User talk:DGG/Archive 179 Dec 2021

Shamir Optical Industry
I saw your tag, and checked a few references. I guess the question is how to get the churnalism removed. I've tagged a couple of the refs, but not reading Hebrew and having to use translation is a hindrance. I think this was an erroneous acceptance at AFC, though I am 90% certain the org passes WP:NCORP Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 09:51, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I've left a request at Wikiproject Israel. That may help. I'm not sure how active the project is in editing articles, though  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 10:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

what else can we do with drafts in references in languages we can't read when the subject is notable? I have ones in Japanese in a similar state. There are too many for the few people willing to handle them properly, and, after all, it is a principle that we AGF and that references in any language are acceptable. Sometimes I'll take a chance with GTrans. Sometimes I'lll try to tell from the reference format. Sometimes if the person is around, I'll tell them to at least translate the references titles. But you're right, I should have done more of a spam cleanup myself--removing at least some is rarely difficult.  DGG ( talk ) 15:26, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I wasn't even thinking of critiquing your actions. I noticed it (was on my watch list) and just took it a little further. Sometimes I do go through 100% of the references, but I chose, this time, to seek a Hebrew speaker. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 15:29, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that you and I probably go about afc the closest of any two reviewers, and if you see something you'd do differently, please do tell me. It's important that we exchange notes, as that's how i see these messages. For problems like this, the only way to figure out how to do them is experiment, and, like you, sometimes I'll try doing things a litle differently than my usual.  DGG ( talk ) 02:21, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Hans Neu
Hello, DGG. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hans Neu, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 * checked, non notable.  DGG ( talk ) 18:26, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Botrytis Blight
Hello, DGG. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Botrytis Blight, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Gardenofaleph
Hello DGG,

I have been following the current sockpuppet investigation about myself and Gardenofaleph. I'm very concerned by the fact that he and I apparently are about to be blocked as sockpuppets of one another without anyone running checkuser, even though Gardenofaleph asked for checkuser to be run. It doesn't seem reasonable to refuse to examine the technical evidence in a borderline case like this one, or to assume that one of the accused parties' request for it to be examined must have been a bluff.

Is there any way for someone to run a checkuser? I'd encourage you to run checkuser on us yourself, if you have that power and would consider it appropriate to use it in this case. 2600:1004:B14C:FBAD:75DE:E94C:3E2C:6D31 (talk) 12:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

I am not a checkuser. I gave up the role beaus Ido not have the necessary technical competence nor the time to acquire it. But I can tell you that the rule that we do not run a checkuser on request is a longstanding basic rule, and whether or not it makes sense is besides the point.  DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I've now registered an account, although I won't be able to use it after I return the computer that I borrowed for this purpose. Does this change anything? The reason that was given for not running checkuser is that checkuser cannot be used on IPs, but now that I have an account there's presumably no reason to not run it. Alexg2021 (talk) 11:13, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Clay Reynolds Texas Author submission -- a response to your feedback.
FOR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Clay_Reynolds_(author)

Thanks for your feedback (Sorry for the delay in responding because of the holidays). I thought I had addressed the questions of primary sources/reliable sources as thoroughly as I can. I had even used official wikipedia policy to support my reasoning. It is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Clay_Reynolds_(author)#MISUNDERSTANDING_OF_OFFICIAL_WIKIPEDIA_POLICY_ON_VERIFIABILITY_AND_SOURCING.

Also, I had pointed out a specific Wikipedia article (John Updike) that uses many of the techniques criticized by you. I'm just checking to make sure that you have read my statement and are familiar with the policy I am citing. It seems to me that you and the previous approvers are rejecting official wikipedia policy on the use of self-published sources or are just not aware of this policy.

Updike died a few years ago, and maybe different rules apply for that, but I have seen many examples of biographies of living persons citing statements by the wikipedia subject (for musicians, authors, intellectuals). To be fair, I have also seen examples of articles of living persons where there is no biographical section at all.

I have already included mostly secondary sources about his works. They are mostly book reviews, but there are a few critical essays about the works of Reynolds and encyclopedia articles. But my usage of primary sources here is allowable under wiki policy, appropriate for the subject and not excessive.

After reading your comment, I slimmed down two parts on EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION to make it more "neutral-sounding", but there's not more than can be done. The option you mentioned -- to remove the section on EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION and just focus on published works -- is something I could live with, but it sounds unnecessary. I have already provided 11 secondary sources about Reynolds books.

As an aside, I've been a blogger for over 20 years and I can say authoritatively that this draft does not resemble a blog post in the slightest :) Specifically, I have removed any phrase which might suggest an editorial judgment of my own and even gone out of my way to locate overly critical book reviews. I have tried simply to describe what the books are about the typical topics found in his essays. Let me know if you have any further advice or need more information about something. Robert J Nagle (talk) 22:34, 2 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Looking at your bio on your user page, which I should have looked at sooner, I see where you say your career is at least in part in publishing small press fiction and promoting authors, it is  reasonable to ask  whether you are a connected contributor with respect to this particular author, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on  Conflict of Interest And if hte connection has any financial aspects,   see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures.   I ask you the same with respect ot all editsyou have made involving other texasauthors.


 * From the information provided, Reynolds is a notable author. It would be a shame if he did not get an article because you are unwilling to write it properly. The first step is to remove all citations to what he says about himself except for one statement about his purpose or style,  and all references to reviews that are not in third-party published independent reliable sources, which does not include  press releases, blurbs, publishers statements,   blogs, or noncritical local reviews. There should be quite enough left.   DGG ( talk ) 01:37, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

REPLY: I was already aware of the Wiki policy about COI before writing the Clay Reynolds article.

Here's what happened with regards to Clay Reynolds. We have a common facebook friend (Robert Flynn, who was my college teacher whose wikipedia page I created over a decade ago). About 2 or 3 years ago I sent Reynolds a message saying, it's strange that there hasn't been a wikipedia page about you and your books, and someone (possibly me) should do one about you. He didn't get back to me for over a year, and then out of the blue, he wrote me and asked about it (I'd forgotten I'd even contacted him). Then I decided to start doing it and at the same time offered to interview him for my literary blog (something I've been doing for a while. See for example http://www.imaginaryplanet.net/weblogs/idiotprogrammer/2011/06/interview-with-monk-turner-creative-commons-musician/, http://www.imaginaryplanet.net/weblogs/idiotprogrammer/2012/04/interview-with-michael-barrett-writer-and-movie-critic/ , http://www.imaginaryplanet.net/weblogs/idiotprogrammer/2020/07/interview-with-harvey-havel-novelist/ and https://archive.org/details/robert-flynn-tx-author-2007-interview I've actually been interviewing Mr. Reynolds for 11 months now -- all my interviews take a long time to do and the final product will also be very long. (I like to envision myself as a kind of literary Bill Moyers, a Texas journalist who conducts long in-depth interviews with subjects).

I have never talked to Clay Reynolds, and when we agreed to an interview by email, we agreed that both of us would own the rights to publish the interview separately without needing permission. No money has changed hands, though I will note that Mr. Reynolds has sent me review copies of two of his books (I have bought several others on my own). I will note that no parts of the unpublished interview have been used for the draft I made for Wikipedia.

It's true that Mr. Reynolds and I have discussed via email the possibility of publishing something later on, but even that possibility is not likely and far in the future.

It is true that I will probably make a disclosure about another non-Texas author after this Reynolds article is successfully submitted. I will be sure to do this after the Reynolds article is done with. But this is unrelated to the matter of Clay Reynolds. Also, I can say that none of my Texas-theme edits require any COI disclosure.

IN SUMMARY: You have suggested that I might be a connected contributor and have a COI about the subject. I have disclosed that I have received no compensation of any kind for contributing this article and that I have no personal connection other than the fact that (1)we have a common Facebook friend and 2)I'm working on an in-depth interview about the subject and have emailed him several times for the interview while writing the article.

One thing I know is that Mr. Reynolds has 100s -- if not 1000s -- of writers who studied under him over the last 3 decades. I know that after this page is approved, his ex-students and readers will probably make this article even better. My goal is simply to get it approved, so that this can happen.

The second point is a little more serious. You say that I am "unwilling to write it properly" and that the "first step is to remove all citations to what he says about himself" and all references to reviews, blurbs...."

I have gone to great effort to write in a way that conforms with Wiki policy and guidelines. I have cited an official Wiki policy about why it is okay to cite primary sources in certain cases and referred people to the John Updike article which does many of the same things. Also, wikipedia policy does not forbid the kinds of secondary sources  you mention -- only that it be used carefully to fill in "noncontroversial details." I quote official wiki policy, "Non-independent sources should never be used to support claims of notability, but can with caution be used to fill in noncontroversial details." https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:NIS&redirect=no

With regard to the descriptions of books, there is almost next to no "fluff" or press releases here, just a one sentence summary of each book and quotations from usually 2 reviews.

I am unsure what to do now. Do you want to approve it? Should I resubmit it?

If worse comes to worse, I could just remove the section EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION entirely and just leave everything else as is, but only if that's enough to be approved. But I have already explained my reasons why the EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION was probably fine as it stands now.

I hate to sound argumentative -- we are all volunteers here -- but I see the problem not that I am "unwilling to write it properly," but that the approvers are not applying Wikipedia policy properly in this case. I don't know why this has been happening. The policy on verifiability and the use of self-published sources explicitly and unambiguously allows the use of primary sources in certain cases, and the approvers should already know that. Yet they seem to think that primary sources are forbidden in all cases. That is simply not the case. Robert J Nagle (talk) 05:52, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Update 3: I have provided a COI statement on my User page (not as hard to do as I thought). Robert J Nagle (talk) 06:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)


 * If you do not want my advice, nothing compels you to come here. �  DGG ( talk ) 06:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry. I thought you were expecting me to respond to your remarks and would possibly be willing to reconsider your decision. I must have misunderstood. I have resubmitted the article again. Robert J Nagle (talk) 07:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Quick note
Hello dear. This article (Tamkeen Insurance Company) represents a real company with a legal presence, and also this company is the most prominent company in the State of Palestine, and it is the only company in the Levant region that deals with the Islamic system, and it also represents the first idea of ​​Islamic insurance in the Arab world .It also meets encyclopedic standards for companies and organizations. I hope the article is not deleted. Osps7 (talk) 10:27, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

, it was deleted by another administrator for not indicating significance. That doesnot mean it might not be notable, but that the information provided did not indicate that it might possibly be important enough to be notable. That's because all the references come from a source which is in essence merely a directory of the industry. For notability of corporations, se W{:NCORP. Put briefly, you need substantial 3rd party reliable published sources, not press releases or blogs or postings or mere notices or directory information. The sources must actually discuss the company, and not be limited to its financing or its personnel changes. Furthermore, we do not consider interview with the company officials to be objective sources if the interviews consist mainly of the executives saying whatever they care to. If you think you have sources for this, start again in Draft space.

WP bases its judgments of notability not on intrinsic importance, but only on sources, I am not saying this always makes sense, but it is the way things work here.  DGG ( talk ) 05:21, 4 December 2021 (UTC)��

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).



Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news
 * Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page.
 * The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse.

Arbitration
 * Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
 * The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Len Fulton
This is an interesting guy and publisher. I came across him working on Draft:Revolution and Other Essays. It seems strange to me that anyone wouldn't consider a book of Jack London essays and stories published by a major publishing house in 1910 notable, especially as this would seem the broader subject to cover the individual stories and essays, but I'm often surprised. Maybe you or one of your talk page stalkers are a Jack London fan and can help? His essays and stories promoting Socialism are pretty interesting even if they aren't his most celebrated work. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)


 * As for the essays, it is difficult to show a book of collected essays notable. It might be possible for London, but you need, as usual  substantial reviews in third-party published independent reliable sources, not press releases, blurbs, blogs,  Amazon, or Goodreads  . Itis also likely that its been discussed in one of the biographies of Jack London.
 * As for Fulton, What you need to do for Len Fulton is expand the part on his publications ,giving gfull publication information, and link to substantial reviews in third-party published independent reliable sources, not press releases, blurbs, blogs,  Amazon, or Goodreads
 * If he published these through his own firm, there will be a problem with notability unless there are very strong reviews from major sources,  DGG ( talk ) 01:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Eran Meshorer - corrections
Hey, I removed puffery and all adjective of praise of excellence as you asked.

Can you give me a reference page of a scientist that shows a list of the 5 most cited papers, with citations? I don't know where to put them.

furthermore, if it is in your interest, could you please check the other page I made:   Draft: Liran Carmel

thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biochen123 (talk • contribs) 09:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Taufiquar Khan
Hello, David,

You seem to be very knowledgeable about academic notability so could you look over this draft that was rejected? It's a little troubling that it seems to have been written by the subject but he's the chair of his department so I think he might be notable. It's a page on the expiring draft list for next week. Thanks for any help you can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 13:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Citations might be enough if his field is considered pure math, rather than applied math. Chairman tends to be a job all senior people get stuck with in turn, and hasn't been considered enough by itself for notability. But it's an autobio and I no longer work on them unless they are very much more clearly notable ,If you want to add the 5 highest papers with citations, remove the others,  and accept, afd is unpredictable.  DGG ( talk ) 17:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I wanted your opinion so thank you, I appreciate your explanation. I realize at this point, you have probably seen hundreds, if not thousands of academic BLPs so I will look into your suggestion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:16, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Freudenberg Group Update
Dear DGG,

Some time ago, we were in contact regarding the draft article Freudenberg Performance Materials – see also our discussion above.

Back then you suggested, it might make sense to add certain information about the subsidiaries of the Group to the Freudenberg Group article. I wanted to pick up this thought and discuss some general ideas with you:


 * The current German article of Freudenberg Group has a much more thorough description of the history of the company. In the next weeks/months I will review the section and add some more sources in the German article – as on first sight there are some paragraphs that seem to miss sources today. After I did this, I could imagine translating the section and adding information to WPEN, where it is not as thorough today as the German version.
 * I would like to suggest adding the current table of business areas of the Group (Geschäftsfelder) and possibly the KPI section to WPEN. The description of the company structure is somewhat different in WPDE (more focused on legal structure) and WPEN (more focused on the family) but both approaches make sense to me. So, I wouldn’t change anything there.
 * For WPEN I would like to suggest deleting the section about the brands. First of all, the list currently is far from complete and a selection of some brands over some others seems at random. In addition, this kind of information seems to be more appropriate on a company website then in a Wikipedia article.

What do you think about these ideas? Would those make sense? Looking forward to your feedback. Best, Conandcon (talk) 15:18, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Kevin J. Greene
Hi! Do any of your TPS have familiarity with improving sourcing for legal/academic notability? Came across this article in the backlog and found a source for the named chair, so I know he's notable. He's also relatively well cited enough to meet Academic on that front. What I'm unable to find is any sourcing to make this more appropriate for a BLP. Thoughts? Or are primary OK in this sense since it's not contested material. Thanks either way! Star  Mississippi  16:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC) I am not sure about notability under WP:PROF other than the named chair; there are a few often-cited publication and lots of trivially cited ones. The article needs editing to put the material in chronological sequence, list only the most cited articles, and remove some of the promotional wording. Usually a publication from the university involved would be enough for the named chair, and other plain statements of fact, but there ought to be something more for the named chair. In this case I do want something more, because this university publication is really just a press release, so PR-ridden and self-congratulatory that normally I wouldn't use it. What I really want is a formal CV--it seems to be hidden, but sometimes I can find them anyway. i'll take a look.
 * But as for WP:PROF. If the only thing we can document is something that shows the notability, then we can still do an article. There's no absolute need for bio information, any more than there would be for someone elected to a legislature. Material in a BLP that can't be documented can be removed, but normally if there's a RS for the plain facts, it doesn't need to be the sort of independent RSs for ANYBIO. , I'll get around to it in afew days, I hope.  DGG ( talk ) 06:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * As always, that's super helpful. Thank you. If the law schools are fine for BLP purposes, we're probably good. I'll watch for your edits as a template for how to handle some as I've found a few other articles a mess, but subjects clearly notable in the backlog. Have a great afternoon and thanks again. Star   Mississippi  21:03, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd be glad for the help--there are too many for me to handle. I have a standard advice:

An encyclopedia article is not a CV. Make sure the article contains, first, the basic biographical information such as birthyear and birthdplace, then the full sequence of degrees and professional positions in chronological order, with dates. Next, a complete list of books published, with year, date, publisher, ISBN (referenced to WorldCat), and links to published reviews of the books; and (in the sciences)  the 5 or so most cited peer-reviewed articles, given in full with coauthors, full name of journals, and links, with the number of citations to each of them from Google Scholar of Scopus or ISI; any national level awards--(not junior awards or awards from their own university) Add major national-level outside positions, such as president of the major national organizations, and any positions of editor-in-chief ; Membership or minor offices in most societies, and service on editorial boards, do not count for much & are better omitted. Very sparse articles attract skepticism. as do those using vague claims and superlatives, or those that list all possible internal and external committes.  DGG ( talk ) 02:02, 11 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I've left the articles as I'm not sure which journals are notable and don't want to inadvertently remove one that should be included. I sourced the Chair and a few other facts from his bio. It needs more work but it's better than it was, which is my goal with some of these long backlogged. Star   Mississippi  19:39, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * My �goal �also.  DGG ( talk ) 23:35, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Academic BLPs
Good day. I do not understand why you moved Nikolai Petrovsky, Barry Schoub, and Robert F. Garry to draft but not Kristian G Andersen and Jesse D. Bloom, when they all use the same kind of sourcing. I also created Mark R. Denison, Phillip Russell (general), James Le Duc, Charles H. Calisher, and now also Yanzhong Huang and Neil L. Harrison. I have read NPROF but am not sure what I have missed here. ScrumptiousFood (talk) 17:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Is it because university websites are considered primary sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScrumptiousFood (talk • contribs) 17:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The notability for academics has a special guideline: the person can meet the GNG, but could also meet WP:PROF, and usually that's the one that works. . There are many parts to WP:PROF, but the usual one is being influential in one's field as shown by citation to their papers. The basic bio part of an article on an academic ought if possible to contain   information such as birthyear and birthdplace, then the full sequence of degrees and professional positions in chronological order, with dates.  A official university website is sufficient for this information, although it is not fully independent: they are considered sufficiently reliable..
 * This is different from notability. The notability of a professor or other scientist depends on their work. A list of publications with citation information from Google scholar is independent enough, and if the counts are high enough it will prove notability.    .  Having received a notable prize can be shown by the university source alone, but it is much better to find an independent source as well, and that is usually possible.


 * For the people mentioned:
 * Philip Russel is notable unde WP:PROF, because he has been president of the major society in his subject. Publications still need to be added. The article might be challenged without them
 * Mark R. Denison holds a named professorship. Publications still need to be added. The article might be challenged without them


 * Schoub is a little closer to having evidence of notability, as founding president of the African Virology Association, but I'm not sure that will be considered a sufficiently important organization . Considering his positions, it is also possible that he wcan be shown to meeet WP:GNG--but you can so easily find the publicatiosn that it's ussally simpler that way
 * Petrovsky is also close, but it will need the publications. That he's head of a company is irrelevant if it's not a very notable company. Refs 4 & 5 might be enough to meet GNG, but showing the publications to meet WP:PROF is easier.


 * Huang has no evidence of notability/ Presumably they wrote books or papers, and they will need to be included to meet WP:PROF. Just being a Professor is not enough to show it, though they probably are notable--once it is shown  . I've moved it to draft.
 * Similarly for Harrison, Calisher,  Bloom, Andersen, Garry
 * Similarly for James W. Le Duc (being head of a major laboratory or department is not enough, tho anyone in that position will probably meet several other criteria)

The way of learning what works here if to follow afds of similar people and see what affects the decisions. That's how I learned. The written rules, though they sound positive, actually leave a good deal to interpretation. It's the current interpretation that matters.


 * Thank you. Please can you tag the articles instead of moving them to draft? I wanted to get them started because they are notable, but I don't have time to add all their publications. Petrovsky is in Ossie news but I don't want to get into that topic. ScrumptiousFood (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

If I create them as drafts then they take forever to get approved. :/ ScrumptiousFood (talk) 18:45, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

IsraellyCool
I updated Israellycool and resubmitted it for review. I'm writing to you as you deleted it in May 2020 and wondering if you'd like to take another look. I'm not the most accomplished editor so maybe I haven't done it justice but I believe the notability is established. Thank you MaskedSinger (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I made a comment on the draft. I think that whoever accepts it, you ought to be prepared for another afd.  DGG ( talk ) 05:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thankyou. I have no idea about what controversial BLP matters you're referring to. I asked for the draft to be revived and I didn't delete anything from it. If there are controversial incidents that should be on the page, they should be on the page. As for another afd, why do you think I should be prepared for it? Isn't notability there? If so, what's the issue? MaskedSinger (talk) 06:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you read the afd and look at hte reference cited there, it should be clear enough. All articles in the Israeli-Palestinian area tend to have some problems, or what people think are problems.  DGG ( talk ) 06:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok. What would you like me to do? MaskedSinger (talk) 07:03, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * the most practical advice I can give to anyone who wishes to edit articles in this field, is to pick some other area. Like cricket. Try to avoid minefields.  DGG ( talk ) 09:12, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * LOL! Nice to see you see have your sense of humor! So there's 2 issues here - the notability of the subject/its ability to stand here on its own 2 feet as wikiworthy and the delicate sensitive niche. If it satisfies the former, I'd like to see it have a go at passing the latter. All I can do is my best, whatever happens thereafter is out of my control. Such being the case, is there anything else I need to do to have the draft approved? MaskedSinger (talk) 10:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @MaskedSinger I noticed your question and have answered it on the draft. I have chosen not to decline it, but it is not acceptable currently  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 10:30, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Sexual Desire
Hi. May you please send the deleted text of Sexual Desire (book) to my email? Ali Pirhayati (talk) 06:13, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Dec 15: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 18:52, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia
Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny Associate Professor Hanyang University If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Requesting some article expansion help
Greetings,

Hi, I am User:Bookku, I find information and knowledge gaps create Drafts and try to recruit draft expanding editors and this way promote drafts for further expansion.

Requesting your visit to following drafts and help expand the same if any of these interests you.


 * Draft:Irrational beliefs
 * Draft:Superstitions in Christian societies
 * Draft:Intellectual discourse over re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 08:46, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The first is a viable topic, with good research in relevant sources, but the aritcle night be vewed as a POV for. I changed the tile to Draft :Re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia which Ithink iscleaer. Seee WP:Summary Style.


 * The other two topics are much too broad Superstitions in Christian societies includes basis christian doctrines like the Resurrection, trivial religion-related superstitions, Moslem and Jewish  superstitions, pagan superstitions like Halloween,  and non religious one like break a leg. I think people could find good faith  objections for almost every item on the list. Your quotes are from a variety of people at a variety of times, and views changed rapidly in the 18th and 19th century,


 * Irrational beliefs covers almost the entire field of intellectual concepts. Ir confuses abnormal psychology with bad logic with willful ignorance. Rgw very concept "belief" has to meanings, and one of them is a conviction beyond the limits of rationality.-- the other is merely a deeply help idea.

I don;'t really see the point of trying to make an outline of this, but that;'swhat you have, though I dont know how you'd title it.


 * I have some advice for you. Stanford Handbook of Philosophy is free on line, and written by well-qualified professionals, at a enormously higher intellectual level than almost anything in WP. What's more, it;s usually clearer, if you keep track of the special terminology being used, and stop and re=read as soon as you see you're not understanaing, . I;m not suggesting you read it through--I doubt anyone has, but give it a look.,  I've been doing so for years.  DGG ( talk ) 11:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for detail reply with your deep insight. As suggested by you certainly I will have a look at 'Stanford Handbook of Philosophy'.

On superstition side I give an example of Garbhadhan (astrology) which is under AfD discussion. Some modern scholarship specially U.S. one wishes to play down 'superstition' either as 'magic' or a 'folk belief', this is done in the name of cultural sensitivities of smaller religious groups but practically while working on these articles as an encyclopedist I experience is bigger religious orthodoxy domains are piggy backing in the name of 'magic' or a 'folk belief' to avoid critical scrutiny. In the process what is getting undermined is 'Skeptics' side of point of view. The present article Superstition itself is under that pressure, if given chance many will wish to merge it into Folk beliefs article. In most definitions of Superstition the term 'Irrational belief' is at the core.

You are right, irrationality gets an inherent agency in the concept of beliefs. Even many skeptics will agree to your argument, but as encyclopedist preferably we go by term used by scholars and is 'irrational belief'.

In modern times the term 'irrational belief' seems to have been used more by scholarships in psychology. But before that in renaissance period it seems to regularly occurring while discussing Draft:Superstitions in Christian societies. During my primary (re)search itself I found that European skeptics were much more introspective and open mind in discussing irrational beliefs and superstitions among Christian societies, Idk why the same spirit of inquiry seems missing in (post–) modern times.

I will keep looking forward to your valuable inputs in these article as and when you come across any good source or piece of information.

Similarly I find criticism of re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia relatively subdued. Is it because in Europe's internal West Vs. East (read Russia) politics Turkey becomes geopolitically important to both the sides? Which European intellectual sources would you recommend for this topic?

Thanks and warm regards

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 11:58, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

This is too multifaceted a topic to cover in outline. and studying this is not a finite process. You need to know the general history to know the setting of the intellectual history; you need to know the lines of thought from Lucretius onwards. You need to read the original works, then both classic and modern commentary, and then back to the originals. You will not finish in your lifetime; there are no shortcuts here. If you want to start in the middle, The two most readable authors are Hume and Diderot. Many people traditionally add Spinoza. You need to keep in mind that people writing in that period did not necessarily say all they meant, but only implied it. And to see what happened later, the most important author of all is Darwin: I recommend Descent of Man, a more straightforward work than Origin of Species.

Just as I leave my opinion of HS & Turkey to be implied. Remember that for 1200 years the Moslems and Christians regarded each other as barbarians. Perhaps they still do. The general history of the Ottoman empire is a field I've only known for a few years, & it gives interesting perspective.  DGG ( talk ) 07:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

I definitely agree with your opinions on current issues at Wikipedia
You wrote that "There is a popular-liberal flattening of positions here, and I do not speak from any conceivably right-wing position." I definitely agree with this, and I wish more admins would recognize this bias.

Also, you wrote that "The other, often related, is the increasing and often successful attempt aided by discretionary sanctions to win arguments by maneuvering the opponents into poor behavior." That's part of the reason I was blocked last year, especially given that a lot of the people going after me had already been blocked in the past, so they were socking using IPs. Example: "Since 2016 Ylevental has been getting detailed criticism from various Australia-based IPs and the number of coincidences is increasing." at Special:Diff/945920522/945925090.

Overall, I believe that the best solution to both problems is to balance Wikipedia activities with real-world activities, which will help one see things from multiple perspectives. The pandemic has definitely made things more difficult in this aspect. Yleventa2 (talk) 20:01, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Even if someone does not truly believe that it is our fundamental ethical obligation to present all views in such a way that nobody could tell what the position of the writers might actually might be (and thus do not agree with the fundamental principle of WP, but are coming here every bit as much for advocacy as a commercial advertiser), those with  a particular perspective should want us to cover things from the opposite perspective also.
 * While those who read the article and agree with them already agree and those who sharply disagree will not be converted by anything said here or elsewhere, those undecided or new to the question are the audience they might want to influence.  If they see us covering it from a particular POV, they will dismiss it as propaganda; only if they see us as neutral are they likely to listen. Covering from one POV gives the impression that perhaps the opposite view is so powerful, that we are reluctant to present it. Neutral coverage implies the opposite POV is so ridiculous that the best way to combat it is to explain what our opponents are trying to do. The strongest anti-Nazi book ever written was Mein Kampf.  The best way to show the utter absurdity of homeopathy is to present it in detail. Only those who are seen as impartial can do effective propaganda. The others are not only dishonest, but  fools lacking in their understanding of rhetoric. Marx, desiring to show the need to destroy the existing economic system, wrote his masterwork to explain it. Stalin, on the other hand, convinced nobody but those already true believers.    DGG ( talk ) 21:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You definitely make interesting points. Thanks for explaining in detail.  I can see how many arguments are self-contradictory. Yleventa2 (talk) 21:07, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think you mean self-contradictory. You might be meaning something like self-defeating. People inherently will never fully understand what they are doing or saying, because you can not understand a system from inside it. Start with Locke.  DGG ( talk ) 05:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Pig War (1859)&#32; on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 20:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas DGG!


Jujiang (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! 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 Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

Shelley H. Metzenbaum
The page has been nominated for deletion, and I am interested in your opinion on this page which has been edited since you initially provided comments on the page. DaffodilOcean (talk) 00:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Replacement chars in your sig
Hi, DGG, just wondered if you were aware of a past anomaly with your sig, that appeared to have a couple of unrecognized UTF-8 characters that render as Unicode replacement characters (various representations; on my browser, it renders as a white question mark in a black diamond). You can see it at AFC from 04:53 19 Nov, and it's still there now. The actual UTF-8 characters present are. This article might provide some insight. Whatever it was, it doesn't seem to be present on your Talk page now, so maybe a one-time glitch? Just thought you'd want to know. Happy editing, Mathglot (talk) 04:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems to be a frequent copy-paste artifact when using "quick edit." and the original source was something outside WP.  DGG ( talk ) 06:07, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Ahuvia Kahane
You submitted this BLP for review on behalf of another editor, but an article already existed. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:24, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks; I caught it in in process. It would be nice if this could show automatically on the draft, before one starts revising and accepting. It would be even nicer if the existence of corresponding articles in other WP also always showed on the draft. But I expect to wait a long time for these because there are simpler fixes., all waiting for years now: waiting for years: default copying over of comments, not just declines, to the users talk page, a selection of Draftify messages, and a wider range of rejects.  DGG ( talk ) 07:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Hedwig Hillengaß
Draft:Hedwig Hillengaß - please take a look. The article had a difficult history in German, until Brodkey - a key editor for opera singers - expanded it. We have the problem that we have two major sources, RS Kutsch/Riemens, which is rather brief, and another, by someone with the same last name as hers, which is a detailed pictured biography. Both list more or less the same operatic roles, the latter also when she sang what, and more operetta roles which not the focus of the former. Could that be accepted? --hillengass, horst (talk) 16:45, 21 December 2021 (UTC) From worldcat I see that Horst hillengass is a writer on business management--his books on that subject are by good publishers; this book is a family history he published himself on createspace,and is therefore worthless as a ref--it would do as additional reading. I wouldn't use it for the operetta roles. Is it possible to find reviews of major performances and of the recordings? Would her relative's book list them?
 * But isn't Großes Sängerlexikon considerered authoritative? or is unselective?  DGG ( talk ) 19:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Devon
I found your comments very helpful. Have a great Christmas. - Ret.Prof (talk) 17:09, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
�

Draft:Andrea Unger - Submission Declined - Part 2
Hello DGG, did you have the chance to review again my article? If you remember, you misunderstood the journal name (Il_Sole_24_Ore). As I wrote you in the previous section, I agree with you about the pull quote. But after that, I need just to know what do you think about the page, in light of the fact that the references should be reliables. I refer to this section: [] This is the Draft: [] Many thanks and Best wishes, Angio92 (talk) 15:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I will look tonight or tomorrow. Thanks for reminding me.  DGG ( talk ) 18:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
 Merry Christmas! ''Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten! ¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua! God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus! Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce! Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством! শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스! สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส!'' ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành! Весела Коледа! Hello, DGG! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 22
 Hello everyone, and welcome to the 22nd issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter. This issue will be covering new and updated user scripts from the past seven months (June through December 2021).

Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!

Featured script
 * LuckyRename, by Alexis Jazz, is this month's featured script. LuckyRename makes requesting file moves easier, and automates the many steps in file moving (including automatic replacement of existing usage). Give it a shot!

Updated scripts
 * SD0001: hide-reverted-edits has been updated to take into account changes in reversion tools like Twinkle and RedWarn.
 * Writ Keeper: massRollback.js has added a rollback-some option (missed in last issue).
 * ClaudineChionh: SkinSwitcher (a fork and update of Eizen's script) provides an options menu/toolbox/toolbar allowing users to view a given page in MediaWiki's default skins.

Pending requests
 * Mass-patrolling at Special:NewPages
 * Taking up the mantle of an almost completed peer review javascript bot
 * Restore the Wikipedia Citation Tool for Google Books
 * Autohighlighting specific characters (Greek)
 * ...and many more, all available at User scripts/Requests

Miscellaneous
 * User scripts/Ranking is a sortable table of Wikipedia's thousand-or-so most commonly used scripts; it includes their author, last modification date, installation count, and sometimes a short description.
 * Toolhub is a community managed catalog of software tools used in the Wikimedia movement. Technical volunteers can use Toolhub to document the tools that they create or maintain. All Wikimedians can use Toolhub to search for tools to help with their workflows and to create lists of useful tools to share with others.

New scripts
 * Ahecht:
 * draft-sorter sorts AfC drafts by adding WikiProject banners to their talk pages. It supersedes User:Enterprisey/draft-sorter, adding a few features and fixing some bugs.
 * massmove, a modified User:Plastikspork/massmove.js that adds a link to the left column, allows adding and removing both prefixes and suffixes.
 * watchlistcleaner removes missing pages (redlinks), redirects, pages you haven't edited recently, and/or pages you've never edited from your watchlist.
 * Awesome Aasim:
 * Infiniscroll adds infinite scrolling to user contributions, page histories, and log pages.
 * Quick create allows for the fast creation of red-linked pages with two clicks.
 * Caburum:
 * UTCclock adds a clock displaying the current UTC time.
 * Chlod:
 * CopiedTemplateEditor, mainly for CCI case handlers, allows graphically editing a talk page's copied templates.
 * DaxServer:
 * BooksToSfn adds a portlet link in Visual Editor's source mode editing, in main namespace articles or in the user's Sandbox. When clicked, it converts one inside a   tag block into an.
 * FlightTime:
 * OneClickArchiver is a custom version of User:Technical_13/Scripts/OneClickArchiver which doesn't prepend Clear to the top of each section on the archive page.
 * Jon Harald Søby:
 * diffedit enables editing directly from viewing a diff "when, for instance, you notice a tiny mistake deep into an article, and don't want to edit the entire article and re-find that one line to fix that tiny mistake".
 * warnOnLargeFile warns you if you're about to open a very large file (width/height >10,000px or file size >100 MB) from a file page.
 * JPxG:
 *  PressPass  adds a collection of tools for Newspapers.com including configurable automatic citation generation in five different formats.
 * CurrentSwitcher gives you links on the contribs page to hide duplicate entries, current revisions, rollbacks, huggles, twinkles, and redwarns.
 * TrackSum lets you automatically sum the lengths of tracks in templates like track listing and get total runtimes.
 * Nardog:
 * CopySectLink adds a button to copy the unencoded page title or section path next to each heading.
 * IPAInput allows you to type in IPA symbols by directly looking at an IPA key like Help:IPA/English and clicking on the symbols.
 * TemplatePreviewGuard warns when you try to use "Preview page with this template" with a page that doesn't transclude the template.
 * NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh:
 * ContribsTabVector adds "Contributions" and "Statistics" tabs to user and user talk pages on the Vector skin.
 * CopyvioChecker adds a "CopyvioCheck" tab to all pages, except Special (Vector skin only).
 * LiveDiffLink is a version of Equazcion's LiveDiffLink which shows a wikilink instead of a URL.
 * QuickDiff (by OneTwoThreeFall at Fandom) lets you quickly view any diff link on a wiki, whether on Recent Changes, contribs pages, history pages, the diff view itself, or elsewhere. For more information, view its page on Fandom.
 * Novem Linguae:
 * DetectSNG scans a list of 1,600 SNG keywords and displays them at the top of the article.
 * NotSoFast highlights recently created articles in the new pages feed, to discourage patrolling them too quickly.
 * UserRightsDiff concisely displays what perm was added or removed when viewing Special:UserRights.
 * VoteCounter displays a rough count of keeps and deletes at XFDs, RFCs, etc.
 * WatchlistAFD automatically watchlists the AFDs of any pages you AFC accept or NPP patrol, to help you calibrate your reviewing.
 * P.T.Đ:
 * TwinkleMobile enables Twinkle on mobile view (Minerva skin).
 * Qwerfjkl:
 * editRedirect adds a → link after redirects to edit them.
 * RegExTypoFix, a script for fixing typos, is a wrapper for User:Joeytje50/RETF.js.
 * talkback creates links after user talk page links like this: | |  (with the first linking to the user's contributions, and the latter giving the option of sending a talkback notice). It also adds a [] link next to section headers.
 * Rublov:
 * diff-link shows "copy" links on history and contributions pages that copy an internal link to the diff (e.g., Special:Diff/1026402230) to your clipboard when clicked.
 * Rummskartoffel:
 * auto-watchlist-expiry automatically watchlists every page you edit for a user-definable duration (you can still pick a different time using the dropdown, though).
 * generate pings generates the wikitext needed to ping all members of a category, up to 50 editors (the limit defined by MediaWiki).
 * share ExpandTemplates url allows for easy sharing of your inputs to Special:ExpandTemplates. It adds a button that, when clicked, copies a shareable URL to your exact invocation of the page, like this. Other editors do not need to have this script installed in order to access the URL generated.
 * show tag names shows the real names of tags next to their display names in places such as page revision histories or the watchlist.
 * Tol:
 * VisualEditor Citation Needed adds a button (under "Insert") in VisualEditor to add a citation needed tag.
 * Venkat TL:
 * ColourContrib color-codes the user contributions page so that pages you've edited last are sharply distinguished from pages where another editor was the last to edit the page.
 * Vukky:
 * StatusChanger is a fork of Enterprisey's Status Changer, which adds a UI to the script. (using Morebits, so you'll need to have Twinkle enabled to use it).

All in all, some very neat scripts were written in these last few months. Hoping to see many more in the next issue -- drop us a line on the talk page if you've been writing (or seeing) anything cool and good. Filling in for DannyS712, this has been jp×g. Take care, and merry Christmas! jp×g 07:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

About the newsletter

Archive

Subscribe or unsubscribe

Discuss this issue

Merry Christmas!
Season's greetings and Merry Christmas to you and your family. Have a wonderful holiday season. Cheers! RV (talk) 06:46, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Ecumenical Yule
Hi David, wishing you and your loved ones peace and happiness, Stevan User:Harnad (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Season Greetings
Happy Holidays text.png Hello DGG: 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,  Comr Melody Idoghor  (talk)  13:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message  Comr Melody Idoghor   (talk)  13:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard&#32; on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 01:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Tagging pages for deletion
Hello, David,

You tagged some pages that were just created today and yesterday as CSD G13s stale drafts (Draft:SoftFamus, Draft:Bijendra Meel, Draft:Thumbay Physical Therapy & Rehabilitation Hospital). Explicit did delete them but changed the tag to CSD G11, promotion or advertising. I was surprised so I thought I'd mention it to you. I know that when using Twinkle for speedy deletions, I have occasionally clicked the wrong radio button for the appropriate criteria for deletion.

I hope you have a great New Year! It's been fun working with you this year. Take care. Liz Read! Talk! 06:11, 27 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks. We all need to check each other. Looking at the content, I certainly did mean G11. Probably a mouse problem. The ones I would do as G11 and G13 are generally in separate batches--one from NPP, the other from G13-ready.  I sometimes deliberately do the opposite: if something comes due for G13, and it also fits G11, I'll change it to G11 so  it won't be restored automatically.  DGG ( talk ) 07:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Translation hints
You just reverted an edit of mine. You argued with irrelevance for translating from German. But your revert is as well. So what's the point not keeping these hints for translating to German? --Vollbracht (talk) 13:04, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * we may be misunderstanding each other. The page is about translating articles from deWP to enWP. How is what I removed helpful for this?  Thee was indeed other material in there also relevant only in translating to the deWP. If you look at the talk p., at one time, there was more, and there was considerable argument about some of it. I am very conservative; I do not like to disturb old material on a guideline page or essay, especially if it will re-start an argument.
 * The problem of translating from enWP to deWP  would merit a separate page, if you want to write it. It would probably more  logically be on the deWP. As I see it, the main problem is that few enWP articles are good enough to translate. At most they could serve as a guide to rewriting.  DGG ( talk ) 20:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Creation protected page -> New redirect
Hi DGG, I learnt that more than 5 years ago you've creation protected BB Ki Vines, which is the YouTube channel of Bhuvan Bam. I wish to create a redirect link over there to reach the correct destination when people search it up, but as it is already protected I can't do that. Can you please remove the protection from that page and create the redirect. Thanks! ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk&#124;contribs) 17:21, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Will do.  DGG ( talk ) 21:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC) �
 * ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk&#124;contribs) 07:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

An Article On An Academic
DGG, care to take a look at this Phil Lord (academic)? The article claims the subject to be a notable academic, but I don’t know, I was having a headache by just looking at the article and I figured I’d leave it for an actual expert in academic related articles to do the reviewing, care to check it out in your spare time? Happy holidays and prosperous new year in advance to you and yours. Celestina007 (talk) 22:46, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , You have good instincts. . Any article on a US or Canadian academic that says someone is a professor within specifying the position exactly raises the suspicion that the person may not be a full professor. And indeed he is not--the university site says he's an assistant professor. I just listed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Lord (academic). DGG ( talk ) 08:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah! Thank you my friend, I honestly figured as much but needed your expert and far more experienced eyes looking at it. Thank you for the feedback, I have visited the AFD discussion page and shared my rationale accordingly. Celestina007 (talk) 23:30, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

RFA 2021 Completed
The 2021 re-examination of RFA has been completed. 23 (plus 2 variants) ideas were proposed. Over 200 editors participated in this final phase. Three changes gained consensus and two proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration. Thanks to all who helped to close the discussion, and in particular, , and for closing the most difficult conversations and for  for closing the review of one of the closes.

The following proposals gained consensus and have all been implemented:
 * 1) Revision of standard question 1 to Special thanks to  for help with implementation.
 * 2) A new process, Administrative Action Review (XRV) designed to review if an editor's specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools, is consistent with policy in a process similar to that of deletion review and move review. Thanks to all the editors who contributed (and are continuing to contribute) to the discussion of how to implement this proposal.
 * 3) Removal of autopatrol from the administrator's toolkit. Special thanks to and  for their help with implementation.

The following proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration:
 * 1) An option for people to run for temporary adminship ( proposal, discussion, & close )
 * 2) An optional election process ( proposal & discussion and close review & re-close )

Editors who wish to discuss these ideas or other ideas on how to try to address any of the six issues identified during phase 1 for which no proposal gained are encouraged to do so at RFA's talk page or an appropriate village pump.

A final and huge thanks all those who participated in this effort to improve our RFA process over the last 4 months. This is the final update with no further talk page messages planned. 01:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Unprotection request
Hey D, as protecting admin. back in the day, could you please unprotect Emsisoft so I can move the incorrectly titled Emsisoft Ltd. to that title? Thanks as always, UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , I moved it, bu left the protection. I think from the page history that semi-protect would be enough, and if you agree, I'll change it.  DGG ( talk ) 18:28, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and I agree: semi-protect is enough. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)