User talk:Andrybak/Archive 1

A Request for making Userbox
Hey man, a sincere request to you from my side. Please make 3 userboxes for Pearl jam. It should be like-"This user is Super fan of Pearl jam", "This user listens to Pearl jam", "This user loves Pearl jam". It would be really great if you add something really innovative like photo or something in it.Note that its not an order brother but just a request as i am finding problems doing it myself. When you make it please tell me how i can get access to it since i am helping in categorising some bands fans on wikipedia.To reply to me simply leave a message below, i will see it as soon as i get free. Regards 47.8.235.244 (talk) 12:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you have any colors in mind? Please see User:SportsFan007/UserBoxes and let me know what you think!!! SportsFan007 (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007

User page editing
Hi; saw you removed a category from my user page, probably not allowed to be there which is my fault. I think a message explaining why on my talk page would have been nice but removing it without even stating why in the edit summary is bad form.

I am sure that you would not like if I messed around with your user page without stating why. The reason for removal is totally understandable; the method was not. I hope you have a nice day. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 21:48, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Saw your new userbox; maybe I would, but I would explain why and what I had done. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your helpful remarks. I'll keep it in mind. Cheers. —⁠andrybak (talk) 22:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Your talk page examples in your Sandbox are very informative
Thanks! Re this page. From, Peter. Vid2vid (talk) 10:18, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Great! It nice to know that it's helpful. (a for historical purposes) —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kurima (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Kurima (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
 * disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
 * is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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. ... disco spinster   talk  16:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Correcting others talk page posts
Hi Andrybak. While I appreciate you correcting some errors I made in my post at User talk:Satish Dahiya, you really should be careful when doing such a thing as explained in WP:TPO. If you find an error in a talk page post left by another editor, it's OK to point it out or even ask the person for clarification if it's something which might lead to a misunderstanding, but directly going and fixing even a typo is something which can quickly lead to problems between editors, Talk page posts are not held to the same standard as article content and there's really no need for them to be proofread and corrected by anyone other than the person posting. Some editors get really angry when this is done to their posts no matter how well meaning the other editor might be; so, it's probably best to not make a habit of doing that kind of thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:13, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , thank you. I greatly appreciate such direct pointing out of my mistake. I will try my best to adhere to WP:TPO. —⁠andrybak (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Most editors will see your corrections and probably understand that you were just trying to help; some editors, however, may not be so understanding and not appreciate your help at all. Since you've got no real way of knowing how an editor is going to feel if you correct their post, it's generally a good idea to not do it at all. The worst case scenario would be you change something (even a single word) in good-faith that turns out to completely change the meaning/intent of the post, but even making a spelling correction that's not really needed (e.g. changing "color" to "colour") can some editors pretty angry. There are some cases explained in WP:TPO where it might be OK for you to edit another editor's post, but these are pretty specific and usually involve correcting either format/layout mistakes or addressing some clear policy/guideline violation; even in those types of cases, however, some editors still get pretty upset when their posts are edited. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for correction
Thanks dfor the correction about my signature... I am just learning. Rsurratt (talk) 21:06, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:40, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Messed up
Can you help fix a mess on the page Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/New Userboxes please. User:AlexKiddo16 has created many new userboxes, but the last few he messed up. I tried to fix, but I failed.Catfurball (talk) 20:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * fixed by archiving a bunch of older sections. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:TemplateData
Hi I noticed you have been updating the list of templates with template data at TemplateData. You might be interested in TemplateData/List I've recently updated this automatically generated list to show all the template for which there are template data elements.--Salix alba (talk): 19:35, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTBROKEN
There's very little reason to do edits like on a large scale. The original link works, nothing is broken. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

RfC on COVID 19 template
I started an RfC concerning pointing to the template namespace in the COVID 19 navbox. You voiced an opinion about this voiced about a week ago, so please feel free to restate your opinion at Template talk:COVID-19.  Bait30  Talk? 05:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header
Please would you mind explaining or undo your changes at Teahouse/Header as they no longer allow the template to be displayed on that page. This (diff) renders it much harder to preview any changes before they are implemented and visible at WP:TH itself, and thus seems quite unhelpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , here you go: Special:Diff/948044038/948153381. Please let me know if you see any issues. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:45, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Brilliant - thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:47, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your edits at WP:RFP
Hi, you (inadvertantly, I am sure) kind of repeatedly broke said page with your requests; I have fixed it for now. Please follow the instructions provided there. In that case, it would be beneficial to make the request on the page's talk page rather than at requests for protection. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 06:17, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , first of all, thank you for fixing whatever got broken on that page (including reverting of this unexplained removal by an IP editor). Secondly, I would like to point out that Template:Page links and Template:Pagelinks are two different templates, fixed. Thirdly, the page I requested my edit for is a fully protected talk page—User talk:Example, so using WP:RPP is the only way to request an edit as first item in the list of instructions specifies. —⁠andrybak (talk) 08:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Span vs Anchor
I am curious why you desired to make this change. I find anchor cleaner. —¿philoserf? (talk) 19:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you for asking. That's a good question, and I should have provided a better edit summary. Template anchor has some limitations, one of which is If a template is inside a section title then the template code will appear in the edit summary window each time a section edit of that section begins. This limitation can be seen in the previous edit on the same page. Substitution is a easy solution to this limitation. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you. My education continues. —¿philoserf? (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Half Barnstar userboxes
Hi, I saw you'd recently edited Userboxes/Barnstar and are an experienced coder. I would appreciate your thoughts on modifying the code for the Left and Right Half Barnstar userboxes so editors could show who has the other half of the star. If you're interested, an example version for the Left Half Barnstar is here (though I'm a novice in this coding language so there may be better ways to do this). Thanks. ~ RLO1729&#128172; 13:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Here you go: Special:Diff/957989385/958000289. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! To answer your edit description question: No, I don't think bold is necessary but that's how it currently is and I didn't want to change the functionality unnecessarily. I do prefer it with only the Barnstar name bold, but then it would be different from all the others on the current Userboxes/Barnstar page. The next question is whether I should replace the current Userboxes/Barnstar version with this new version, presumably moved out of my sandbox space. What do you think? ~ RLO1729&#128172; 14:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would have recommended asking 's opinion on this, but they seem to have stopped editing in 2014. Other than the bolding, the new wikitext is just adding new functionality. I think it would be fine to use the sandboxed code at User:DangerousPanda/Userboxes/Barnstars/Left Half. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * So I would just replace the code there (updating the user page names etc)? And same for the Right Half Barnstar which I'll create from the current coding. OK, will do, thanks! ~ RLO1729&#128172; 15:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Done! Your revision has created a very professional look, great work! I left the text unbold, is it worth revising all the other userboxes for consistency or will that just annoy others? ~ RLO1729&#128172; 15:31, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Some award images could also be revised to the newer versions, such as User:Bwilkins/Userboxes/Barnstars/Special, but some editors may like the old versions so should the option be made available? ~ RLO1729&#128172; 15:50, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would recommend leaving bold text as is, unless other changes are done to template. I.e. it would be a good idea to do it only in conjunction with other changes. As for barnstars 2.0, I recommend asking at WT:Barnstars. —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:53, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for adding example uses of the new templates. I'd suggest using more common cases such as and  rather than both being the unusual case of sharing multiple stars with the same editor - although the  template doesn't seem to like the double || in the second example, is there a solution to that? ~ RLO1729&#128172; 16:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , yeah Template:yy is not flexible in that regard. Doing it manually works though. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Messed up archive
Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/New Userboxes/Archive 27 was messed up I believe by User:Diriector Doc, can you please fix this page so I can see what userboxes were created.Catfurball (talk) 17:17, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I see the problem. The page reached the transclusion limit. This is no one's fault; it happened when sigmabot archived the sections. It's an easy fix. -- Diriector_Doc ├─────┤Talk Contribs  17:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , the page has gotten too big, it is most definitely not the fault of User:Diriector Doc. See Template limits for more details. I've moved yy templates which were exceeding the limit to Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/New Userboxes/Archive 28. And I've decreased the archive size. —⁠andrybak (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

could you explain?
This [] says you removed something from my Talk page, could you explain? Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , the diff you've linked is for your user page, and not your talk page. As explained in the edit summary for that edit, it was a removal of a template category from your user page per guideline WP:USERNOCAT. Your user page is not a template, so it should not have been categorized into Category:WikiFauna templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, perhaps you could guess the level of my experience from the fact I linked the wrong page--or perhaps you are averse to jumping to conclusions, so let me be clearer. I haven't a clue what you said here.  I would go with the proverbial "it's all Greek to me" except I actually do understand some Greek and it would be clearer--this is just jibberish.  If you could avoid using jargon and explain your terms, understanding could possibly dawn. We'll never know unless you try. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , Wikipedia uses a categorization system for convenience of its users—both readers and editors. To avoid repeating the same markup code on different pages of the encyclopedia, Wikipedia also uses a template system. A userbox is a type of template, which editors may place on their user pages. To understand these terms better I recommend reading the pages I've linked.
 * Back in May of 2020, you have incorrectly used code of Template:User wikipedia/FormerWikiPuppy (which is a userbox) in this edit: Special:Diff/954308157. Instead of transcluding it, you have copy-pasted its entire code onto your user page. Since entire code of the template page has been copy-pasted, the edit has also incorrectly added the bit of code, which categorizes the template's page into Category:WikiFauna templates. This lead to your user page also being categorized as a template. Your user page (User:Jenhawk777) has incorrectly showed up on the page Category:WikiFauna templates. User pages are not templates, so the code for categorization has been removed. —⁠andrybak (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, so thank you for that effort at explaining, and thank you for removing my user page as a template as well! I obviously had no idea.  Whenever I have asked others if I can use their user box, they always just tell me to copy-paste it.  I can't remember where I got the puppy from but I think it was a friend's page. He helped me when I was brand new and having a tough time but occasionally referred to me as a puppy.  I didn't know that had specific meaning on Wikipedia, so when I saw it, I transferred it to my page in good faith.  I'm sorry for the foul up and I am thankful you found and fixed it. I will read those pages.  Thanx again. Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, so thank you for that effort at explaining, and thank you for removing my user page as a template as well! I obviously had no idea.  Whenever I have asked others if I can use their user box, they always just tell me to copy-paste it.  I can't remember where I got the puppy from but I think it was a friend's page. He helped me when I was brand new and having a tough time but occasionally referred to me as a puppy.  I didn't know that had specific meaning on Wikipedia, so when I saw it, I transferred it to my page in good faith.  I'm sorry for the foul up and I am thankful you found and fixed it. I will read those pages.  Thanx again. Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Category:Outlines of econimics Suggestion
Greetings fellow Wikipedian. I see that you reverted my edit on the category "Outlines of econimics" with its misspelling. The edit summaries before and after gave me no clue what was going on. So I chased back some of the info and discovered that the category is being considered for speedy renaming. This is being done in accordance with Wikipedia's category discussion policy. It would be helpful to those of us watching these pages if you had mentioned this in your edit summaries, I wouldn't have reverted the change. Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , here's a timeline of events from my perspective:
 * On 2020-09-22, I start working on diffusing the Category:Outlines of human activities
 * 2020-09-22T19:59:46 — I create a subcategory Category:Outlines of econimics
 * I start moving outlines, which fit the category to Category:Outlines of econimics, using this guidance from WP:CAT: In addition, each categorized page should be placed in all of the most specific categories to which it logically belongs.
 * At 2020-09-22T20:00:20 I recategorize the page Outline of economics into the new category
 * Seven minutes later I notice the typo in the category name, and nominate it for speedy renaming at 2020-09-22T20:07:45.
 * As you can see, in my first edit to the page Outline of economics I didn't know there was a typo in category name, so I couldn't provide additional information in the edit summary for that edit. In my second edit I've tried to explain why misspelled category name is perfectly OK: the category will soon be renamed; the category exists, that's what matters.
 * Here's another relevant bit of WP:CAT:
 * —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:33, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * From a collaboration point of view, it was a suggestion to reduce everyone's efforts. Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 14:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's another relevant bit of WP:CAT:
 * —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:33, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * From a collaboration point of view, it was a suggestion to reduce everyone's efforts. Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 14:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Template categories
Thanks for the help! I wasn't entirely sure what your change was, though ... I couldn't decipher what I did wrong or what you changed. Could I trouble you to check if I did these correctly? Thanks! Sandy Georgia (Talk)  18:35, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Template:FA sidebar
 * Template:FA sidebar/doc
 * , in your edit Special:Diff/986238911, you've added  outside of the tag pair , which is incorrect. In cases, where a /doc subpage exists, like Template:FA sidebar/doc for Template:FA sidebar, categorization should be added at the bottom of the /doc subpage. See wikitext {{Sandbox other||...}} at the bottom of Template:FA sidebar/doc. —⁠andrybak (talk) 20:11, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Template editor granted
Your account has been granted the "templateeditor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit editnotices. Before you use this user right, please read Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation.

You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edinotices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established. If you are willing to process edit requests on templates and modules, keep in mind that you are taking responsibility to ensure the edits have consensus and are technically sound.

This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

If you were granted the permission on a temporary basis you will need to re-apply for the permission a few days before it expires including in your request a permalink to the discussion where it was granted and a ping for the administrator who granted the permission. You can find the permalink in your [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/rights&page=User:Andrybak rights log].


 * Useful links
 * All template-protected pages
 * User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable – outstanding template-protected edit requests (bot-generated)
 * Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection

Happy template editing! Primefac (talk) 22:01, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Math portal selected pics
In case you notice my edit to Portal:Mathematics/Selected_picture/30, which you had just created, I just wanted to explain that I switched pics 26 and 30 because the subpages for pics 26 through 29 were never completed for display to readers. Now those unfinished subpages are 27 through 30 (and max=26 at Portal:Mathematics). Maybe this will spur me to actually finish those subpages (or you can take a crack at them, if you'd like). Since it looks like you might be doing more such selected pictures in the near future, please add any new math ones to the currently-unfinished subpages for 27, 28, etc., before creating new subpages at 31, etc. I can fish out the old, unfinished contents of those subpages later from the page histories, as necessary. - dcljr (talk) 09:00, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for catching this. I completely missed that they were unfinished. —⁠andrybak (talk) 10:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Portal thanks
Thank you for all your good work, especially on portal templates. I spent time on them last year but lost heart after most portals and some tools were deleted, the modules I was working on suddenly became protected, and the software grew in complexity to handle other namespaces and Wikipedias. It's great to see an enthusiastic and skilled editor making these very welcome improvements. Certes (talk) 13:56, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Replying?
Re this edit, are you trying to reply to me? It didn't seem like you were, which is why I changed it from an indent to another bullet. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 19:04, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , indeed I was replying to you. You've said: If we're talking about changing the color of some links and I've suggested another highlighting option for dab links—that is, use background color instead of foreground color and only in article space. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:07, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it; thanks for clarifying. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 19:08, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Template problem
Hi Andrybak,

first of all. thank you for all your good work on templates.

There is a template created by you which currently has as a problem and because I've way too few knowledge for fixing it, I'm asking you (thus ignoring the wikibreak template on your user page because from your contributions I see were not be able to keep away from Wikipedia...):

Recently, the page "Perm" has been turned into a disambiguation; before, it pointed to the city in Russia. Therefore, now in Template:User Perm the "Perm" link does not any longer point to the city. Of course, one could replace "Perm" by "Perm, Russia" in the template, but a smarter solution would be something like Perm which does, however, not work in the template.

Could you find any solution? It is not a real problem, because currently this template is not linked from any user page, but this may be a general problem with other towns as well.

Regards --Cyfal (talk) 15:03, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Wow, you're unbelievable quick!!! Thank you! --Cyfal (talk) 15:09, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * For the record: fixed in Special:Diff/993794676, after adding a new parameter page to Template:User Russian city. —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:12, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Germany portal selected pictures
Hi Andrybak,

thank you for your work on portal templates and the Germany portal. Reusing the POTDs for portals is very clever. I'm just curious whether it would be possible (by passing an alternative portal layout parameter) to use the same style as the other Germany portal selected pictures, which auto-resize (you can test this by changing the size of your browser window). On a wide screen, the POTD derived images are quite a bit narrower than the others. I don't know whether anyone else uses this dynamic resizing, but I quite like it. Happy editing, —Kusma (t·c) 14:31, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks. I have tried using template Portal dynamic image for POTDs, but unfortunately it is broken for vertical images—the image overlaps the text. See tests for Template:POTD/2012-10-10 and Template:POTD/2020-12-01 on the page Template:Portal POTD/testcases. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:57, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm, it appears that only parameter max-height is broken: Special:Diff/993793825. —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , another solution to make pictures auto-resize would be to use Random slideshow. It can be used directly, or through template Portal pictures. The latter supports three kinds of images: POTDs, numbered subpages, and "custom". The slideshow has the benefit of using less traffic for user (pictures load faster)—it seems that template Portal dynamic image always has to load the pictures in full resolution.
 * I've considered switching Portal:Germany/Selected picture to Portal pictures before, as there seems to be quiet a lot of POTDs related to Germany. Just hasn't had the time to actually do it. You can see an example of how it looks at Portal:Sports. —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of the random slideshows/transclusions, because they used to consume a lot of time/data when I last checked (more than a year ago). I deliberately went for larger images than the POTD ones because I think we should use more screen space (and on small screens, the portal layout switches to single column automatically). I kind of prefer Portal:Germany/Selected picture/17 to Portal:Germany/Selected picture/49, as I want to feature the picture, not the description, if you know what I mean. Maybe just using your search to find good candidates via POTD and then just adding them by hand is the best way to go. —Kusma (t·c) 22:35, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of the random slideshows/transclusions, because they used to consume a lot of time/data when I last checked (more than a year ago). I deliberately went for larger images than the POTD ones because I think we should use more screen space (and on small screens, the portal layout switches to single column automatically). I kind of prefer Portal:Germany/Selected picture/17 to Portal:Germany/Selected picture/49, as I want to feature the picture, not the description, if you know what I mean. Maybe just using your search to find good candidates via POTD and then just adding them by hand is the best way to go. —Kusma (t·c) 22:35, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!


