User talk:Trackinfo/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Nomination for deletion of Template:Gloria Krug W75 Weight Pentathlon
Template:Gloria Krug W75 Weight Pentathlon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 13:44, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Williams record has been surpased by Williams?
what do you mean here? I don't understand how a record by Williams is surpassed by Williams? did you mean to update the record? it's still in use in the European article. Frietjes (talk) 21:56, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- This original template was for her performance 5169 points at the 2005 World Masters Athletics Championships. Later I discovered the actual results covered in the record were from the meet in Poznan which (I should add) were 5313 points from the European Veterans Athletics Championships a year later.Trackinfo (talk) 22:18, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- I see, so you basically blanked it without replacing or fixing it. I have replaced it in the article until someone has a chance to update it. Frietjes (talk) 15:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Jermone Davis
Hello Trackinfo. I am wondering why you reverted my edit to Sherman E. Burroughs High School. The subject of the portion I removed, Jermone Davis, is not notable. Collegiate athletes are not inherently notable, and he does not have an article - or even a source. From a look at your recent user contributions, you removed two non-notable entries from high schools yourself, with the edit summary "Not notable, write and establish the article first." Is there a reason that same logic does not apply to Jermone Davis? --Kbabej (talk) 21:08, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks
I'll make sure to do my due diligence re: removing non-notable entries going forward. Thanks for your patience with me. Keep up the good work. --Kbabej (talk) 04:28, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Impeachment March -
Hello! You participated in a discussion about merging the Not My Presidents Day article. I was wondering if you'd be interested in sharing your thoughts on the proposed merge of Impeachment March into the Efforts to impeach Donald Trump article? If you're not interested, no problem. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:47, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- I commented 9 days ago. Trackinfo (talk) 23:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- Ah! I'm so sorry. I was just trying to invite more participation, and clearly not double checking my efforts. Thanks for contributing to the discussion already. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:10, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
2017 World Athletics Championships
I'm no wikipedia expert, but from what I've seen over the last few days a lot of the content you've added is overtly journalistic as opposed to encyclopedic. However, clearly you are a very well informed individual, with a great deal of value to add... I really value your insight into each and every event, I just think the journalistic 'flair' needs to be toned down a notch or eleven. Let it be said here that I value your input immensely - but please consider thinking a tad more before you post as to whether what you're adding is encyclopedic and is includes relevant context.Rolapib (talk) 04:14, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Context is exactly the point I am trying to cover here. There is a lot more to the details of this sport than who crossed the line first. The statistical details of each event is below on each article, in the (now called "Summary," not my word for it) I am trying to tell the story. I use descriptive words, I cover the subtext. You will discover that most of the descriptions and points I make are also picked up by the informed journalists. If you compare what I write with, not just one source, but probably as many as four sources covering the same event, you'll find just about everything is consistent with coverage of this sport, because it is significant to the event. Trackinfo (talk) 04:25, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- I think we're violently agreeing in the main...noting that I'm no wikipedia Manual of Anything expert...I just think that 1) as this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, we should stick to the facts and lose the fluffy stuff (he popped one out!), and 2) whereas I see your intent is to add some useful context to the articles, I think it's worth taking a quick step back to consider whether it's being added with appropriate context... I appreciate that others have dictated the Summary section over the Analysis section - but it all still needs to make sense to the lay person regardless... if we end up with a single summary section fr the entire article, surely it should summarise the entire event (heats, semis, final) not just the final???Rolapib (talk) 04:38, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- regarding your sources point... i accept that, but please add those citations to avoid unnecessary reverts (not by me I may say)Rolapib (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- PS: as you may have guessed... I'm a format and consistency guy, not a journalist... I'm just trying to make these articles clear, accurate and consistent...I'm sure I'm making lots of mistakes myself, which i'm happy to hear about... any 'feedback' i'm giving is genuinely only for the greater good! (I think)Rolapib (talk) 04:51, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- I make minor edits to the statistics when I see problems, but frankly I don't see many. You and your cohorts have that handled very well. I try to write what isn't written in the statistics, and I try to get it posted before fans write illiterate peacock promotion of their heroes' success. Trackinfo (talk) 05:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- I think we're violently agreeing in the main...noting that I'm no wikipedia Manual of Anything expert...I just think that 1) as this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, we should stick to the facts and lose the fluffy stuff (he popped one out!), and 2) whereas I see your intent is to add some useful context to the articles, I think it's worth taking a quick step back to consider whether it's being added with appropriate context... I appreciate that others have dictated the Summary section over the Analysis section - but it all still needs to make sense to the lay person regardless... if we end up with a single summary section fr the entire article, surely it should summarise the entire event (heats, semis, final) not just the final???Rolapib (talk) 04:38, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Paul Warfield – high school broad jump championships
I'm having trouble figuring out how many times Paul Warfield was the "state broad jump champion" in high school. I know almost nothing of how these champions are determined, if there can be more than one champion in a given year, etc. All I'm concerned with is whether I can say he was a one-time, two-time, or three-time state champion. I know I can say he was at least once, in 1957. Could you figure out if he was the state champion in 1958 and 1959 as well? I can provide some clippings that seem to suggest he was if you don't have access to Newspapers.com. Thanks, Lizard (talk) 02:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- You are on the right path. I don't know any magic sources for Ohio. Many states have somebody keep their historical records. I'd start with the Ohio High School Athletic Association. check here for a leaping off point. From that notation, I will deduce he was still playing football at Warren in 1958. So he won as a junior or earlier. 1958, he was about to turn 16, meaning he graduated in 1960. Based on his birthdate, in California, he would be graduating at age 17 and a half, meaning that would be a sophomore year. If someone wins as an underclassman, it is highly likely they will win again and possibly other events as well as they get older. Obviously Warfield was such an exceptional athlete. Curious you just edited an article about the leader of my favorite but obscure prog rock ban Camel. Trackinfo (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The sport is Athletics or Track & Field? The specialization is 100 m + 4x100 m relay or is right Sprinting?
Can I have your opinion here please? --Kasper2006 (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Another question sorry. Is correct to delete the results of International competition (section Achievements) that have the links at Wikipedia pages? Like this roll back for example. --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:04, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Adding categories
Please, when you create a new category, it's really important that you add categories to it, so that people and maintenance bots can find it. Also the act of looking for suitable categories to add it to will help you understand the current structure of the category hierarchy. So for instance, if you had tried to add categories to Category:Kenyan cross country runners you would have found that we already have Category:Kenyan long-distance runners with which there would be a lot of duplication. Also you would have found that we don't really have categories specifically for cross country runners - although we do have categories for eg winners of specific cross country championships. I'm not going to take it to WP:CFD myself, but you should be aware that there's a good chance that other people may be rather more hard-line about duplicate categories.... Cheers Le Deluge (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- There might be duplication with some members of Category:Kenyan long-distance runners but there is not total duplication. While all cross country runners would by definition be long distance runners, only a smaller subset would be cross country runners, Kenya or anywhere. I believe, without exception, all of the Kenyan cross country runners I linked were world championship medalists. The logic of duplication you express would mean Category:Living people would wipe out a majority of categories. Trackinfo (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- No, because the first question to ask is "Does this category need subdividing?" Clearly Category:Living people should be subdivided, but in general people tend to WP:Overcategorization and make categories too small. OK, Category:Kenyan long-distance runners is one the large side but not unmanageably so - and you have to think of all the other national LDR categories, most of which will be much smaller than Kenya. But yes, maybe there's scope for a split. The next question is there a way to split it that is "clean" (like male/female) and fairly equal (I don't like splitting the UK for categories other than eg politics and football, as England has 80% of the population so the England category still ends up too big). Cross country fails on both counts - it's not a "clean" split as the vast majority of LDRs will have done some cross country at some point, and so can be called "cross country runners" depending on where you draw the line. Even Mo Farah has won cross country titles, but absolutely noone has ever called him a cross country runner. You should also look at WP:DEFINING - it's a pretty good rule that if cross country doesn't get mentioned in the first paragraph of an article, then it's not a significant part of their career. I've looked at several articles and they all start "X is a road racer" or "X is a LDR". Cross country just isn't defining for most of these people - and most of them have too many categories as it is, no more than 2-3 categories are necessary. One way to make it more precise would be to categorise in terms of titles - but see WP:OCAWARD. And there's no need to do intersections like that with categories, there are tools such as Petscan that can work out the intersection of eg Kenyan LDRs and African Games medallists. So I just don't see a huge need for the category, the parent doesn't urgently need splitting, it doesn't divide its parent evenly, the criteria are fuzzy and Petscan can do a lot of the work. Plus it's a huge amount of work for you to do, when I'm sure you could be more productive working on the articles themselves. Le Deluge (talk) 02:44, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- Only if you do for a country you should do it for everyone. Why not Category:German cross country runners? --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:46, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- That could be a possibility. I happened on Kenya because they have such a record of success on the global scale. As I said above, I populated it with just World Championship medalists. Germany does not have that kind of track record in recent years. Scanning quickly Germany would populate the category with just two equally qualified individuals. The World Cross Country Championships has only existed since 1973, East African dominance began evolving in 1981, first with Ethiopia (which certainly deserves its own category) and by 1985, Kenya had its first champion, the following year it had its first individual men's champion and team championship. Like Category:Kenyan male steeplechase runners and Category:Kenyan male marathon runners it is a sub-specialty that not all long distance runners are part of. Yes this category could be broken down further by gender. Trackinfo (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you intend the category to be Category:Kenyan medallists at the World Cross Country Championships then that's what it should be called. At least it has precise criteria for entry, even if it probably represents overcategorisation per WP:OCAWARD. But that's a different thing to Category:Kenyan cross country runners which has no real criteria for entry and fails WP:OVERLAP. But never mind the technicalities, you should have a good think about what you're trying to achieve with all these categories - categories are not the same as metatags on a blog, and these athlete articles generally have too many categories already. You really should have a good read of WP:Overcategorization and consider whether what you're trying to do would be better done as a list article. In general lists are better for medal winners and such like, because they can be ordered by year which categories can't. Is there anything in this cross country category that isn't already done much better by the lists in IAAF World Cross Country Championships. You just seem to be making work for yourself, to do something that's not as good as what's already in that article.Le Deluge (talk) 19:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- I did not intend for the category to be that limited. I populated it with the obvious. As you see there are already almost 2 hundred individuals so qualified by that criteria alone. Essentially all such participants at that championship for Kenya have also become medalists. You could also create that category and duplicate populate with the existing individuals. It only goes to prove it is a valid category. Other editors might find more to add to this category based on other criteria. This category identifies people who have notably participated in this specialization. Trackinfo (talk) 19:43, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you intend the category to be Category:Kenyan medallists at the World Cross Country Championships then that's what it should be called. At least it has precise criteria for entry, even if it probably represents overcategorisation per WP:OCAWARD. But that's a different thing to Category:Kenyan cross country runners which has no real criteria for entry and fails WP:OVERLAP. But never mind the technicalities, you should have a good think about what you're trying to achieve with all these categories - categories are not the same as metatags on a blog, and these athlete articles generally have too many categories already. You really should have a good read of WP:Overcategorization and consider whether what you're trying to do would be better done as a list article. In general lists are better for medal winners and such like, because they can be ordered by year which categories can't. Is there anything in this cross country category that isn't already done much better by the lists in IAAF World Cross Country Championships. You just seem to be making work for yourself, to do something that's not as good as what's already in that article.Le Deluge (talk) 19:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- That could be a possibility. I happened on Kenya because they have such a record of success on the global scale. As I said above, I populated it with just World Championship medalists. Germany does not have that kind of track record in recent years. Scanning quickly Germany would populate the category with just two equally qualified individuals. The World Cross Country Championships has only existed since 1973, East African dominance began evolving in 1981, first with Ethiopia (which certainly deserves its own category) and by 1985, Kenya had its first champion, the following year it had its first individual men's champion and team championship. Like Category:Kenyan male steeplechase runners and Category:Kenyan male marathon runners it is a sub-specialty that not all long distance runners are part of. Yes this category could be broken down further by gender. Trackinfo (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- Only if you do for a country you should do it for everyone. Why not Category:German cross country runners? --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:46, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- No, because the first question to ask is "Does this category need subdividing?" Clearly Category:Living people should be subdivided, but in general people tend to WP:Overcategorization and make categories too small. OK, Category:Kenyan long-distance runners is one the large side but not unmanageably so - and you have to think of all the other national LDR categories, most of which will be much smaller than Kenya. But yes, maybe there's scope for a split. The next question is there a way to split it that is "clean" (like male/female) and fairly equal (I don't like splitting the UK for categories other than eg politics and football, as England has 80% of the population so the England category still ends up too big). Cross country fails on both counts - it's not a "clean" split as the vast majority of LDRs will have done some cross country at some point, and so can be called "cross country runners" depending on where you draw the line. Even Mo Farah has won cross country titles, but absolutely noone has ever called him a cross country runner. You should also look at WP:DEFINING - it's a pretty good rule that if cross country doesn't get mentioned in the first paragraph of an article, then it's not a significant part of their career. I've looked at several articles and they all start "X is a road racer" or "X is a LDR". Cross country just isn't defining for most of these people - and most of them have too many categories as it is, no more than 2-3 categories are necessary. One way to make it more precise would be to categorise in terms of titles - but see WP:OCAWARD. And there's no need to do intersections like that with categories, there are tools such as Petscan that can work out the intersection of eg Kenyan LDRs and African Games medallists. So I just don't see a huge need for the category, the parent doesn't urgently need splitting, it doesn't divide its parent evenly, the criteria are fuzzy and Petscan can do a lot of the work. Plus it's a huge amount of work for you to do, when I'm sure you could be more productive working on the articles themselves. Le Deluge (talk) 02:44, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
LA event this Thursday
| LA Meetup: September 7 edit-a-thon near DTLA | |
|---|---|
 Dear fellow Wikipedian, You have been invited to a meetup and edit-a-thon at the LA84 Foundation in Jefferson Park (near DTLA) on Thursday, September 7, 2017 from 5:45 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.! This event aims to improve coverage of female Olympians and Paralympians (some of whom will be attending!). There will be a deejay and food/drinks, and kids are welcome. I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2017 (UTC) Join our Facebook group, follow our Twitter account, and like our Facebook page!! To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. | |
Indonesia edit
Hi. Thanks for the message. The edit in question introduced a large amount of text to an already long article, and it is not practical to include every single issue under its own heading on a country's main article. The edit also introduced a number of grammatical errors which would have to be fixed one by one. There is already a lengthy Women in Indonesia article, created some 6 years ago. I do not understand your comment about it being a possible POV issue, unless you think I am unhinged enough to be anti-woman... I have added a link to the Women in Indonesia article in the "Demographics" - I hope that is an agreeable compromise. Regards Davidelit (Talk) 15:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Reverting Jefferson Starship intro paragraph.
Hello Trackinfo: What rationale did you use to revert my edits on the Jefferson Starship intro paragraph? There has been an ongoing discussion about the real start date of the band for several days now basically between me and user AbelGus. I just offered a compromise to the wording that I thought would satisfy everyone by deleting "evolved" from the paragraph and naming the original members of the band. The word evolve makes it sound like one band, Jefferson Airplane, morphed into Jefferson Starship which is actually not the case. Jefferson Airplane had been defunct for 2 years before the Jefferson Starship band was born. I believe Wikipedia embraces accuracy? I'm looking forward to your reply.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 19:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl
Women in the Olympics and Paralympics editathon at LA84 today
Hi there. Regarding this event, Wikipedia:Meetup/Los Angeles/Women in the Olympics and Paralympics/September 2017, the LA84 Foundation has an Eventbrite registration link I need to email to you if you'll be attending. I have "Email User" enabled so please email me if you wish to attend (I hope you do!) and I'll provide you with the link. Thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:45, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Need your help to update an article of an athlete
Hi, I am a friend of an athlete, Siddhanth Thingalaya, hence I know that the information currently present on his wiki page is not updated with all his latest achievements. Can you help me update his wiki page?
Kiran247 (talk) 11:43, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- I see, there is a lot missing from 2011 to 2017. I added his participation in the World Junior Championships. I didn't go digging to see what he has sone since. Find some sources and report it and conclude with the 2017 World Championships. Let me know if you need help in doing this. Trackinfo (talk) 20:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- He is my good friend and I can arrange all the relevant details from him whenever required. I have list of all his records national/international. He wanted all this to be updated on his Wiki page in the format it is updated here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Shubenkov
Can you tell me how do we start this ? Kiran247 (talk) 09:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Provide me the information, preferably in the form of sources. Sure you can interject a little from what you know, but wikipedia wants its information to be backed up by reporting from reliable sources. You are right, I don't know the right places to look for information about an Indian athlete. So find the reports, newspapers, magazines, results (not blog posts, Facebook or unreliable stuff like that). Send them along and I'll try to help you out. Learn from the technique and you can become another valuable wikipedia editor from your part of the globe. Trackinfo (talk) 16:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for that motivations..I am have updated all his international records with all relevant source links that I could find. In fact he was with me when I was updating his wiki.
Kiran247 (talk) 08:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1974 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reggie Jones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1971 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim Crawford (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Slight clean-up of M 100m record progression list
Hi Track:
Just thought I'd let you know I did a bit of clean-up on the M 100m record prgression page. Nothing huge, but I went by that fantastic record progression list the IAAF started to publish in their guides in (I think) 2015. So, I omitted the several non-ratified marks from the 1930s - the Arthur Jonah one and one of Ralph Metcalfe's - as the IAAF list, which includes marks that weren't ratified back in the day, lists numerous other marks. I see no particular rationale for keeping those particular two. So, either include those other marks, or just include the ratified ones. I count 56(!) unratified marks on that list (manual time era, 1912-1976) so instead of including them all, I deleted the two.
Additionally, I added one mark missing from the list, one that is not usually included, but it had been ratified then later rescinded. Set after Jesse Owen's 10.2 in 1936, it was ratified before the Owen mark, then rescinded after Owen's mark was ratified in 1938. So now I've included Lennart Strandberg's 10.3, with the "rescinded" colour code. Cheers. Canada Jack (talk) 19:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
| Thanks for your work on saving Bring Back the Bees at AfD! The Bushranger One ping only 03:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Trackinfo. 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)
New Page Reviewing
 |
| Hello, Trackinfo.
As one of Wikipedia's most experienced Wikipedia editors, |
Disambiguation link notification for December 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
- 2000 NCAA Division I Cross Country Championships (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Keith Kelly
- Athletics at the 1988 Summer Olympics – Men's 800 metres (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Peter Elliott
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles for Creation Reviewing
 | |||
Hello, Trackinfo.
I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged. |
Invitation to join Women in Red
 You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, just 17.37% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Ipigott (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Are you interested in co-submitting John W. Overton to DYK?
Great job with the article (although there is still a bit to do, I think). I would like to submit it to DYK. Since you've put in a lot of work, too, I wouldn't do so if you weren't ok with it. I'm thinking the hook should be something like "... John W. Overton was killed in World War I one year after setting the world track and field record in the indoor mile and indoor 1,000 meters races in 1917." What do you think? I would submit it jointly, although I'd be happy to do the quid pro quo. Thanks, Smmurphy(Talk) 02:39, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- Lets survive the AfD attack first. I'm OK with submitting the article forward. Pluralize "records" as there are separate, multiple records. As I've said elsewhere in the AfD process, my frustration is with the overt stupidity of these nominations. Know-nothings putting articles in jeopardy. This one was in my wheelhouse, so I know where to look for sources. Even a hundred years ago, there is some documentation. Information compiled on top of itself. I can't do that in subjects I don't know as well and there aren't enough others doing it. Wikipedia is getting victimized daily by our echo chamber of uninformed and lazy, serial delete voters. So I'm writing an editorial to that effect and will see if I can find a place to post it. Trackinfo (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- Not to count chickens before they hatch, but that article will certainly be kept. We have a few days before we the seven day window we have to submit it to DYK starts, but I wanted to make sure you were on board before I spent to much more time on it. I'll let you know before I do submit it, but just to be clear, here is the hook as of right now (feel free to suggest a better or ALTs): "... John W. Overton was killed in World War I one year after setting the world track and field records in the indoor mile and indoor 1,000 meters races in 1917." Thanks for the correction; unfortunately I seem to make a too many grammar and spelling mistakes.
- I spend most of my editing doing WP:HEY at AfD, focusing on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History - particularly US history. I've done scores of HEYs myself since coming back to WP in earnest almost two years ago. I share your frustration; although I've had very very few HEYs fail, they erode time I would otherwise spend at other parts of the project. I think a number of people would like to write a similar editorial expressing similar frustrations. I, myself, often think about a statistical study of AfDs which might address some of the empirical questions that go along with such an issue, but I'm pretty sure I won't be doing one any time soon. If it would be any help, feel free to send me a draft of your editorial to look over. Also, if you are interested and thought it would help your editorial, I could compile my HEYs into a list and give you a bit of statistics on that.
- I welcome your statistics. I was not even aware of it. But that is essentially my goal. Before nominating, do some research. If there is some meat to the subject, you must use that information to improve the article before, or instead of nominating it. Same for voting. You shouldn't vote if you didn't first look for information and if found, fixing the article. And (this won't be popular for sure) I think there should be a penalty for serially making bad nominations or votes. In effect, it is disruptive. Their laziness bothers a whole lot more people to look at the article, comment/vote and ultimately close the discussion. A bad nomination is disruptive. So a first time offender is put on a quota for the number of NOMs or iVotes they can make in a period of time. Subsequent bad votes reduce the quota by 50 per cent. And with a certain number of bad NOMs or iVotes (which would have to be a decision by the closer), they lose their nominating or ivoting privileges. The standard for the closer to call it a bad nomination will be simply (based on how the article has evolved) "You could have fixed this." Meaning, the sources that improved the article to a Keep were readily available if you had simply looked. I'd like to think people are here to improve Wikipedia, which is what WP:HEY is all about. I have been in enough AfD battles against disingenuous and lazy editors that I am convinced some people do not behave in the best interests of improving Wikipedia.Trackinfo (talk) 06:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- The weather has messed up my schedule and I've been too busy to do more work on the article. I've gone ahead and submitted it to DYK at Template:Did you know nominations/John W. Overton, I'm not sure if it isn't too late. I'll do my QPQ and do more work on the article on Sunday or after Monday of next week. Feel free to suggest an alt or c/e the proposed hook I submitted. Smmurphy(Talk) 03:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- I welcome your statistics. I was not even aware of it. But that is essentially my goal. Before nominating, do some research. If there is some meat to the subject, you must use that information to improve the article before, or instead of nominating it. Same for voting. You shouldn't vote if you didn't first look for information and if found, fixing the article. And (this won't be popular for sure) I think there should be a penalty for serially making bad nominations or votes. In effect, it is disruptive. Their laziness bothers a whole lot more people to look at the article, comment/vote and ultimately close the discussion. A bad nomination is disruptive. So a first time offender is put on a quota for the number of NOMs or iVotes they can make in a period of time. Subsequent bad votes reduce the quota by 50 per cent. And with a certain number of bad NOMs or iVotes (which would have to be a decision by the closer), they lose their nominating or ivoting privileges. The standard for the closer to call it a bad nomination will be simply (based on how the article has evolved) "You could have fixed this." Meaning, the sources that improved the article to a Keep were readily available if you had simply looked. I'd like to think people are here to improve Wikipedia, which is what WP:HEY is all about. I have been in enough AfD battles against disingenuous and lazy editors that I am convinced some people do not behave in the best interests of improving Wikipedia.Trackinfo (talk) 06:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello Trackinfo. I have been gradually adding bits to this draft, but I know little about the subject. When would this althlete become notable? I've been trying to avoid adding references that aren't independent.—Anne Delong (talk) 00:26, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
- 1964 NCAA University Division Track and Field Championships (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Washington State, John Thomas, Paul Drayton and Edward Burke
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1964 NCAA University Division Track and Field Championships, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Occidental, Cal Poly and Thomas Farrell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Patty Van Wolvelaere, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ramona High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
1998 USA Outdoors Results
Hi there! Hope you're doing well. Any chance you can review the results for 1998 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships? It looks like some of those results have been mixed up with the one's from 2000 United States Olympic Trials (track and field) when you created it. I've fixed the high jump ones already. Thanks! SFB 01:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
- I know I have a mistake like that in 1964, but I didn't think it also hit 1998. I'll look when I get some time. Trackinfo (talk) 02:16, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of April Jace for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article April Jace 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/April Jace (2nd 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. Hirolovesswords (talk) 02:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 10
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- 1998 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Kim Jones
- Keshia Baker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Fairfield High School
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Writer's Barnstar |
| Thank you for your editing work, even when others try to bypass the system and you need to invest so much time to get some of it back. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC) |
advice
You know I've been supporting at some relevant discussions, so perhaps you'll understand if I give you some advice: Victory in a WP conflict can be achieved by maneuvering the other party into doing something that would justify a block or ban, such a personal attacks. DGG ( talk ) 01:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
DYK for John W. Overton
On 24 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John W. Overton, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that John W. Overton (pictured) was killed in World War I, a year after setting the world track and field records in the indoor mile and indoor 1000 yard (910 m) races in 1917? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John W. Overton. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, John W. Overton), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert Poynter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Silver Creek High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 5
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- 2018 IAAF World Indoor Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Hannah Williams
- Robert Poynter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Pasadena High School
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia Day LA, March 31
| Wikipedia Day LA 2018 | |
|---|---|
 Please join us from 10:00 am - 5:00 pm on Saturday, March 31st for Wikipedia Day LA 2018 at the Ace Hotel in downtown Los Angeles. There will be speakers, panel discussions, a presentation on Wikidata, flash sessions, and a discussion about the formation of an LA User Group. There could be dramatic readings of LA-related talk pages, and there will be truly excellent cake. Please RSVP on the event page if you're thinking of joining us. We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC) To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. | |
Finding disambiguation links
Hi there! I seem to remember a while back that you were bothered by the amount of time it takes to check whether athlete links are the right ones. There is a User:Anomie/linkclassifier user script that you can install to highlight disambiguation links in yellow automatically. Obviously there is still the problem of linking to a page where there is a different, non-athlete at the main target name, but hopefully this goes some way to easing the burden. SFB
- It looks like a useful tool. I have no idea where these menus to install this are.
- I think my issue more recently was SvG project draft links not connecting to reveal which had articles. I figured out a time consuming solution, but am satisfied the articles classified as athlete have all been rescued. I have little faith in the categorization. Trackinfo (talk) 00:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- The link to your script page is the first one provided at Special:MyPage/skin.js. All that is needed is to place the below text on that page. It's quite colorful at first sight, but I'm used to it now and knowing which athlete names are going to disambiguations immediately by sight has been a real time saver on results articles for me. SFB 01:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
importScript('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js]]
importStylesheet('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css]]
Discretionary sanctions alerts for gun control and BLPs
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Note that we (the Committee) decided that these only have effect on editors during the 12 months after the alert has been given.
Doug Weller talk 10:46, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
John Iadarola
Hi. I've restored John Iadarola to the redirect which was placed there per my close of WP:Articles for deletion/John Iadarola (2nd nomination). If you believe the close was in error, or things have changed so the result is no longer relevant, please start a discussion on WP:DRV, rather than just undoing the AfD result. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:01, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Arts Datathon!
| LA County Civic Arts Datathon! | |
|---|---|
|
Please join us for the LA County Arts Commission Civic Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Beginners are welcome! We'll provide training for new editors. Bob Hope Patriotic Hall, 1816 S. Figueroa St., Los Angeles, CA 90015. | |
Disambiguation link notification for June 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2017 World Championships in Athletics – Men's 3000 metres steeplechase, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frohawk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
One-Hit Wonders
Hi. So, what do you suggest we do about this list of inaccurate "one-hit wonders"? I say go back to Billboard. 50.111.24.195 (talk) 04:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Famousbirthdays.com as a source
Hi Trackinfo . I noticed that you used famousbirthdays.com as a source for information in a biography article[1]. Please note that there is general consensus that famousbirthdays.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. (See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_153#Is_famousbirthdays.com_a_reliable_source_for_personal_information). If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 02:57, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Illinois gubernatorial election, 2018#Stop Adding Third Parties to infobox. Nevermore27 (talk) 09:30, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of high schools in California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastvale (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Armand Duplantis
Hi Trackinfo. Is Armand Duplantis really eligible to set American records? Thanks for respond.Montell 74 (talk) 16:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- I have questioned USATF Records people about this directly. I did not get a definitive answer. Since Duplantis apparently holds dual citizenship, he effectively meets the USA criteria, "by an American citizen," though clearly he competes for another country internationally. I can't remember any other American citizens competing for another country setting records, but there are people like Felix Sanchez competing and there is a likely example that goes against this new precedent. You might be able to cite one. Apparently, the committee does what they want. Trackinfo (talk) 07:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Margareth Tomanek W55 Record
Template:Margareth Tomanek W55 Record has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
7th Annual Los Angeles Wiknic
Sunday, September 30, 11:00-4:00 PM
Pan Pacific Park, 7600 Beverly Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90036
Hang out. Consume crowd-sourced BBQ! Bask in the glory of late September in Los Angeles (and the glory
of our new user group, Wikimedians of Los Angeles).
RSVP (and volunteer) here.
We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) 02:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Follow on from Deletion tip of day 11 September
It may or may not be related but I have noticed a spike of PRODs and AfDs shortly following that tip on 11 September. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xmonad (3rd nomination) has some interesting considerations from DGG. In terms of rescue FoxyTunes achieved an amazing escape following a PROD decline due to a previous contested PROD.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
Archiving
Could I request that you set up archiving for your talk page? With a page this long, it's very awkward to read. On a mobile device, it's almost impossible. If you like, I'd be happy to help you with the technical details, or even set it up for you. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:00, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- Back when I considered archiving this, I recall my frustration in having to search back through some other user's archive. The particular user was one that had infuriated. It took a lot of effort to not only search back through the archive, but through the history to discover he was also deleting the numerous complaints he was receiving as well as frequently archiving so virtually nothing was immediately visible. The archiving served to mask from public view just what an asshole this guy is; how many times he had been blocked, threatened to be blocked and had gotten into arguments with well meaning editors, particularly abusing novices. And he's still with us. I can be argumentative and opinionated at times, but I have no legitimate blocks, violations or problems associated with my account. I'm here for positive contributions. I vehemently fight those who try to destroy content. So in the view of openness, I have chosen to keep all my conversations, even the negative ones, here in open public view. I hadn't considered the mobile device dilemma, but then I didn't think that many people would even bother coming here. Trackinfo (talk) 15:15, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hmmm. While I do appreciate your desire to be fully transparent, might I point out that the archiving software automatically generates an index of the archives? So, for example, if you think I've done something stupid (which I'm sure I have, on multiple occasions), you can search my talk archive for "stupid". I don't know if that's always been the case, so possibly the last time you looked into this, that feature wasn't available. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:56, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- That would mean you know what you are looking for. When trying to dissect what went wrong, you start with a blank page. Seriously, I am sensitive to every website I visit; the number of pages and page loads to search through to get where you are intending to go, much less the poor labeling of said items. A generic archive, with no time basis or content basis is literally just a bunch of meaningless numbers. Given the choice, I have so far chosen not to inflict that on my vast readership. OK, this page is a bit long, its an 11 plus year accumulation. You should see my garage. Trackinfo (talk) 16:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry but this is not really optional anymore. The length of this page is preventing some browsers from opening it. Users have wide latitude in their userspace, but may not actually break the website. I will set up archiving for you shortly, unless you do it yourself. Thank you. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:33, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Following on from this, I've set up archiving at a very conservative level but which will fix the accessibility of the page. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:33, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
- Should be all sorted for you! I've even added dates to the threads which the bot could not sort out. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:13, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- That would mean you know what you are looking for. When trying to dissect what went wrong, you start with a blank page. Seriously, I am sensitive to every website I visit; the number of pages and page loads to search through to get where you are intending to go, much less the poor labeling of said items. A generic archive, with no time basis or content basis is literally just a bunch of meaningless numbers. Given the choice, I have so far chosen not to inflict that on my vast readership. OK, this page is a bit long, its an 11 plus year accumulation. You should see my garage. Trackinfo (talk) 16:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hmmm. While I do appreciate your desire to be fully transparent, might I point out that the archiving software automatically generates an index of the archives? So, for example, if you think I've done something stupid (which I'm sure I have, on multiple occasions), you can search my talk archive for "stupid". I don't know if that's always been the case, so possibly the last time you looked into this, that feature wasn't available. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:56, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Trackinfo. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve 1965 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships
Thanks for creating 1965 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships.
A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:
Please add your references.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Boleyn (talk) 14:40, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve 1966 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships
Thanks for creating 1966 USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships.
A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:
Please add your references.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Boleyn (talk) 14:43, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 6
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of United States records in track and field, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Norman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Miss Multinational 2018
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Miss Multinational 2018 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tagishsimon (talk) 00:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Miss Multinational 2018 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Miss Multinational 2018. Since you had some involvement with the Miss Multinational 2018 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Adam9007 (talk) 16:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
WMACs Formatting
Hi mate, I created stubs for all the WMACs last night, and I had intended to split the results as per 2014 European Masters Athletics Championships to avoid the very lengthy pages like are seen at 2015 World Masters Athletics Championships - would you be interested in using this format as well? I understand the hassle when results are often formatted by event rather than age group but I believe this is a preferential layout. JDWFC (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you first for starting the articles. I've gotten complaints about the existing formatting, so I welcome the improvement. All these results are going to be a lot of work to format. Trackinfo (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Miss Multinational numbering
Since you're the one who created Miss Multinational 2018 and Miss Multinational 2019, are you aware that you're misnumbering them? Their website says it's 40 days, 1 hour and 12 minutes or so till Miss Multinational 2018, which makes the pageant held in January 2019 the "2018" edition. The pageant also calls the first winner, alternately, "Miss Multinational 2017" or "Miss Multinational 2017-2018". Huon (talk) 11:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- Actually yes I discovered that yesterday. And yet the legitimate third party sources reported differently, which is why I initiated the different numbering system. They also had changed the date of the upcoming pageant, delaying it by some 5 weeks from earlier posts. Because the reporting on this subject is more fluffy, entertainment related, rather than by the journalism side, I don't know if I will find reporting on the confusion of the organizers, but that is what I would like to find before making statements in the article. But I will go back and renumber again. Trackinfo (talk) 16:24, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
A Dobos torte for you!
.jpg)
|
7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:43, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Congratulations
|
100000 Edits | |
| Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 536 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work! |
-- Dolotta (talk) 01:12, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Invitation to attend a Southern California Regional mini Unconference
Who: All Wikipedians & Wikimedians
What: Southern California Regional mini Unconference.
When: Sunday 3 March 2019, 2:00PM PST / 1400 until 4:10PM PST / 1610
Where: Philippe's at Chinatown, Los Angeles
Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN )
Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)
Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending, due to the limited size of the cafe.
(Delivered: 00:38, 10 February 2019 (UTC) You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list & the Los Angeles mass mailing list.)
Wikipedia Day LA, February 24, 2019
| Wikipedia Day LA 2019 Consider the Source | |
|---|---|
 Please join the LA User Group, Wikimedians of Los Angeles, for an afternoon of panels, presentations and conversations on the subject of sources, and cake (locally sourced), in celebration of Wikipedia's 18th birthday. The Ace Hotel (DTLA)929 S Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90015 For more details or to sign up, see Wikipedia Day LA, or RSVP via Eventbrite. Everyone is welcome! We hope to see you there. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC) | |
Michael Cohen
I edited Michael Cohen (lawyer) making a lot of small changes. When I saved it, the system may have lost some of your changes. Sorry. It would be easier for you to re-do your changes than for me to do so. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:07, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Art + Feminism 2019
| Art+Feminism 2019 Los Angeles Events! | |
|---|---|
 Dear fellow Wikipedian, You are invited to join Art+Feminism's annual worldwide Wikipedia edit-a-thon and help close Wikipedia's gender gap at one of these Los Angeles–area museums this March! RSVP/Details here.
These Los Angeles events are co-hosted by online magazine East of Borneo and include step-by-step Wikipedia instruction for beginners. Bring your laptop or tablet computer and any reference materials you'd like to work from or share. People of all gender expressions and identities are encouraged to attend. I hope to see you there! StaceyEOB (talk) - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC) | |
Thank you for your commitment to WP:Inclusionists
Thank you for your help and diligence with AfD/Saikat Chakrabarti.
Phersh (talk) 22:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
attention
| [[ |
attention-grabbing |
| Hello! What is wrong with my actions in "athletic world records"? Артем Загребельный (talk) 01:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC) |
Convent & Stuart Hall
Hi Trackinfo, I noticed you re-created the page Convent of the Sacred Heart High School (California) after it was merged with Convent & Stuart Hall and was wondering if you had a specific reasoning behind the move? I originally created a discussion to merge the two articles as it more accurately reflects the structure of the school, but please let me know if you are seeing anything different. NEW at this so trying to make sure I'm doing this right! Sacredsf (talk) 17:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
ITN recognition for 2019 Boston Marathon
On 17 April 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2019 Boston Marathon, 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 02:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
| Race Results | |
|---|---|
Question About Race ResultsHello Grandmaster Track and Wikipedia Editor. I haven't written on a Talk page yet. Let me know if I'm doing this wrong. I've a question for you regarding race results. I'm interested in boosting the local community of runners and making it easy to see local race times of the biggest races in the region. Instead of clicking through dozens of proprietary timing sites, I'd like runner to easily navigate through top results in the region. However, I don't want a "top leaderboard of regional races" type deal. I've settled on the simple, easy layout in the Los Angeles Marathon 2019 results. Easy to see the winners (men and women), the masters winners, and the wheelchair winners. Three categories, one glance. But I have two problems with this: 1) It continues to emphasize only the top runner. I'd like to show the top three for each year's race. Yes, we could create annual race pages (like this one for Boston you did), but for races under 500 runners, I don't think it is necessary (and it wouldn't meet the Wikipedia criteria). I do argue, however, that the race is still important enough to have its own page. So I'd like to show the results of all the years races in a category on the marathon's wiki-page, and I'd also like to show the three top runners--and--the winner of the masters. I'd also like to have the toggle to reorganize all the times (so they rank by fastest to slowest, and not year by year). 2) How could I combine a table like yours in the 2019 Boston Marathon page and the one shown in the 2019 Los Angeles Marathon page? Comm260 ncu (talk) comment added by Comm260 ncu (talk • contribs) 23:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC) --- I know there might not be an easy answer, but I wanted to brainstorm with someone. I'll try simplifying the question: How can I make a chart that shows all these things: Each year of the race, showing the following:
So the finished result would be a combination of Bemidji Blue Ox Marathon and 2019 Boston Marathon and 2010 Chicago Marathon (but only up to the top three places). Any ideas? I guess a second question is this: Can I make a column order adjustable if the column doesn't continue all the way down the table? Thanks for your expertise and all your great track edits! Comm260 ncu (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:48, 18 April 2019 (UTC) | |
Nomination of Miss Multinational 2017 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Miss Multinational 2017 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/Miss Multinational 2017 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Richie Campbell (talk) 14:47, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
UC Irvine edit-a-thon on May 17, 2019
| UC Irvine edit-a-thon on May 17, 2019 | |
|---|---|
 Dear fellow Wikipedian, You are cordially invited to an edit-a-thon this Friday in Orange County, focused on gender equity. The event is a collaboration between UCI and Women in Red. 10:00 am – 4:00 pm PDT (UTC-7) Langson Library, Room 228, at University of California, Irvine Points of contact:
For more details, including the registration link, please see the meetup page. Everyone is welcome! We hope to see you there. | |
--Rosiestep (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Nomination for deletion of Template:Vanessa Hilliard W55 Record
Template:Vanessa Hilliard W55 Record has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 15:32, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
- 2019 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Columbia, Auburn, Bowling Green, Albany, Bucknell, John Warren, SMU, Charles Brown, Michael Carr, Mark Porter, Georgetown, Dartmouth, Sean Collins, Jay Hunt, Anders Eriksson, Adam Dawson, Portland, Carl Johansson and Devin Clark
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Ways to improve 1999 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships
Hello, Trackinfo,
Thanks for creating 1999 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Please add your references.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Boleyn (talk) 20:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 19
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- 1999 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to John Davis, James Parker, Brad Snyder, Jacob Davis, James Dennis, Marcus Thomas and Mark Simmons
- 2000 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Dee Brown
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1999 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marcus Thomas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 00:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Ridgecrest quakes
Hey, before I went in and changes something I wanted to get your input. Specifically the location of the epicenter being "85 miles northeast" of the San Andreas fault. That's the right direction (and about the right distance) for the part that runs through LA, but the fault is much longer than that-finally ending in the Pacific north of San Francisco. What would you think about either dropping the distance and changing the direction to "east", or specifying that that distance and direction is relative to the LA section of the fault? Almostfm (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- First off, you're right-I did mean the Ridgecrest quakes. I don't know what happened, other than my brain saying "Ridgecrest" and my hands calling an audible on the play. I got your message, and I can't say I disagree with your reasoning. But as you said, the distance to the San Andreas depends on where on the fault you're measuring from. What about "85 miles northeast of the nearest point on the San Andreas fault"? Thanks. Almostfm (talk) 05:34, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019 USA Track & Field Outdoor Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jonathan Wells (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Southern California Wiknic & Bonfire invitation
Who: All members of the public
What: Southern California Wiknic & Bonfire.
When: Sunday 1 September 2019, 2:00PM PDT / 1400 until 10:00PM PDT / 2200
Where: La Jolla Shores
Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN )
Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)
Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending, and please add your intended potluck contribution to the list.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject San Diego at 18:27, 1 August 2019 (UTC). You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list, and from the Southern California meet-up group by removing your name from the LA meet-ups mailing list.
Lowly editor
Hi Trackinfo. Per your AN post ("...as a lowly editor I am unable to delete the redirect article...") you might be interested in this. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts
Hi. One or more of your pages have DEFAULTSORT conflicts: (search)
Please either
- <nowiki> DEFAULTSORTs (if your page is a draft consisting of multiple subjects); or
- remove redundant DEFAULTSORTs (if your page is a draft with multiple DEFAULTSORTs); or
- remove all DEFAULTSORTs (otherwise)
in the affected pages. Thank you. – Ase1estet@lkc0ntribs 06:26, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
USATF web site
Hi Trackinfo. There seems to be a problem with the USATF web site. I got the last successful "access" maybe one year ago. Is it just me who got problems with it? Do you know more? Thanks. Montell 74 (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
- While I have a lot of issues with the USATF site, moving and hiding links, slow server and their unnecessary security denying me access to certain places, I have not had a long term issue with the USATF website itself. What are you unable to access? Trackinfo (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I'm in Germany. Maybe also a cause. The USATF site is not building at all. Maybe a server problem. First and foremost I am interested in the state of ratification of records (timeliness of the record lists).Montell 74 (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- I know you are in Germany, but you do an excellent job of English. No records are ratified until the third day of the national meeting. I think that is November 30, 2019. I'll be in the room in Reno, Nevada this year. If there is anything you need me to pull from the site, please let me know. Trackinfo (talk) 07:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I'm in Germany. Maybe also a cause. The USATF site is not building at all. Maybe a server problem. First and foremost I am interested in the state of ratification of records (timeliness of the record lists).Montell 74 (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Creating the Best Marathon Results Table
Hey again Trackinfo! I'm working on creating a better marathon results table. Thanks to your help from previous discussions, I've made a lot of improvements and spent days researching results and crafting some wiki-markup. I'd love your critique on this table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Med_City_Marathon.
- I checked it. Having dealt with records for so long, I like the time in the column before the name rather than clear across the line on the right. No big deal. From a global perspective, I think going three deep on somewhat local events might cause some deletionists to target your article. As a local USATF administrator, I think its great. Thank you for putting in the effort. Trackinfo (talk) 07:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! I know there are some people that won't like the top three, but for any local state user, it's a much more helpful gauge on the type of marathoner that runs the race (and even the type of race organization might be present). I also think it's a good way to not be an elitist when it comes to runners. You can sort this Med-City list by time and you find 36 runners who placed second or third, yet were still faster than the first place winner in 2006. A reader of the list wouldn't get that context otherwise. Of course, there's a limit and I get that, but I think first through third allows the reader to better examine the results. If they want only the first place winners, they can do a sort for the time, then a secondary sort for the place. Viola! I'm curious if people will want to argue this if I do a bigger marathon, such as Grandma's Marathon. That would also take a mountain of time! You seem to know the Wiki-community a bit. Do you know of any people that go crazy for creating and editing marathon pages? Comm260 ncu (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is made up of individual volunteers who choose to work on what they want to and what know to work on wikipedia. Unfortunately there is a group of malicious editors, who somehow have a perverted idea of protecting wikipedia from improper content. Censors essentially. I am suggesting that your content might be too localized for their taste and when they find it, they might go on attack. I'll be glad to help protect your content, notify me offline at info@trackinfo.org. But I'm just one vote and they have an echo chamber of people who love to pile on. I've been in a lot of battles with these low lifes. I win most of the time on my own content, but not always and its never easy. They get their greatest thrill in deleting as much content as possible. I think there is a backroom awards system to reward those who succeed in deleting the most content. There is one creep who makes it his life's mission to go through the AfD section and vote to delete. I won't mention any names here but it won't take you too long to see who it is. So you can guarantee he will vote against your stuff if it gets there. That is my cynical view of the deletion process. Bigger picture, if you want to be helpful; learn the process. I'd love to see you learn how to fight to defend content. I'd love to see more allies on our side. Start by finding articles in jeopardy that are worthy of fighting for, and help save them. That way you will be ready to defend your own content. Especially learn NSPORT, because those will be the grounds you will be working from. Trackinfo (talk) 22:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ahhh. Thanks for the lead. This is unsettling. The only marathons that appear to have recognition are those over 5,000 runners or 25 years old. Hmmm... yet read through any small city's wiki page and you'll find several pages that branch from it that don't have near the notoriety that a marathon would have. Interesting. I think I'll keep creating and build out the smaller ones, then try to jump into two bigger race pages and see how it goes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comm260 ncu (talk • contribs) 02:42, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is made up of individual volunteers who choose to work on what they want to and what know to work on wikipedia. Unfortunately there is a group of malicious editors, who somehow have a perverted idea of protecting wikipedia from improper content. Censors essentially. I am suggesting that your content might be too localized for their taste and when they find it, they might go on attack. I'll be glad to help protect your content, notify me offline at info@trackinfo.org. But I'm just one vote and they have an echo chamber of people who love to pile on. I've been in a lot of battles with these low lifes. I win most of the time on my own content, but not always and its never easy. They get their greatest thrill in deleting as much content as possible. I think there is a backroom awards system to reward those who succeed in deleting the most content. There is one creep who makes it his life's mission to go through the AfD section and vote to delete. I won't mention any names here but it won't take you too long to see who it is. So you can guarantee he will vote against your stuff if it gets there. That is my cynical view of the deletion process. Bigger picture, if you want to be helpful; learn the process. I'd love to see you learn how to fight to defend content. I'd love to see more allies on our side. Start by finding articles in jeopardy that are worthy of fighting for, and help save them. That way you will be ready to defend your own content. Especially learn NSPORT, because those will be the grounds you will be working from. Trackinfo (talk) 22:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! I know there are some people that won't like the top three, but for any local state user, it's a much more helpful gauge on the type of marathoner that runs the race (and even the type of race organization might be present). I also think it's a good way to not be an elitist when it comes to runners. You can sort this Med-City list by time and you find 36 runners who placed second or third, yet were still faster than the first place winner in 2006. A reader of the list wouldn't get that context otherwise. Of course, there's a limit and I get that, but I think first through third allows the reader to better examine the results. If they want only the first place winners, they can do a sort for the time, then a secondary sort for the place. Viola! I'm curious if people will want to argue this if I do a bigger marathon, such as Grandma's Marathon. That would also take a mountain of time! You seem to know the Wiki-community a bit. Do you know of any people that go crazy for creating and editing marathon pages? Comm260 ncu (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Many thanks 🙏
Thank you very much for the very good analysis about AfD of Zach Bradford. There is the same problem with Amere Lattin.--Arorae (talk) 13:19, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Bruce Jenner and other things
I have read with interest your story in the User page. I had the same reaction and the same thoughts. In other WPs, some people tried to change her/his name in the results of Olympic Games. A nonsense. And I would like to point the fact that I am very modern and open-minded (I hope so!). But I think that it is impossible to change the view (of people that usually does not care of track and field). Just one question: what’s the meaning of NOM? Yours.--Arorae (talk) 17:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
- NOM in the context that I use it here is the person proposing a nomination, the guy complaining essentially. So you can see in my time I have been in my battles to try to present to the public what is right. We have some nuts out there who do not understand our sport. Trackinfo (talk) 18:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
- yes. When he says that Universiade is a Junior or Youth competition, he is completely wrong. How is it possible to convince him? He also like to delete a WORLD senior champion in fencing (and also European) that won at Universiade. A non-sense.-Arorae (talk) 20:49, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
- he is not listening. At all. It took 3 posts before an offside reply. A kind of Asperger syndrome? He have just tried to absolutely delete 5 «stubs» (not very good ones for sure, little responsible for that, sorry) but all respecting the criteria. All the 5 AfD have been now closed. All time and ink wasted.-Arorae (talk) 19:10, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- yes. When he says that Universiade is a Junior or Youth competition, he is completely wrong. How is it possible to convince him? He also like to delete a WORLD senior champion in fencing (and also European) that won at Universiade. A non-sense.-Arorae (talk) 20:49, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sharmin Sultana Sumi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Modern (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:43, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey
Hi Trackinfo/Archive 3,
The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikipedia and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).
Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
RMaung (WMF) 16:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey
Hi Trackinfo/Archive 3,
A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).
Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
RMaung (WMF) 15:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey
Hi Trackinfo/Archive 3,
There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).
Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
RMaung (WMF) 20:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Masters world record progressions
I see you created a lot of articles in Category:Masters athletics world record progressions in 2014, e.g. Masters M50 high jump world record progression. Thanks for the effort. I think the articles are too small on their own and it would be better to merge them by event and gender like Masters men high jump world record progression and Masters women high jump world record progression. Then you can follow how the results decline with age, and you can often track the same athletes as they grow older. Both genders could be on the same page but I prefer to keep them separate. Another option would be to merge by age category, e.g. a new Masters M50 world record progressions for all M50 records. I prefer merging by event, but we might use section tranclusion to additionally create articles like Masters M50 world record progressions by transcluding Masters men high jump world record progression#Men 50, and similar for other events. {{#section-h:Masters men high jump world record progression|Men 50}} produces:
| Height | Athlete | Nationality | Birthdate | Location | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.76 | Wolfgang Boneder |  Germany
|
20.10.1894 | Neustadt | 20.07.1947 |
| 1.675 | Orvald Gillett |  United States
|
02.06.1919 | San Diego | 04.07.1969 |
| 1.73 | Orvald Gillett | United States
|
02.06.1919 | Glendale | 11.12.1971 |
| 1.73 | Richmond "Boo" Morcom | United States
|
01.05.1921 | Randall's Island | 22.07.1972 |
| 1.75 | John C. Brown | United States
|
04.12.1929 | Philadelphia | 05.07.1980 |
| 1.75 | John C. Brown | United States
|
04.12.1929 | Christchurch | 12.01.1981 |
| 1.78 i | John C. Brown | United States
|
04.12.1929 | Liberty | 15.02.1981 |
| 1.79 | John C. Brown | United States
|
04.12.1929 | Dallas, Texas | 25.07.1981 |
| 1.79 | Herm Wyatt | United States
|
13.09.1931 | Los Gatos | 12.06.1982 |
| 1.81 | Herm Wyatt | United States
|
13.09.1931 | Eugene | 27.06.1982 |
| 1.85 | Herm Wyatt | United States
|
13.09.1931 | Los Gatos | 21.05.1983 |
| 1.87 | Herm Wyatt | United States
|
13.09.1931 | Los Gatos | 03.07.1983 |
| 1.88 | Herm Wyatt | United States
|
13.09.1931 | Los Gatos | 20.08.1983 |
| 1.88 | Horst Mandl |  Austria
|
08.01.1936 | Verona | 27.06.1988 |
| 1.88 | Dieter Wille | Germany
|
06.07.1943 | Miyazaki | 10.10.1993 |
| 1.89 | Mark Chelnov |  Ukraine
|
15.03.1944 | Athens | 11.06.1994 |
| 1.90 | Asko Pesonen |  Finland
|
15.04.1943 | Leppavirta | 24.09.1995 |
| 2.00 i | Thomas Zacharias | Germany
|
02.01.1947 | Birmingham | 02.03.1997 |
| 1.98 | Thomas Zacharias | Germany
|
02.01.1947 | Baunatal | 17.05.1997 |
What do you think? I could help with the mergers but haven't contributed to the articles in the past and don't plan to do it in the future. I'm thinking about proposing it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics but wanted to hear your thoughts first. Another thing: I suggest chronologial order like Men's high jump world record progression. I think all non-Masters progressions are chronological. It seems more logical. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:45, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- I see you opposed merger in 2014 at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics/Archive 6#Segmentation of Masters athletics. Do you feel the same way five years after making the articles? I think the table of contents and section edits makes it easy to read and edit a page like Masters men high jump world record progression. List of world records in masters athletics#High jump has progression links directly to the section for an age group. There is low reader interest in the small articles except marathon: [2]. If marathon is excluded then 358 of 361 age group articles have 30 or less total page views in the past 20 days. 347 (96%) have less than 1 per day on average. The marathon articles had a huge increase in the latest days [3] due to recent events. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:51, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- I went back to see what I said before. I don't see what might have changed. I don't see the problem.
I think the articles are too small on their own and it would be better to merge them
are opinions. I don't see a policy mentioned here. Does size matter? What is the problem with a lot of little articles containing the content vs larger articles that contain the same information? This mirrors the way the Open division articles do it for each event (well a few do men and women or indoor and outdoor on the same page). Does wikipedia have a cap on the number of articles? Does it reduce the cumulative number of bytes stored and distributed by the server? The larger articles will have multiple headers and will necessitate chasing a lot of clean up. I am one of maybe 4-5 editors who pay the most attention to this category of articles. We will get to clean up the mess. One of those @WeiaR:, whose work I respect greatly, created the sequential high jump articles like the Masters men high jump world record progression. I've had enough occasions where I have had to change redirects and fix confusion (some of it my own) back to the correct sections of those large articles that I have not been motivated to create more. If you go ahead and make more of them, you'll go away. Over the next few years I expect to be here cleaning that up. Maybe you are that good and there won't be issues. I'm not enthusiastic to take you up on your offer to fix a non-problem. Trackinfo (talk) 07:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)- I'm not nominating any of the articles for deletion but I don't think they satisfy Wikipedia:Notability on their own. If somebody nominates them then a keep seems unlikely. The discussion would probably be merge or delete. I also think Wikipedia:Notability#Whether to create standalone pages suggests merging. Seeing the same record for other age groups is good context. WP:SIZERULE says for readable prose size below 1 kB: "If an article or list has remained this size for over a couple of months, consider combining it with a related page." WP:MERGEREASON is on an information page without guideline status but it says: "If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic." It's not Wikipedia's style to split closely related information on a lot of tiny pages. List of world records in masters athletics is a good example of placing many closely related tables on the same page. It might be split by gender but I don't think it should be split in 65 pages with one table, and they would still generally be larger than the articles we discuss. General World records get a lot of attention and there exist plenty of sources for articles like Men's high jump world record progression to be notable on their own. It also has more content than the small Masters pages. With help from the World Championships it got 12,263 views in the last 20 days. That's more than the 386 articles in Category:Masters athletics world record progressions together. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- The progression info is very nice, but on the other hand it means lots of work to keep updated. When I merged the high jump progressions into one I had the intention to go on with other events, but the amount of work was a bit too much. When someone would be able to merge them I have no objections. WeiaR (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- We currently have both merged and separate high jump articles so there is double updating, and Masters men high jump world record progression#Men 50 has far more records than Masters M50 high jump world record progression. If we only have merged and it has the same tables as separate articles would have then it seems easier to me to check and keep up to date. If [4] is used then it can be compared to a single similar article instead of 12 separate articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- If I did the merge work then I would only merge what is in the articles now. This part seems like a simple copy-and-paste job. With around 350 articles it adds up but I would be willing to do at least 100 of them if I didn't have to check the data or expand the tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:29, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- The progression info is very nice, but on the other hand it means lots of work to keep updated. When I merged the high jump progressions into one I had the intention to go on with other events, but the amount of work was a bit too much. When someone would be able to merge them I have no objections. WeiaR (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not nominating any of the articles for deletion but I don't think they satisfy Wikipedia:Notability on their own. If somebody nominates them then a keep seems unlikely. The discussion would probably be merge or delete. I also think Wikipedia:Notability#Whether to create standalone pages suggests merging. Seeing the same record for other age groups is good context. WP:SIZERULE says for readable prose size below 1 kB: "If an article or list has remained this size for over a couple of months, consider combining it with a related page." WP:MERGEREASON is on an information page without guideline status but it says: "If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic." It's not Wikipedia's style to split closely related information on a lot of tiny pages. List of world records in masters athletics is a good example of placing many closely related tables on the same page. It might be split by gender but I don't think it should be split in 65 pages with one table, and they would still generally be larger than the articles we discuss. General World records get a lot of attention and there exist plenty of sources for articles like Men's high jump world record progression to be notable on their own. It also has more content than the small Masters pages. With help from the World Championships it got 12,263 views in the last 20 days. That's more than the 386 articles in Category:Masters athletics world record progressions together. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- I went back to see what I said before. I don't see what might have changed. I don't see the problem.
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Onel5969. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Hasan Piker, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Onel5969 TT me 13:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Barnstar for you
|
The Running Wikipedian Barnstar |
| Thanks for starting the IAAF testosterone rule article and setting a good standard of writing about this complex and sensitive subject! SFB 22:29, 28 October 2019 (UTC) |
Masters World record progression articles
Hi, I noticed you have created many articles on Masters World record progressions for individual sports and age categories. I very much doubt that most of these are notable enough subjects for separate articles, and have very little content anyway, and I would support the above suggestion to merge them.
More importantly though, the way you create them has serious problems. I first removed 3 of the 4 entries on Masters W85 javelin world record progression, since you added the W90 instead of the W85 here. Looking further at this article and similar ones like Masters W70 javelin 500g world record progression, I see multiple problems, including:
- The source for the older records ends in 2012
- You have added no source for any records between 2013 and the current one
- The date on your source ("Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-01-22. Retrieved 2013-05-06.") is all wrong
- The information you provide is not correct: apart from the incorrect W85 list, I see that on the W70 list you give Jarmila Klimešová with 29m32 as the record holder, bit your source[5] gives Masako Suzuki with 29m03 as the record holder. In that same list, your record (topmost) entry is older than the second entry, so that would not be a record progression in any case.
Please take more care with these creations. Fram (talk) 09:48, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- I was catching up on data I put in my sandbox ages ago, too much formatting and copy/paste. Obviously I made a mistake with the W85 by inserting W90 athletes. As far as the updates past that, yes I went combing through a collection of results, season lists, credible blogs, wikipedia records history and of course the current world records. I compile from more sources than I care to log simply for time efficiency. Everything since Martin Gasselsberger stopped updating the lists in 2015 has had to be done manually. That is why it is essential to save the data here because we don't know when the site might also disappear. The Masters records process is hinky at best and wikipedia serves as an excellent means to dissect beyond just the official list, which can't even agree with itself from year to year. Its good for you to keep me on my toes, I do make mistakes. I have added the sources to new updates to the W85, so you can now remove your tag. Each new source opens up a bigger can of worms to chase down. Trackinfo (talk) 05:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Immortal Combat (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American Gladiators (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Roger Stone
Yes, he is a convicted felon. But saying so in the first sentence of the lede? That is absolutely NOT the thing he is best known for, so it doesn't belong in the lede per WP:BLP. --Calton | Talk 07:37, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- See O. J. Simpson for example. It is a significant factor for Stone, because it is a judicial statement on the rest of his career. It definitely belongs there. Trackinfo (talk) 07:52, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Jimmy Dore
Guy:
- "Influence Watch" says nothing -- nil, nada, fuck-all -- about whether the organization is "pro-Assad", or anti-Assad, or Assad-less, or any other Assad things. There's nothing for me to "accept" because it is entirely irrelevant, and Influence Watch is a source for nothing except the organization's mailing address, really.
- The source of the "pro-Assad" characterization is the Bellingcat reference. Don't like it? It's not your place to contradict a source just because you don't like it.
- Despite your being wrong from the start and it not being necessary, I gave you another source anyways. So you were wrong both on the sourcing and on the straight facts, and you reverted anyways. Accuracy clearly is not your concern here.
--Calton | Talk 12:25, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
- Influence Watch notes if any organization has a bias or "Influence" get it? Its in the name. Its what they do. They mention Palestinians but do not mention Assad. If there was an influence by Assad, it would be their job to note it. Instead you quote from hit pieces and repeat from hit pieces. You and your like have turned this article about a guy doing a political comedy podcast out of his garage into character assassination. You might read about WP:BLP. Trashing a guy on his own BLP is not what wikipedia should be used for. If the conspiracy theories were what made him famous, maybe, but they aren't. You have completely lost the essence of his character or his show. I don't know who sent you to wikipedia, but before you edit any more, read a little about WP:NPOV. Trackinfo (talk) 02:56, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
January 2020
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. WMSR (talk) 16:23, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at Talk:Media coverage of Bernie Sanders, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - MrX 🖋 17:35, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
- MrX 🖋 17:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
The personal attacks and wild speculations about other editors' motives in this post are completely over the top. You seriously need to stop. Reyk YO! 04:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
hmmm
OK, yeah, that third editor in our latest exchange I see that their edit count and talk page are artificially made to look like they have done more editing here than is truthful. Do you see what I mean? Check their TP archive. Let me know. Should they be reported? Gandydancer (talk) 07:35, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not sure which one you mean, but I don't see anything any more suspicious than editors I have seen on a variety of these articles. Several have long established accounts with relatively little activity, with a spike during the current political season. I'm thinking someone with a CIA mentality, build a backlog account to hold in waiting for situations like this. But it takes a lot of human attention to make thousands of edits and that could not be maintained practically. Suspicions don't mean anything in a report, you need some proof. There have been a number of editors I'd like to get off the scene because of the hideous things they have done to other editors. And that has been unsuccessful. To do that on content disagreements, that would make me a form of a censor. Trackinfo (talk) 08:56, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Inclusionism
Hey. It's good to see a fellow inclusionist on this site. I'm glad you haven't grown so discouraged as to stop editing, as so many good editors unfortunately have. Keep at it!
Regarding Wikipedia policy, have you read Gwern's essay, In Defense of Inclusionism?
Benjamin (talk) 08:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Trackinfo/Kyle Kulinski
User:Trackinfo/Kyle Kulinski, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Kyle Kulinski and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Trackinfo/Kyle Kulinski during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:46, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Would you be able to fix the previous and next lines that don't work? --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
- Please show me a case where it is not working. Trackinfo (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
- Now work
--Kasper2006 (talk) 10:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
- Now work
SPA removing SPA tag
Hi, in Talk:Ilhan Omar an IP who has made no edits outside the topic is removing the SPA tag next to his vote in the RfC of allegations.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 09:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- I am not a SPA nor have I not made any edits outside the topic. I have simply removed a SPA tag which violates existing policy. --70.190.179.93 (talk) 10:06, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- The IP's first edit was not related, every edit since has been. They qualify as an SPA and I've told them so. Doug Weller talk 11:52, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Help with the creation of the article Miss Multinational
Hey. Can we communicate regarding the creation of the article at ishefalimathur@gmail.com
Just in case
Apologies for this quick intervention pending review, but I'm paranoid, a lazy admin could interpret "bare URL" as BS indicator. I'm also not sure about tackling the nominator personally, the 3rd AFD closure was very near to DEL, or rather, that's how I interpreted it. –84.46.53.84 (talk) 08:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- I begrudgingly added formatted sourcing for this special case. It won't stop snoogans from disappearing it on some made up grounds. Generally, source formatting is against my principle, explained here. Trackinfo (talk) 09:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Interesting, one admin apparently agrees with you (archived), I disagreed, because I like quick plausibility info in the reference popup: Has the source an enwiki page? –84.46.53.84 (talk) 09:34, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Post-AFD note, please update AfD discussions if you pick the REFUND route, a separate deletion review would make no sense (for me. anyways;) –84.46.52.96 (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
comment on the above, in which my earlier comments were mentioned (I've been away from Wikipedia) and on this: There is no requirement to use citation templates. There is in my view strong reason not to use bare URLs. The maintenance tag refers to bare URLs as being subject to link rot. This is misleading. A bare URL is no more likely to change than one with proper bibliographic metadata. However, if link rot does occur, having metadata makes it much easier to find another get a valid source. Also important, having the key metadata in the list of cited sources makes it easier for a reader to u8nderstand the basis for the article. I am referring to such basic metadata as name of article, name of containing publication, year of publication, name of author, and name of publisher when the publication is obscure and this indicates the degree of reliability. Thia level of metadata beyond a bare url should allow a reader to evaluate the reliability of the cited sources. For instance, if several sources are all citing the same author, that is a relevant factor which the reader may7 well want to be aware of, and having to follow each link to learn this is not IMO best practice. Likewise, the year of publication allows the reader to asses whether a source is current or out-of-date, or is contemporary with the events being described. (It can also be vital in finding an archived version o0f a dead url.) In addition, academic and journalistic style guides pretty much all advise supplying author and publication metadata with cited sources. There are tools to make adding bibliographic metadata to a Wikipedia source citation easier, whether in source editing or in the visual editor. (However the output of the semi-automated tools must be checked, they are sometimes badly wrong.) I urge you not to use bare URLs in future in source citations, whether you use templates or other means to format citations. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:40, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
The article Iamnotshane has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Appear to be a non-notable musician with no significant coverage in reliable sources and no evidence of satisfying WP:MUSICBIO.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GSS 💬 06:04, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tandem Productions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NBC Studios (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Up for deletion again
The Category:Professional wrestling jobbers is up for deletion again. Davidgoodheart (talk) 02:07, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Arild Busterud M55 Record
Template:Arild Busterud M55 Record has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hi. Thanks for commenting at the recent AfD for the above list. There is now an ongoing discussion around the best way to split the list, if any, if you wish to comment further. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Integrated Kyle Kulinski Draft
Hi there! I wanted to thank for your work on helping draft about Kyle Kulinski through some fairly significant difficulty. I've integrated the copy on your userspace page and the original on the original draft page so we have one unified copy with all the detail we can, and so we don't have confusion about different versions of the draft article. You are more than welcome to check the newest version there! ƒin (talk) 15:47, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Trackinfo. If you think it's a good idea, maybe we should remove the first banner at the top of Draft talk:Kyle Kulinski that encourages people to edit the version in your userspace. That way all edits are concentrated at Draft:Kyle Kulinski. Up to you though, I don't want to step on your toes. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- My primary concern to create my own copy was preservation. There are elements out there who want to throw a monkey wrench into this article and many like it. They have already succeeded in making his article invisible to the public. Draftspace is subject to the same nefarious efforts. It will be much more difficult for them to erase the history of my user space and archive, should it come to that. So this has achieved that goal. Trackinfo (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with your observation about the folks trying to throw a monkey wrench into the article. I commented about it here. I feel they abused our AFD process and kept re-submitting the article until they got a deletionist closing admin. I also feel that the 4th AFD was closed against consensus. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- My primary concern to create my own copy was preservation. There are elements out there who want to throw a monkey wrench into this article and many like it. They have already succeeded in making his article invisible to the public. Draftspace is subject to the same nefarious efforts. It will be much more difficult for them to erase the history of my user space and archive, should it come to that. So this has achieved that goal. Trackinfo (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/Nebraska/Douglas County medical cases chart
Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/Nebraska/Douglas County medical cases chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. JayJayWhat did I do? 01:13, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 28
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States Olympic Trials (track and field), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Josh Thompson.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks!
I came to thank you for opposing the request for deletion of the article I'd recently authored on Jenna Hutchins. One supporter of deletion was a long time stalker of mine who has never before or since shown the faintest interest in T& F, another two were deletionists who had no clue what they were talking about, and a third was not only very wrong about my (considerable) knowledge of the subject but was downright insulting. I've created some articles on the subject and have added to many, going back to the history of a 1936 Olympian. (I've added to many articles about participants in the most famous marathon of all, that race in the 1960 Olympics.) That said, your own knowledge of T&F vastly exceeds my own. I read your User page and found all of the many comments of yours that I read regarding many subjects to be important and uniformly inspiring. If you would consider off-Wiki correspondence, as I'd appreciate your thoughts on a particular ongoing editing problem, I can be reached through the link on my User page. Please don't feel obliged to respond, as you obviously have a lot on your plate. Thanks also for your substantial contributions to the encyclopedia. Please erase this after you read it. Activist (talk) 03:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Masters M85 triple jump world record progression for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masters M85 triple jump world record progression until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
Geschichte (talk) 10:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Movement for a People's Party for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Movement for a People's Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
SecretName101 (talk) 05:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Happy New Year from Wikimedians of Los Angeles!
|
Happy New Year from Wikimedians of Los Angeles! 
We're beginning to plan in-person and virtual events for 2022, and your support is needed as we re-launch the LA User Group.
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. |
--JSFarman (talk) 02:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
LA to FA 2022
| LA to FA 2022 | |
|---|---|
 Dear Trackinfo, You're invited to a zoom call, taking place on February 11, with the goal of improving the article on Los Angeles to Featured article status! I often find it daunting to approach the Big Subjects on my own—so if you, like me, want a time to sit down with fellow dedicated editors and tackle something important and complex, this is the zoom for you! I, unfortunately, have no way to transmit snacks over zoom; but I trust you to exercise good judgement and discretion in selecting snacks of your own. Hope to see you there—if you're interested, add your name here! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC) To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. | |
Nomination for deletion of Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/Orange County medical cases chart
Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/Orange County medical cases chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 07:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/San Diego County medical cases chart
Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/San Diego County medical cases chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 07:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/Santa Barbara County medical cases chart
Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/Santa Barbara County medical cases chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 07:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/Ventura County medical cases chart
Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/California/Ventura County medical cases chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 07:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
canvassing rules
How you wrote it could be seen as violating WP:CANVASSING. Please consider deleting it before someone quotes it and uses it as an excuse to claim the usual nonsense about us. I check the list wikiproject at times, and already voted Keep to one obvious one that should be kept. Dream Focus 05:20, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Undeleted article
Restored to User:Trackinfo/sandbox/Angelo Rossi (musician) per request on my talk page. — Voice of Clam 09:00, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for working on this. I was going to start adding the new sources after I closed the AFD, but I'll wait until you're done. Meters (talk) 06:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
The article Masters M90 400 metres world record progression has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Notability and lack of content
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Trackinfo!
Trackinfo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 03:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.