User talk:Cenarium/Archive 6

Extended confirmed
FYI it was decided to leave "extended confirmed" in place on admin accounts, just for ease of use during desysops. (Noticed you'd removed a few as redundant) –xenotalk 12:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Where was it decided? (It isn't in the original proposal that I had initiated.) Desysops are sufficiently rare to not be worth bothering about (and it's easy to readd the group, along with the other usual ones), while presently it makes the total count of extended confirmed users inaccurate (which is not terrible in itself, but still :). Cenarium (talk) 13:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess it wasn't so much 'decided' as suggested by to leave it in place: Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive 34. –xenotalk  17:35, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I really don't care one way or the other :D I think at least one of the sysops was removing it as redundant from other sysops andI noted in Bureaucrats that if that group had ever been removed, we should restore it (if not already there) during a de-sysop. If they never had it, it should auto-promote. —  xaosflux  Talk 18:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

,, another reason for removing them is that it makes gathering statistics much easier, for example in the queries I ran for this discussion if admins had extendedconfirmed we would have to handle duplicates... Cenarium (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm okay with it. –xenotalk 19:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

About new page
I was submitting an article called Edit King on my other account (Edit King2 and it said it was not facebook and I was wondering what that means.Lol😈😈😈😈😈😈😈 03:06, 8 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin the editor (talk • contribs)

Deferred changes
Hi! Does stabilization in deferred changes work in same way as in FlaggedRevs, and does it leave mark on article history, or in log that article has been stabilized. I'm asking this because in fiwiki we have planned to use bot to stabilize article, when possibly damaging edit has made. And the only problem what we have faced is, that rollback cannot be used to revert vandalism, that has been made before bot has stabilized the article. Do you know any solution how this could be fixed? --4shadoww (talk) 15:19, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&#32;should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time, and that you have not been inactive from administrative tasks for a five year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. Further, following a community discussion in March of 2018, Administrators suspended for inactivity who have not had any logged administrative activity for five years will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. —&thinsp;JJMC89 bot 00:04, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&#32;should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time, and that you have not been inactive from administrative tasks for a five year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. Further, following a community discussion in March of 2018, Administrators suspended for inactivity who have not had any logged administrative activity for five years will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. —&thinsp;JJMC89 bot 00:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time, and that you have not been inactive from administrative tasks for a five year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. Further, following a community discussion in March of 2018, Administrators suspended for inactivity who have not had any logged administrative activity for five years will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux  Talk 01:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary! From the Birthday Committee, A 10 fireplane (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2018 (UTC) A 10 fireplane (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Talk pages consultation 2019
The Wikimedia Foundation has invited the various Wikimedia communities, including the English Wikipedia, to participate in a consultation on improving communication methods within the Wikimedia projects. As such, a request for comment has been created at Talk pages consultation 2019. You are invited to express your views in the discussion. ~ Winged Blades Godric 05:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Number theory
Portal:Number theory, 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/Portal:Number theory and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Number theory 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. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Set theory
Portal:Set theory, 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/Portal:Set theory and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Set theory 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. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Discrete mathematics
Portal:Discrete mathematics, 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/Portal:Discrete mathematics and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Discrete mathematics 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. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:12, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Amish:Portal
Hello my name is John and I live in the great state of Ohio United States of America I know you have been an editor for over 10 years and I am trying to create or add to existing information on this wonderful platform. I know you are the editor that deleted my Amish portal idea where would be the correct location to add information about Amish social settlements? -- [🇺🇸 COACH Z &#124; #USNavy ⚓] 10:40, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:55, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:14, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Double soft redirect
Template:Double soft redirect has been nominated for merging with Template:Soft redirect. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. JsfasdF252 (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:36, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Notice of EFH Request
I have previously made a request for EFM which you participated in, per WP:EFH I am notifying you that I have made a request for EFH. P HANTOM T ECH (talk) 03:42, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Help:Edit summary/feedback
Help:Edit summary/feedback, 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/Help:Edit summary/feedback and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Help:Edit summary/feedback 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. Clyde!Franklin! 22:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Revisions query
Template:Revisions query has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Winad


The article Winad has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "'Winad' is not mentioned at either entry: this page and the linked redirect Winad (disambiguation) should both be deleted."

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 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 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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Winad for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Winad 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/Winad 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 until the discussion has finished. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Double soft redirect
Template:Double soft redirect has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC)