did and actually reflect on the feelings the mailer has.

Keep up the good work!!

Kind regards from the Netherlands, Ciell (talk) 17:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ciell: Thanks. I apparently no longer have access to that ticket to see which one it was, but it's nice to have my work appreciated! Lankiveil (speak to me) 00:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Mister wiki case has been accepted

You were recently listed as a party to or 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/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Lankiveil. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 25

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017

  • OAWiki & #1Lib1Ref
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: Research libraries and Wikimedia
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

New Email

Hi, Lankiveil.

I have sent you an email. But there is one thing I forgot to add, so I am waiting till you get time to respond. Thanks. –Ammarpad (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Deleted articles

Hello again, Lankiveil! I don't know if you still remember me, but I've asked you about my deleted articles back in October. I really don't want to rush you or anything, but can I ask how is the process going? If you're still working on it or you've been busy lately then I apologize. Beyoncetan (talk) 14:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Please inform me about this situation. It has been three months. If you can't do it, I'll gladly ask another one to help. Beyoncetan (talk) 11:15, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
@Beyoncetan: I am sorry, I have not and will not have time. It will be quicker if you ask another. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:29, 7 January 2018 (UTC).

Special:Tags

Hi Lankiveil, I see you made the tag source but it has no description or information. Was this a test? — xaosflux Talk 21:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: It was created in error. Thanks for reminding me about it. Lankiveil (speak to me) 22:10, 12 January 2018 (UTC).

Books and Bytes - Issue 26

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Civility in infobox discussions case opened

You were recently listed as a party to or 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/Civility in infobox discussions. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 17, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

How can I make a request for intervention?

Good evening Lankiveil, I am a french wiki, user name Marloen, and I am trying since this morning to request intervention to the ombudsman commission in order to resolve a problem I have at the french wikipedia. Could you please tell my where should I post my request? Thank you in advance, --Marloen (talk) 20:34, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

@Marloen: Please see the instructions at meta:Ombudsman commission and contact us through the process described there. Lankiveil (speak to me) 22:59, 4 February 2018 (UTC).
@Lankiveil: I send an email but I have much more to say, I hope I will have an answer and the possibility for doing so. Thank you very much. Good night.--Marloen (talk) 23:19, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
@Marloen: Thanks, confirm your email has been received on our mailing list. We'll keep you posted. Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC).
@Lankiveil: Thank you, but could you please tell me where can I found my post? --Marloen (talk) 10:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Strange category

I noticed that quite a few user pages, including indef-banned ones, are in category:MassMessage delivery lists, including your User:Lankiveil/sandbox. I suspect some miscoded templates, but at a loss. Do you have any idea? At least where to ask? Staszek Lem (talk) 22:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

OK, yours may be has sense (usage of 'target'; what is this?). But this one User talk:Editor0071 is strange. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:08, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Staszek Lem: I used that page as a list of users for the mass message functionality to work off of. I can't speak for whatever User:Editor0071 may be doing with their page that you mentioned. Lankiveil (speak to me) 22:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC).
Sorry, I was a bit unclear with the question: By what mechanism your page was added to this category ? How can I find all templates and other constructs which add this category? Who may know that? Staszek Lem (talk) 23:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@Staszek Lem: Oh, that is weird. I guess it comes from the "target" keyword. But to be honest I don't know for certain. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC).

Socks?

Hi:

You just blocked Wastemessbigfatmistake, but it appears to me that Thisisgospelforrepublicans, TheFewThatRemain, and Withbrandneweyes are socks - along with Tidepodcasserole, who was blocked by Widr.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

NM, Widr got them all. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:25, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of BrowseAloud for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BrowseAloud is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BrowseAloud (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KTC (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

spot on

spot on sir, well said, hear hear JarrahTree 01:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

added Lourdes‹See TfM›†
removed AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
‹See TfM›† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.

Our top scorers in round 1 were:

  • United States Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
  • Germany FrB.TG , a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
  • India Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
  • United States Ceranthor, India Numerounovedant, Minnesota Carbrera, Netherlands Farang Rak Tham and Romania Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.

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

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aunus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup: Saturday 13 January 2018 at The Edge, State Library of Queensland

Brisbane Meetup
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Saturday 13 January 2018 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there!

New Help regarding "This page is protected from creation, so only administrators can create it."

I have resolved the issues regarding this article: Sanjana_Sanghi. I waiting for the review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dany296 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Dany296: I recommend you approach another admin for this if you haven't already. I don't really care for Bollywood films and don't know enough about the area to make an informed judgement on whether the draft would survive another deletion attempt, sorry. Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC).

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

added 331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG
removed Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

  • Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
  • Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
  • The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
  • The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

  • A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

You're right

Upon reflection, I agree with you, my close (at least, not sure if you are referring to any of my other responses) was too terse. Following the golden rule, I strive for brevity. Sometimes I err. Regards, Paul August ☎ 14:41, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@Paul August: I wouldn't worry about it; it takes two to create a situation like that, and the fact that you made it clear after the initial encounter that you were still open to looking at the problem if they would provide some actual information, was very honourable. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:17, 6 April 2018 (UTC).

Andrew Wakefield

Please give a reason for declining speedy deletion of Andrew Wakefield. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 11:12, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Mock wurzel soup: This was not a problem best suited for speedy deletion of an article on this clearly notable and high-profile individual. It would better be solved through gaining consensus on the talk page to get agreement on the changes you want, and then edit the page. Speedy deletion is not a way for you to do an end-run around consensus. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:18, 10 April 2018 (UTC).
He has just been warned of WP:NLT. Tgeorgescu (talk) 11:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Unnecessary, because I have not made any legal threats. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
You said It is my opinion that the Andrew Wakefield article, in its current form, is libellous. I will say no more. Tgeorgescu (talk) 11:37, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
@Mock wurzel soup and Tgeorgescu: I would prefer you do not have this discussion here. I've provided an explanation for declining the speedy, any discussion about NLT can take place elsewhere. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC).

Walk / Don't Walk

Greetings, Lankiveil. The real result of this AfD appears to have been a decision to redirect rather than to delete. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

  1. ^ [21]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lankiveil/Archive_11&oldid=1143128035"