Empire AS  Talk ! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2024 and tomorrow will be . Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive . This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Empire AS  Talk ! 17:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Films based on oral tradition


A tag has been placed on Category:Films based on oral tradition requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz Read! Talk! 16:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Works based on oral tradition


A tag has been placed on Category:Works based on oral tradition requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz Read! Talk! 17:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the collaboration
Hi, I just want to thank you for your help with. Good job! Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 00:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

RfC notice
This is a neutral notice sent to all non-bot/non-blocked registered users who edited Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics in the past year that there is a new request for comment at. Nardog (talk) 10:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia Contribution Team members has been nominated for discussion
Category:Wikipedia Contribution Team members has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:56, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Bar_Council_of_Karnataka
Hi Andrybak. Thanks a lot for your correction in this article. Gardenkur (talk) 12:07, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wikipedia Contribution Team members


A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia Contribution Team members requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

"CfD at Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 19 closed as delete, the userbox template has been altered to not categorize these pages (i.e. they aren't actually in the category anymore, you can confirm by opening them) but the template edit hasn't propagated to the category yet"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. jp×g 11:02, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Cosmetic edits with JWB
Please do not make cosmetic edits (no change to the rendered output or to the template when it is transcluded) with JWB, especially to template pages, the editing of which adds to the job queue.

I understand why someone might want to add slashes to br tags, as it makes at least one of the syntax highlighters work better, but editors should do it only when making a substantive edit at the same time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * On a related note, it is my opinion that edits like this are fine, since they fix an actual error that may result in different rendering if MediaWiki stops cleaning up after us sloppy human editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:41, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Jonesey95, thank you for reminding me that WP:COSMETICBOT exists. It's completely my fault – I wasn't paying enough attention during that JWB run. It's nice to know that someone keeps a closer eye on Category:Astronomy templates. Thanks. —⁠andrybak (talk) 07:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Category:Series sidebar templates has been nominated for deletion
Category:Series sidebar templates has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 14:22, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Asimov template
Sorry I didn't notice you had changed the category; I've changed it back. I only meant to undo the piped link, because it was invisible. Richard75 (talk) 20:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the answer to my question. There seems to be a misunderstanding of the wikitext syntax. For categories, the syntax of "piped links" is for category sort keys, not for links. —⁠andrybak (talk) 20:11, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I see, thanks. Richard75 (talk) 20:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of The Amara Sulya Freedom Movement for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Amara Sulya Freedom Movement 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 Articles for deletion/The Amara Sulya Freedom Movement 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noah B. Smith (talk • contribs) 14:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank gosh for you fixing my flubb

 * Gallomimia, the best advice for correct usage of templates – follow the template documentation and use preview to check the output. Some templates report errors only in "Show preview" mode (e.g. a lot of infoboxes report unknown parameter this way), some just do it in the actual output of the template. In case of Spoken Wikipedia, the documentation does mention that date is a parameter – you just needed to follow the syntax described in the documentation, with the wikitext date typed in before the date itself:
 * As for errors, Template:Spoken Wikipedia does complain in its output. See "Error: no date provided" in red font in ​your version of the page "Tehachapi Energy Storage Project".
 * Hope this helps. —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Andrybak Ohhhh yes. I thought the red font was because the template was gone, not spelled right or something. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gallomimia (talk • contribs) 04:28, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Andrybak Ohhhh yes. I thought the red font was because the template was gone, not spelled right or something. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gallomimia (talk • contribs) 04:28, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:POTD/2006-02-18
Template:POTD/2006-02-18 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:40, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Andrybak! Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:36, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:The edit-summary field/VisualEditor
Template:The edit-summary field/VisualEditor has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 07:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:User WikiProject Userboxes/doc
Template:User WikiProject Userboxes/doc, 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 Miscellany for deletion/Deprecated docs and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Template:User WikiProject Userboxes/doc 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. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 02:25, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:POTD/2005-12-31
Template:POTD/2005-12-31 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy notice
I mentioned you at WP:ANI. Schazjmd  (talk)  23:22, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Category
Hi! Please can you see what's wrong with the categories in Template:Culture of Kazakhstan? This template doesn't show up in the categories, but it's in the code of it. Thanks! --Porto Neto (talk) 01:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Porto Neto, fixed: Special:Diff/1092562729. —⁠andrybak (talk) 02:00, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Navbox style
Sorry for clicking 'undo' so quickly after your edit, I should have thought through the changes before doing it, especially the new specific navigation box category (good idea by the way, it was a long time coming). Choosing that centred layout of the navigation box, instead of grouping the links to the left, is not unique, is completely within the guidelines and has advantages. Years ago, I found a layout for a diocese navigation box, created by someone else, that did not have groups. By not moving everything to the left, each list heading could be longer, and there was less dead space. For ecclesiastical organisations, with their terminology, it makes perfect sense. I hope that you don't mind these navboxes looking a bit different, of course consistency has its advantages, but in this case, a non-grouped layout is more helpful. Cardofk (talk) 21:01, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Empy categories
Hello, Andrybak,

I hope you are doing well. I'm trying to get to the bottom of something unusual that happened today. In tonight's Empty Category list, there are 23 categories about college football conferences that are suddenly empty. Typically categories become empty when an article is deleted and the category only contained that one article or, occasionally, an editor will recategorize some subject matter and they will bypass Categories for Discussion and just do it on their own. With a script I use, I can see the last edit to these now empty categories were edits made by you involving templates.

So, I'm just hoping you can offer me an explanation on what's going on because there is one primary editor who created all of these categories and I think they might have questions on why these categories are all of a sudden empty. I can see the activity in your Contributions that led to these category changes but I'm hoping you can tell me in a few words what brought this on. Of course, I assume it's an improvement to the organization of the subject but I'd like to know in case I encounter this again. Thanks, in advance, for your help and patience! Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Indeed, I've removed some content (i.e. article) categories from template categories. I believe that templates and template categories shouldn't be placed in article categories and that article and administration category trees should be separate. Using Category:Badger-Illini Conference football templates as example (from Special:Permalink/1104626003): it has 11 templates, but none of them are transcluded in pages about football of Badger-Illini Conference exactly. There are no articles about football in Badger-Illini Conference itself – only articles about college football seasons that this conference was a part of. If there are no articles to place in Category:Badger-Illini Conference football, then the category shouldn't exist. And even its parent Category:Badger-Illini Conference has only a single, eponymous, article, which for some reason doesn't mention/wikilink the seasons. —⁠andrybak (talk) 08:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/
Hello, Andrybak,

When you tag a page for deletion, you really need to inform the page creator so that they are aware there is a problem, partially so that they don't repeat it. I see that you used Twinkle to tag this page which should have posted a notice to the talk page of the page creator but it didn't. Please make sure that your Twinkle Preferences have "Notify Page creator" box is checked off so that Twinkle posts a talk page notice to the page creator to inform them of the tagging. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)


 * weird, I don't remember touching the "Notify page creator if possible" checkbox. Thanks for letting me know. Tested editing the preferences, judging by the diff of the automated edit, I've had default settings for this feature. —⁠andrybak (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Feedback on Vector (2022) conversation
Hello! As a member of WikiProject Usability, I wanted to draw your attention to a conversation currently underway on WP:VPR (see the beginning of the discussion) around adopting Vector 2022 as the new default skin.

The Web team at the Wikimedia Foundation has been working on Vector 2022 for the past three years, collaborating with the English Wikipedia community as well as other wikis to ensure that the skin performs better qualitatively and quantitatively for readers and communities than the previous Vector skin. The goal of the new skin is to create a more welcoming and easier to use experience for readers and editors across the wiki. For more details, see our new FAQ.

For the past couple of months, we have collected thoughts from the English Wikipedia community on what changes need to be made to the skin prior to it being considered ready for deployment. Our next step would be to start an RfC to assess whether the community considers Vedtor 2022 ready.

Prior to the beginning of the RfC, we wanted to draw your attention to the current conversation and encourage your feedback on the skin.

Thank you, OVasileva (WMF), SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 12:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Uw-test3/sandbox


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Uw-test3/sandbox, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other test edits you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. WolfeReAds (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)


 * WolfeReAds, this seems to be an inappropriate speedy deletion request. Please see WP:TESTCASES about how /sandbox pages are used for testing changes to templates. And text in template db-test highlights this fact: This criterion applies neither to sandboxes nor [...]. See CSD G2. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Update: Phase II of DS reform now open for comment
You were either a participant in WP:DS2021 (the Arbitration Committee's Discretionary Sanctions reform process) or requested to be notified about future developments regarding DS reform. The Committee now presents Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions/2021-22_review/Phase_II_consultation, and invites your feedback. Your patience has been appreciated. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Arts award navigational boxes


A tag has been placed on Category:Arts award navigational boxes indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Village pump/Header search
I haven't studied flex CSS yet. Please see if anything needs to be done with the search boxes here: Also, please look at --Timeshifter (talk) 16:44, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * commons:Commons:Village pump/Header
 * Help:Table and the section that follows it. Should flex be used there? Is it only needed when there is a gap needed via gap:1em for example? See your diff.


 * as per my edit summary, I used this particular CSS to simplify HTML. That is, to remove two hacks:  and &lt;-- hidden margin --&gt; which were used to produce the gap for horizontal and vertical layout correspondingly. Non-breaking spaces and empty elements are a bad way to control whitespace around HTML elements. Margins, paddings, and—nowadays with flex—gaps are the proper way for that. I don't have bandwidth right now to look at HTML used in similar template on Commons. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, and the fix. I am only responsible for one of the hacks. :)
 * I have a lot to learn:
 * https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/css3_pr_gap.asp
 * https://www.w3schools.com/css/css3_flexbox_container.asp
 * https://www.w3schools.com/css/css3_flexbox_responsive.asp
 * and more of those flex instruction pages.
 * --Timeshifter (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:End tab/doc
Hello, Andrybak,

Any time you tag a page for any type of deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/TFD/RFD/etc.), it's important to notify the page creator about the deletion tagging. I saw you use Twinkle and that editing tool should have posted a talk page notification. Please look at your Twinkle Preferences and make sure that the box stating "Notify page creator" is checked. Also, when you are tagging pages and you get a pop-up box, make sure that "Notify page creator if possible" is checked. I see that you notify editors about Category for CFD and Speedy Deletion notification is even more important because deletion usually happens very quickly, with no time to discuss it. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:55, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Liz, at this point, I assume that it's a bug in Twinkle. Firstly, I checked Twinkle settings when it happened a month ago, secondly, notifications to user talk pages by Twinkle work for CfD notifications. I have just restored default settings right before replying here and the only non-default setting I use is  for my preferred lowercase spelling of the username. —⁠andrybak (talk) 03:09, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Liz, I think I see the problem know. I used criterion WP:G6 when tagging Template:End tab/doc. Per text on Twinkle/Preferences in the section "Notify page creator when tagging with these criteria", near the G6 checkbox, quote G6 ("copy-paste move" only) (for reference, this text comes from these lines of Twinkle code), meaning that Twinkle will never notify about G6 nominations. I will stop using G6 nominations altogether and punt to using plain TfD and MfD or other more specific speedy criteria, for which Twinkle sends notifications. —⁠andrybak (talk) 03:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * While I don't remember which tag I used in WikiProject Military history/Assessment/, judging by the log  deleting admin used G6 for the last deletion. So it's conceivable that thread above is the same issue. —⁠andrybak (talk) 03:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Chrysler template
Hi andrybak: With due respect, I don't need to be told off (just you did on this edit) for such minimal "mistake" (if it can be named like that). I just create the template and then filled it into the most suitable category I found. The "f" was for "factories" indeed. Thank you. Fma12 (talk) 19:32, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Fma12, thank you. I'm sorry, in the future I will be more careful in choosing the tone and wording when pointing out other editors' mistakes, my bad.
 * Just to clarify: incorrect wrapping of template categorization caused a couple dozen articles to be categorized into Category:Chrysler LLC templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions review: proposed decision and community review
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process. The Proposed Decision phase of the discretionary sanctions review process has now opened. A five-day public review period for the proposed decision, before arbitrators cast votes on the proposed decision, is open through November 18. Any interested editors are invited to comment on the proposed decision talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Categories by 2 parameters
Hi, re, you're welcome of course. But – "Commons and Wikipedia schemes again, which are opposites of each other" – I was not aware of that difference before.

What a mess! Commons:Category:Categories by country by subject has some that are named "by country by subject" and others named "by subject by country" – the mixture doesn't look as if it can be right by any scheme. Commons:Category:Categories by subject by country starts again with a mixture named both ways round, and then it has the set beginning "Categories of Afghanistan by subject‎" – as you say, the opposite of enwiki usage. Is that scheme firmly established on Commons, then? – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Fayenatic london, yes, as far as my experience on Commons has shown this is the most commonly used scheme. When writing my reply at CFD/S, I went to Category:People by posture by country and Category:People by country by posture to confirm. Although exceptions exists, e.g. People by nationality and occupation and location uses "and"s with opposite direction of parsing.
 * To be honest, I like the Commons scheme more. Their scheme is left-associative. With parentheses added for clarity one is supposed to read the names of categories as Category:(People by posture) by country and Category:(People by country) by posture – the first "by" gets higher operator precedence than the second. This makes it easier to parse the names of categories – just take the rightmost attribute and categorize by it. In Wikipedia's scheme one needs to find the "by" in the middle of the category name and read from there – a much harder task than just taking the last word in the name (in rare cases, a phrase, such as "country of origin" and "country of location"). Wikipedia's scheme can't be easily clarified with the aid of parentheses.
 * Commons sometimes has to use more than two parameters. Examples: Category:((People by name) by country) by occupation, Category:(((Beam bridges by function) by country) by material) by type. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * As a follow up, I found a relevant guideline on Commons that is marked as historical, but is still linked from the header of c:Category:Meta categories (aka container categories here on enwiki). —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thinking about it more, I think my mathematical metaphor breaks down depending on how one thinks about categorization – bottom-up (clumping things similar in some way together) or top-down (splitting big groups into smaller ones by a chosen attribute). In any case, for Commons, it would be better to include the word "Category:" in the parentheses too:
 * (Category:People by posture) by country
 * ((Category:People by name) by country) by occupation
 * (((Category:Beam bridges by function) by country) by material) by type
 * —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Fayenatic london, I hope my ramblings make sense. I've tried to fix miscategorizations on Commons that you've pointed out as best as I could. In both categories the word "Categories" in the name is basically another hidden "by &lt;attribute&gt;", but the two categories peel their attributes in different order.
 * The bigger of the two: c:Category:Categories by subject by country – the alphabetical list in this category splits "by country" first: from Afghanistan till Yemen. But then a level deeper the words "Categories of" is taken out, e.g. c:Category:Categories of the United States by subject goes from altars ... by subject till videos by subject. And at that, third level, the categories are finally split "by subject", e.g. c:Category:Videos from the United States by subject is split into subjects like Armed Forces and transport.
 * In the smaller c:Category:Categories by country by subject the word "Categories' is taken out first – the category splits into Children/Men/historical images/Awards/Maps, all of which still have both "by"s – "by country by subject". On lower levels these two "by"s are then peeled as I explained in previous messages. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * O…K! Yes, you have improved the categories that I mentioned; let's hope they now fit the right pattern. After looking at these I'm now getting a brain freeze when I try to think them through! I'll just pin a link to this on my own talk page, and remember that Commons is not the same as enwiki… not at all. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:17, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure adopted
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process.

The Arbitration Committee has concluded the 2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the update list.

For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Discuss this at: 

Contentious topics procedure now in effect
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.

In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period. The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * For a detailed summary of the changes from the discretionary sanctions system, see WP:DSVSCT.
 * A brief guide for administrators may be found at Contentious topics/Administrator instructions.
 * Updated templates may be found at Template:Contentious topics.
 * Suggestions and concerns may be directed to the arbitration clerk team at WT:AC/C.
 * Discuss this at: