User talk:Firefly/Archive 7

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! You and all the other lint-fixers are most welcome! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 14:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hallo Firefly, unfortunately your beautiful tool has not worked for a few weeks (on de-wiki). So I can no longer get any updates, which makes my work less effective. Could you please fix it or at least get run the version before the last major change? De-version and others are down. It is very useful to check, if new errors have been made in the namespaces. Thanks for this tool. --Lómelinde (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , hmmm that's weird - I'll have a look. Thanks for the report! firefly  ( t · c ) 09:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Is there any progress in sight? --Lómelinde (talk) 11:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , :)  firefly  ( t · c ) 16:29, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Wow cool, but please do think (not for me) on the otthers pt, pl, ar they are down too. It is very helpful to work with the tool. --Lómelinde (talk) 16:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , hmm didn’t notice that. I imagine they need the same fix as dewiki. Will sort it. firefly  ( t · c ) 18:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , . firefly  ( t · c ) 15:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Looks good, thank you very much. --Lómelinde (talk) 15:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anna Sorokin
The article Anna Sorokin you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Anna Sorokin for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aussie Article Writer -- Aussie Article Writer (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anna Sorokin
The article Anna Sorokin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anna Sorokin for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aussie Article Writer -- Aussie Article Writer (talk) 17:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

reliable source
Hi Firefly, I've removed the DM citation that was not a reliable source. Thank you for your help. 77.89.144.66 (talk) 12:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Anna Sorokin
The Women in Green wikiproject would like to add Anna Sorokin to the listed GA articles here. Would you be alright with this? - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 10:32, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , of course - go ahead! firefly  ( t · c ) 10:52, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 11:57, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello
I'm not a 'probable LTA' or some sort just because I engaged in maintenance aspects of Wikipedia editing. But however, thanks for reverting it because I was going to after seeing the sock tag on an LTA's userpage which makes tagging in talk pages totally unneeded.103.130.61.61 (talk) 08:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You have been appointed as a trainee clerk
Hi Firefly. We have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is. You have been subscribed with the email address you sent your application in with. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.

New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list. If you choose to join the IRC channel, this is also used for communication but you are free to just communicate via email. Ping me on IRC if you would like to join.

Lastly, if you would like to list your timezone in the clerks list please feel free to add your timezone in by providing it as a parameter. This is to estimate when clerks are available and also gives editors wanting clerk assistance some guidance as to when the clerks will be online to respond. Again, welcome! Regards, Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 22:25, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the welcome! I shall add my timezone to the list now... firefly  ( t · c ) 06:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'm active on IRC now, so feel free to ping if you would like to join. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 08:51, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , done - username firefly_wp. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 08:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in my recent RFA
I appreciate your support and trust in my recent run for admin. It remains to be seen whether I turn out to be a jerk. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see me in error, or if I can help. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * On the topic of RfA.. you're another editor who should consider the gauntlet run.. ~TNT (she/her • talk) 18:56, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , hehehehe we'll see. I'm sure by now you've seen my reply to Tamzin's gentle prod on her talk page. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 06:38, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , you are most welcome. I don't think you'll ever turn out to be a jerk :) firefly  ( t · c ) 06:37, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hip Hop Movement
Thank you so much, This whole issue has really wiped me out because right after I was Artist Ron "Bee-Stinger" Savage on the film that just came out on youtube the whole film has almost million views Wiki users took him out of the Hip Hop & Hip Hop Music articles and the Hip Hop Movement Article I dome on him and they went to his Ronald Savage page and started deleting things without looking at the refs i had up evening saying it was not in the daily news and it was - about one of the things they took down, they couldn't say anything after they seen it went i said to read the news paper REF, and I put everything this same user took down I put it back up and he lefted it, now they giving me a hard time with the hip hop movement thats been up 5 years, it's as if they are trying to erase him out of hip hop history the same very next day.

I have started a new Hip Hop Movement page just now but i didn't put nothing on it im wiped out and plus the page they deleted yesterday the content i put on their wasn't saved, I don't even know what I wrote, I am so upset, loke what does this have to do with me if Wikipedia is mad at this artist Ronald Savage that is so wrong. The new page is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Street_sting/Hip_Hop_Movement

Do you know if I can get the content that was on there and the refs, it took me 2 days to read all thise things. That you for keeping a watch out on my talk page.Street sting (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , you could ask an administrator to restore some of the deleted content to a sandbox (e.g. the references). Here is the page you need if you don't want to ask the deleting administrator to do so. However, the draft was deleted under one of our speedy deletion criteria, specifically G11. Wikipedia is not a place to promote a person, organisation, or musical work, and articles/drafts that are wholly promotional can be deleted without a discussion. As I said, an admin could perhaps restore some of the content so that you can rewrite the article to be encyclopedic. I'd recommend reading this guide to writing your first article if you've not already. Thanks, firefly  ( t · c ) 06:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed before that an article presumably substantially similar to the draft was previously deleted at AfD. It appears that perhaps this topic isn't sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article, and that your efforts may be better spent elsewhere. firefly  ( t · c ) 06:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the info, oh that 2nd draft only had like four sentences it was in draft mode I was working on it, it was only up for approximately 2 days and one of the people from the previous group is the one that came and deleted the one you're speaking of the very last one, those are the file text that I need, That was so wrong because it started off totally different totally.

No the article is Noble enough it's been up on Wikipedia for five to six years with a number of wiki project scopes that different winky users put on the talk page with no problem with any winky user or anyone at that matter, it all coincides with what I been saying, and it all took place with this YouTube documentary that Ronald Savage is on talking about his abuser after years of not talking about it, that same day in the next day is when that 1 Wikipedia user and administrator came along and started vandalizing everything that Ronald salvage was on including deleting The Hip Hop movement article and started deleting some content that was on the Ronald Savage page that's no coincidence and this YouTube video or documentary whichever you want to call it has over a quarter of a million views making it let to believe that this one user may be a part of the the Zulu Nation, the title of the documentary is called: Zulu Nation the first gay family of Hip Hop, after years of everything thing they delete have been up on Wikipedia for years, the text that the same one guy took off of Ronald Savage page I put back and he added on to after I confronted him that he never even looked at the references at all because he said this information was not in the daily News on the references and I had to correct him that yes indeed that information was there in the paper that's where I got it from, and everything on Ronald Savage page that he took down was put right back up because he could not dispute it. But it's okay cause I have enough proof. Again thank you so I'm going to try to get the text back from the draft hip hop movement that was just took them down days ago, I think I know an administrator that I can go to and ask. Thanks Street sting (talk) 12:32, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Anna Sorokin
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

A suggestion: link to Introduction_to_deletion_process
Perhaps also include link to Introduction_to_deletion_process for situations where the draft is no longer needed and the creator is perhaps not familiar or has forgotten what to do. C-randles (talk) 14:26, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , that's not a bad idea - I can look at doing that. Thanks! firefly  ( t · c ) 10:42, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

If the deletion has already occured occurred
Can you please fix the spelling of occurred? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * See User talk:49.183.56.8 for an example of a fireflybot message that contains this phrasing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:47, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * - ✅ thank ye kindly :) firefly  ( t · c ) 06:21, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikisources and Firefly tools sumary...
At some point you maintained - https://fireflytools.toolforge.org/linter/enwiki#

Was there a reason the various Wikisources were omitted? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * - Hello! I still do maintain it, and it's not that they were omitted, they just weren't added because nobody asked me to! :) I can add them now of course - which ones specifically are you interested in? firefly  ( t · c ) 12:26, 26 August 2021 (UTC)


 * English (enwikisource), latin (lawikisource) and Multilingual . Please note that Wikisource have additional namespaces Index: and Page: ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:56, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

CCI update
Thank you for your final work on Ardfern, it was appreciated especially as the case winded down. It's always lovely to see your signature on a case page :) Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 12:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , always happy to help, but what I did was small beans compared to others! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

My dear
My dear i mean to say that when people search yaduvanshi then its site  is linked to yadu legendary king page why? Please fixed this site and real yaduvanshi are ahirs but don't know why wikipedia is being spread false yaduvanshi rajputs have no relation with yaduvanshi then Also some people are forcibly separating the Ahirs from the Yaduvansh and making those who are not Yaduvanshis as Yaduvanshi. Change the Yaduvanshi site from Your connection to this site is secure · https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yadu_(legendary_king) And I'm sorry my English not good and I'm new here

A barnstar for you!

 * thank you! I’m glad it’s useful! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 07:07, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Extension of FireflyBot notification to also post to draft talk pages
Hi. Currently, the bot posts stale-draft notifications only to the user talk page of the creator, which results in missed opportunities in cases where the creator has stopped editing, as other editors have no chance of being notified. If the bot also posted the notice to the draft talk page, this would allow more chance of rescue by interested editors who may be watching the draft or tracking WikiProject-tagged talk pages. The issue was raised at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 81, and extending the bot's function was suggested as a solution (see Schwede66's comments). Would this be doable? --Paul_012 (talk) 19:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * @Paul 012 - it would, and would be easy enough to implement. It’d need another BRFA but that’s not really an issue. I’ll see what I can put together. firefly  ( t · c ) 20:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Lean Six Sigma
Hi, if we have a letter from Steve (the gentleman who owns the content) granting us permission to use language from the book or website can my edits be added? If not, would he or I be able to create a separate page for himself? Thank you. LanaBannana (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @LanaBannana - if someone wishes to donate copyrighted material for use on Wikipedia, they will have to follow the instructions here. Can I please ask, who is "us" in this context? firefly  ( t · c ) 12:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Scottish Credit & Qualifications Framework Partnership edits
Hi Firefly, It's Sam SCQF here. Thanks for getting in touch. You didn't approve the edits I made to the relevant entry on the Scottish Credit & Qualifications Framework yesterday. I'm not sure why to be honest - I work for the Scottish Credit & Qualifications Framework Partnership & am authorised to make these changes on the company's behalf. If you want to verify my identity please see the About Us page on the SCQF website at https://scqf.org.uk/the-scqf-partnership/meet-the-team/. I'm the Comms & Marketing Officer for the SCQFP.

Some of the information contained in this entry is out of date, including the logo - this version has been replaced by another logo. So, if I am unable to upload the current logo, can you please advise how I can at the very least delete the out of date one on Wikipedia as this creates brand confusion? We, as an organisation, own the copyright for the new logo, so how do I upload it without any issues?

Logo aside, can you confirm if I am able to amend the text relating to the SCQF on this page? It's a bit misleading, so needs updated.

Thanks in advance, Sam SCQF Sam SCQF (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @Sam SCQF Hello! Firstly, and I realise this may seem bureaucratic, but given that you have a professional relationship with the subject of the article in question, you must disclose that. You can do so by the instructions here. This is a requirement of the WMF Terms of Use (see here for more info).
 * Secondly, the edit in question was reverted because it was in large part a copyright violation of the webpage linked in the edit summary - even if your organisation owns the copyright to this content, Wikipedia cannot accept it. See the links in the message I left for you for more details.
 * You can edit the page and upload a new logo (the logo upload will need to comply with our non-free content criteria), but be mindful of your conflict of interest, and make sure to follow the rules outlined at WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY (linked above) - particularly around noting on the Talk page that you have been paid for your contributions.
 * I realise this can seem like a wall of text and a lot of procedures to follow, so please do ask any other questions you may have. Thanks, firefly  ( t · c ) 15:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at User talk:TheresNoTime, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 16:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , please look more carefully at that page's history, and you may also want to read Don't template the regulars. Firefly was clearly trying to accomplish a productive task, and self-reverted within one minute. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:44, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I was joking, hence the template. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 16:49, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Eh, doesn't actually stop you getting blocked, as I'll now demonstrate  ~TNT (she/her • talk) 16:58, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Humor does not always come across well in a pure-text environment. It's best to be more obvious about it. The FBDB explanation says that the two editors should have an existing relationship that is easy to find; I was unable to find it, so I assumed that you, as a relatively new editor (you registered a while ago but have only been moderately active for less than a year), had templated in error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair, Firefly and I have chatted off-wiki but we don't interact much on here, I guess. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 20:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Pashtun Culture Day
Hello,

I have reapplied this redirect and left a message on the User's page. Just an FYI. --Whiteguru (talk) 22:46, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Lotte Lehmann Page
Dear Firefly,

I am writing on behalf of my associate Gary Hickling (user ), regarding recent reverted changes he made on the Lotte Lehmann Wikipedia page which you administer. Gary has asked me to assist him in contacting you regarding these changes. I am new to WP, so please bear with my lack of knowledge on how it works.

Mr. Hickling is considered an expert historian on Lotte Lehmann. He has devoted much of his life to chronicling every aspect or her personal and professional life, including a biographical book collection, a CD collection, and a website (https://lottelehmannleague.org/). He is referenced on the WP Lehmann page in Notes 1, 4, and 12 as well as “Further Reading” and “External Links.”

Changes he made on October 1 are no longer visible on the page. As best I can make out, it appears that you did not approve the additions of sections on Lehmann’s “Firsts” and “Honors” because they are “an indiscriminate collection of information.” Would a shorter list of Firsts and Honors be acceptable, or are you opposed to the Firsts and Honors information altogether?

You also cited changes for Copyright violations, but we are unable to determine what those are. Are you able to provide more specific information so that he can provide sources?

Mr. Hickling made changes and additions which he genuinely believes were oversights, and would be valuable additions to the page. He hopes you will reconsider your decision on some or all of these things; he can provide sources where needed.

I hope this was the appropriate way to contact you and to learn what to do. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Where do we go from here?
 * 1) Specify her complete given names: Charlotte “Lotte” Pauline Sophie
 * 2) Reflect that she became an American citizen: was a German-born American soprano
 * 3) Mention her status as a singing actress: An exceptionable singing actress, especially in the roles as the Marschallin in Der Rosenkavalier by Richard Strauss and Sieglinde in Die Walküre by Wagner,
 * 4) Mention that she was equally famous for her lieder recitals: Lehmann was equally appreciated for her lieder recitals.
 * 5) She didn’t make over 500 recordings: She made almost 500 recordings in both genres
 * 6) Her third career as a teacher should be mentioned in the top section: After retiring from the stage, she taught master classes internationally.
 * 7) Her status should be included: Lehmann is considered one of the greatest sopranos of the 20th century.
 * 8) In “Early Life” give the whole address of her birthplace: Perleberg, Province of Brandenburg, Prussia, Germany.
 * 9) It should be noted that Lehmann had two unsuccessful early studies: She studied, unsuccessfully, at two music schools in Berlin, where her family had moved.
 * 10) The background of her teacher that was successful should be noted: She finally worked with Mathilde Mallinger, Wagner’s first Eva in Die Meistersinger, who used more natural methods to allow Lehmann’s voice to blossom.
 * 11) Provide the actual dates of Lehmann’s start at the Hamburg Opera: After a year and a half with Mallinger, Lehmann won a beginners’ contract with the Hamburg Opera in 1910, where she began in the roles of pages and other minor roles. [her first performance there was NOT as a page in Lohengrin]
 * 12) Add reference to starring roles and finally of Elsa: The absence of the soprano scheduled to sing Elsa in Lohengrin allowed Lehmann her first acknowledged success. She’d been coached in the role by the young assistant composer at the Hamburg Opera, Otto Klemperer.
 * 13) Clarify how she moved from Hamburg to Vienna: In 1913, Hans Gregor, the director of the Vienna Court Opera, came to Hamburg to hear a tenor, but noticed Lehmann and offered her a contract.
 * 14) Clarify how Lehmann began her Vienna career: Lehmann began her Vienna career with a trial opera appearance in 1914. Her full seasons at the Vienna State Opera began in 1916.
 * 15) Remove the mention of the Trapp Family Singers as it has has little or nothing to do with Lehmann’s career.
 * 16) Add her first appearance at the Met.
 * 17) Add a list of some of her important students, such as Grace Bumbry.
 * 18) In the paragraph “prolific author” add the exact date of publication of her first book; and the names of some of the books mentioned: She also published More than Singing (1945), on the interpretation of song and My Many Lives (1948) on the interpretation of opera roles.

--SP-lava (talk) 22:13, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Wow, there's a lot to unpack here. For the most part, these changes should be brought up on the article's discussion page, which can be found at: Talk:Lotte Lehmann
 * Also, the changes should generally be supported by a reliable source, there is more information on this topic here: Reliable Sources.
 * If you have questions on what is / is not a reliable source, There's a good place to ask questions here: Reliable Sources Noticeboard.
 * You may find it helpful to familiarize yourself with our terms of service, particularly WP:PAID.
 * You should likely familiarize yourself with our policies regarding conflicts of interest, which can be seen here: Conflict of interest.
 * Firefly does not 'administer' that page. No one 'owns' any specific page.
 * I hope some of this helps. SQL Query Me!  06:22, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @SP-lava - Hello! All of what said is entirely correct (thanks!). In addition, the main reason I reverted the edit was that it was, in large part, a copyright violation of this web page. As the message I left here says, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text. Simple statements of fact are probably not copyrightable on their own, but a whole list verbatim definitely would be. Even if the submitter owns the copyright to the text, we cannot accept it unless it has been released under a compatible license. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Thanks,  firefly  ( t · c ) 06:36, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Firefly and SQL. I will move part of this discussion to the article's discussion page. Gary can provide references for all the items on the list. To Firefly: The copyright violation you refer to is actually Gary's own content that he wrote for his Lotte Lehmann website. I looked at the link you provided (thank you) but it was hard to interpret what we are supposed to do in a situation when it is the person's own work. Is Gary supposed to make content on his website public domain?

Again, thank you to both of you for your patience while I learn the ropes here. ("A lot to unpack..." LOL.) Also -- how am I supposed to properly respond to your replies? I clicked on "edit source" and used ping with your usernames, but is there an easier way? SP-lava (talk) 19:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @SP-lava the key issue here is the copyright concern. I understand that the editor in question may well own the copyright, but in order to be used in Wikipedia, content must be released under a compatible free license. If they wish to donate the material to Wikipedia, they can follow the process outlined here.
 * What you did to reply was absolutely fine, no problem there. However, you may find it easier to enable the reply tool, under your preferences > beta features. firefly  ( t · c ) 09:17, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Firefly. I will give the information to Gary and he can decide how he wants to proceed regarding allowing free use of information on his Lotte Lehmann website. As for the above list of additions he would like to make, I added them to the Talk:Lotte Lehmann page, but no one has commented. How long does he wait before he can go ahead and add them? Can je just go ahead and start making additions, providing citations for any change he makes? The other question he has for you is this: Can he use his own website as a citation source? The website is already used in Notes #4 and #12. Thanks again --SP-lava (talk) 21:43, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @SP-lava I would recommend against just adding them, wait and see if anyone comments. A few days is not an unreasonable length of time - such things can take a fair bit longer. As for using self-published sources, see our guideline on the topic. Specifically, [s]elf-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. (emphasis as in original). firefly  ( t · c ) 12:03, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello SQL - I looked at the links you provided, thank you. Mr. Hickling (Gary) is my neighbor and longtime friend. Technology does not come easy for him. For example, there is no way on earth he could navigate this part of WP (the talk pages). He did not understand the message he got from Firefly, and needed clarification. So although I am a WP novice, I am better than Gary technically, and I am helping him navigate. I did not add content to the Lotte Lehmann page for him, but he could not get his lists to format properly, so I did that for him. So we don't see a conflict of interest, and I am not being paid to add content on Lotte Lehmann. I am the go between helping Gary communicate. We are not trying to hide anything; Gary truly just wants the Lotte Lehmann article to reflect his 50 years of research. Does it sound to you that we are in violation, or that we need to disclose something? I hope that doesn't sound sarcastic - Asked in earnest, please let me know. --SP-lava (talk) 19:51, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Firefly Bot
Hello, Firefly,

I'm a little hesitant to complain about Firefly Bot as I am so grateful that you have it posting notices to draft creators about expiring drafts. Its activity has really improved the situation for draft creators and the list of expiring drafts is shorter now than in Fall 2020, now that editors are alerted and go work on their drafts to give them some recent editing activity. But I have found something that is puzzling, so consider this a query rather than a complaint.

I delete a lot of expiring drafts and I often go to draft creators' talk pages to see if they are active editors and to see if they need help or a welcome message. Infrequently, I'd say 1 time out of ~15, Firefly Bot hasn't posted a notice about an expiring draft and honestly, I can not figure out any pattern to its behavior. The latest incident was Draft:1626 influenza pandemic and you can go to the draft creator's talk page, User talk:DondeEstaElBurro?, and see that Firefly Bot has posted other notices to this editor. There didn't seem to be anything unusual about this particular draft.

The only thing I can think of is that the list of drafts that Firefly Bot works with is different than the list that SDZeroBot has put together which is the predominant list that admins & editors work with. This is not a huge problem since things work out excellently 93% of the time. I was just curious if you had any idea why it might skip some notices. Thanks again for setting this all up, it's really been invaluable. Liz Read! Talk! 22:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , please do not worry that you're complaining - without bug reports things can't get fixed! :) That issue is indeed rather odd. You're right that FireflyBot uses a different list of drafts to SDZeroBot - I believe the SDZeroBot list didn't exist when I wrote the code for this task so had no choice but to 'roll my own'. The query the bot uses can be seen at query/52423. I can't see why it'd be skipping some drafts - I'll take a look at the "1626..." page you linked and see if I can track down whether it didn't get into the query (which would be extremely odd) or whether the bot skipped it for some other reason... firefly  ( t · c ) 15:57, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, that's a great attitude to have! I know there are different G13 lists that bots use because SDZeroBot's list of expiring drafts is different that the pages that appear in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions. As I said, Firefly Bot skipping drafts is uncommon so if I encounter it again, I'll let you know. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:25, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, here's another. There should have been a Firefly bot notice on User talk:Shanthi Cheriyan for Draft:Om Karr but there wasn't. The editor hasn't edited in six months so I don't think it mattered. It's taken me this many days to come across another example! Liz Read! Talk! 22:15, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Found another one. User:Isonettv/sandbox/Speedboat Attack appeared in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions but had no Firefly bot notice on User talk:Isonettv and, oddly, the page didn't appear on the SDZeroBot list either. Liz Read! Talk! 20:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , well that’s even more interesting. I wonder what’s causing these to be missed. Will try to have a look at this one tomorrow as it’s particularly odd! firefly  ( t · c ) 20:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm seeing more drafts that the bot has skipped. Draft:Macedonian language between the two world wars is the latest I've come across. I can kind of understand that the bot might be confused by the User space drafts because it has to check to see if there is a AFC or Article Wizard tag but Draft space is more straight-forward so I don't know why it would miss aging drafts there. Liz Read! Talk! 21:00, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I've reworked the bot to use a different query (based on the one listed at Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions) so that it correctly picks up drafts in Userspace - this query also seems to pick up one or two more Draftspace drafts than my original one, for reasons I've not yet determined! Hopefully this will fix the issue, but please do let me know if you find any other drafts the bot seems to have missed. Thanks! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 13:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm coming here because I've noticed more times FireflyBot hasn't posted a notice than, say, six months ago. I haven't noticed much of a pattern but in one case, I think the FireflyBot skips user talk pages where it has already posted a notice for that particular draft, does that make sense? Here's an example of something I'm seeing today (more than once):
 * Draft:ABC has last been edited on September 23, 2020
 * Editor:XYZ gets a notice from FireflyBot on February 23, 2021 about the draft
 * Editor:XYZ doesn't respond and Draft:ABC gets deleted on March 23, 2021
 * Editor:XYZ goes to WP:REFUND on March 25, 2021 and gets Draft:ABC restored
 * Editor:XYZ doesn't edit Draft:ABC again and there is no notice from FireflyBot on August 25, 2021
 * Draft:ABC gets deleted again on September 25, 2021
 * So, maybe if there is already a notice from FireflyBot (from February 2021) about Draft:ABC, it won't post a new notice in August 2021? What's interesting is in the case I was just working on, there was not an August 2021 notice for Draft:ABC in August for Editor:XYZ BUT FireflyBot did post a notice for a different page, Draft:LMNOP, in August 2021 that was also due to expire in September. You would think that this is an unusual situation but I'd say about half of the drafts restored via WP:REFUND just get deleted again in six months. There is one case yesterday where the editor returned for a fourth time to get his draft restored.
 * This doesn't account for all instances because, as I said above, the list we use for deletions, User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon, includes pages that are eligible for deletion but which don't show up in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions. I asked User:SD0001 about this difference (a lot!) in October 2020 so maybe he could explain it, bot operator-to-bot operator.
 * The reason I'm so adamant about this is because not every admin who deletes stale drafts sends a notice to the page creator when the page is deleted so sometimes, FireflyBot's notice is the only one they receive about a particular draft. But even if FireflyBot doesn't post to every editor, it does notify the vast majority and I'm very grateful for that! Liz Read! Talk! 22:33, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, sorry for the deluge, but here's an different but similar example, I just deleted Draft:Albin Myers. I went to the page creator's user talk page, User talk:Connorjosef, and there was no FireflyBot notice. But there was a previous G13 deletion notice on this talk page for Draft:Albin Myers when it was deleted in March. When I restored the draft to look at it, it wasn't in the AfC G13 eligible soon category but it was in Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions which is the category drafts are moved to when they become eligible so that means it was in the AfC G13 eligible soon category before today. So, maybe, FireflyBot skips talk pages if it sees there is already a notice on them for a particular draft. A possibility? Liz Read! Talk! 23:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi @Liz - you’re right in that the bot skips people it’s already notified about a draft to prevent duplicate messages - however of course if said draft gets rescued and then lapses again another notification would be in order. I’ll add in a check that allows for duplicate notifications if a suitable length of time (~5 months) has passed since the last one. Thanks for noticing that! firefly  ( t · c ) 19:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, here's another case (this is becoming like a detective story!).
 * Draft:Mad Fucking Witches was tagged for deletion by SDZeroBot but the editor got no notice from FireflyBot and, in fact, they had no user talk page at all. The article is in Draftspace (obviously) but doesn't have an AfC tag (neither submitted nor unsubmitted) and it's only in the category Category:Drafts with short description.
 * Draft:Kristen Griffith-VanderYacht, which is eligible at the same time according to SDZeroBot, was submitted to AfC and is placed in categories Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions, Category:AfC submissions by date/21 March 2021, Category:AfC submissions declined as a non-notable biography and Category:Declined AfC submissions. That editor was notified by FireflyBot.
 * I went back and checked Draft:Albin Myers, which didn't get a notice from FireflyBot, and it was submitted to AfC and was in categories Category:AfC submissions by date/09 July 2020, Category:AfC submissions by date/24 May 2020, Category:CS1 Romanian-language sources (ro), Category:AfC submissions declined as a non-notable musical topic Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions (which is the successor to Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions), Category:Declined AfC submissions, Category:AfC submissions declined as needing footnotes and Category:Drafts with short description but the editor had received a G13 notice back in March 2021 for the same draft when it was previously deleted.
 * SO, maybe SDZeroBot picks up any page in Draftspace that hasn't been edited in 6 months while the bot/tool/whatever that places pages in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions only includes Draft and User pages that have an AFC tag, submitted or unsubmitted, and FireflyBot works off that tagging system. And then FireflyBot doesn't notify editors if they have ever been notified, in any way, for that particular Draft page in the past. Does this explanation make sense? The only thing I still don't know is what bot/tool/whatever is responsible for placing Drafts and User pages in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions in the first place. If I knew that, I could bug them instead of you! Maybe that is an element of the AfC tag/template? I don't know. Thanks for indulging my speculation...I think this is the end of my questions for you if you think this explanation resolves what I initially saw as inconsistencies. ;-) Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Damn, I found another exception. Draft:Froshking is on the SDZeroBot list, is in NO categories at all (not in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions), has NO AfC tag and yet, its page creator got a notice from FireflyBot at the 5 month mark. So, I don't have it all figured out. But I'll give it a rest so I don't overwhelm your talk page. Bummer. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Firefly: Can you also ignore bot edits while evaluating the ages of drafts? Per WP:G13, bot edits don't matter and some folks have been tagging for deletion the drafts eligible as such, even though the creators aren't getting their 5-month notices. query/55413 can be used for this (after changing 6 to 5; it's a union of two queries since for some reason the combined query is lot slower). I've been thinking about using it in the sdzerobot pages but I think it would be better if FireflyBot starts using it first. – SD0001  (talk) 12:59, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @SD0001 - yep, I'll adapt that query for the bot to use. It already uses an adapted version of your prior query IIRC. Thanks, firefly  ( t · c ) 06:17, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Firefly lintertool
Hi Firefly, the tool hast stopped working since 08:55 in the morning Outstanding linter errors on dewiki As of 2021-10-21 08:55:17 today. Could you please take a look on it? --Lómelinde (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @Lómelinde - yes there were some oddities earlier with the Python webservice infrastructure. Now resolved so it's back to updating as usual :) firefly  ( t · c ) 16:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. --Lómelinde (talk) 16:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

George Clarke (Architect)
You reverted edits and stated "Not sure this is an improvement - seems to be non-neutral". "Not sure" and "seems" are not good reasons for reverting.

The purpose of the edits you reverted were to put a more neutral tone on the content. Previously, the content had prefaced quotes with a non-neutral statement. The content had used juxtaposition of statements and innuendo that suggested the witness accounts were false rather than just wrong. The section's final reference makes it clear, the BBC had to defend its report questioning the witnesses but the content had been written in such a POV way as to leave-off and suggest the reference questioned the witness accounts. The most that can be said from the facts is that the witnesses were most likely wrong which could possibly be accounted for by mistake or false memory which could be the result of trauma from the incident. The suggestion that the reports were false is merely suggestion. The article should state facts not make suggestions.

I question if the whole section is notable enough to be included in the article.

Please revert your reversion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.42.5.143 (talk) 23:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)


 * (noting that I've replied at the IP talk page given IPs don't get Echo pings) firefly  ( t · c ) 16:40, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Linter error categories missing from automated report
I don't know when it happened, but a bunch of Special:LintErrors categories have gone missing from the automated table. There are five high-priority errors listed at the top of the table, but there are ten total high-priority errors. One medium-priority error is missing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @Jonesey95 How bizarre. I’ll take a look. firefly  ( t · c ) 05:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @Jonesey95 - ah I see what you're getting at now. The table only displays categories that have errors - so for instance "self-closed tags" shows as having 72 errors on the Special:LintErrors page, but actually doesn't appear to have any. The table doesn't display rows or columns with only zeroes in order to keep things tidy. firefly  ( t · c ) 10:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, how tidy! I hadn't actually clicked through those links to see if there were errors, since the counts were so high. That counter on the Special page needs some coffee! That all makes sense. Thanks for looking. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:59, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

DRN Status, Bot Question
I think that your bot lists a case at DRN as new if its status is shown as "Closed" rather than "closed". Could you please, at your convenience, check whether the bot is doing a case-sensitive comparison against values of strings? If so, could the bot be tweaked to fold case? Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:14, 11 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Oops that would definitely be a bug if so! Will check it out... firefly  ( t · c ) 07:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Robert McClenon - forgot the ping, see above. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 07:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Why thank you! :) You're very welcome!✨ firefly  ( t · c ) 09:19, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Neutral point of view
Hi Firefly, I think the definition of "Neutral point of view" is not proper on wiki. If saying a good people good from the point view of other people is not neutral, the ones with a lot of citation from someone's autobiography is not neutral as well. It can not be justified by whether there is a source or not. I can create a source and cite it. But I do not want to do that. As trained mathematician who have been following the axiom system and judge everything from definition, I will not argue here. However, it does not mean that axioms and definitions are impeccable. Hope my comments can get some attention. In case you revise the definition of "neutral point of view", please let me know. Thanks. Qian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qianzhangnu (talk • contribs) 14:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Qianzhangnu the issue at hand here is that the additions you made were clearly from the point of view of someone who has worked closely with this person, and holds them in high esteem. On Wikipedia, we must write "from nowhere", with no pre-determined views about subjects (if we hold said views, we must put them aside when writing articles). In terms of revising the definition of NPOV, the place to argue that would be the talk page for the policy. However, NPOV is a very long standing core policy, so the chances of a change along the lines you suggest is exceptionally unlikely to succeed. Thanks, firefly  ( t · c ) 14:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

From a Draft
Good morning, I need this entry to be supervised to know if it already meets the necessary requirements to be accepted from the encyclopedic criteria. I hope it can be posible. Thank you.--SVC74 (talk) 19:09, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Draft notice
Hello maintainer(s), Thankyou for your contributions. I am here as the bot posted a message on my talk page. It was a notice about a draft Draft:Behrouz Barani. The bot took me as the creator of the draft and posted a message about its possible deletion per WP:G13. I am not he original creator of the draft. However, I have moved the draft from userspace to draftspace in past. I thought it would be better to let you know about this issue. Thankyou signed, Iflaq  (talk) 16:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @Iflaq Hello - unfortunately there's not much that can be done about that. It's very hard to programmatically determine the first "real" edit to a page. Of course, we could just skip any drafts where the first revision's edit summary begins " moved page..." - that may be better than sending largely pointless messages. When I'm back from holiday I can look at that... firefly  ( t · c ) 16:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @Firefly Sure and sorry to disturb you, I missed the notice on talkpage, btw Happy Holidays. signed,  Iflaq  (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The same thing happens with Twinkle notifications. This happens often when an experienced editor creates a redirect after moving a page, then a less experienced editor builds an article on top of the redirect then the page gets moved to Draft space. The experienced editor gets notified when the page is deleted because, technically, they created the page even if they didn't create the article. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Einar Bergström
I'm sorry but I've exhausted all avenues I can see to meet the English Wikipedia's critique of this article. Without help from someone, I do not think it is possible.

I have written a lot of articles in quite a few languages ​​on Wikipedia in the last 10 years and something that is very clear is that there is a very different culture, not least about what is a correct source.

I have assumed that factor when this article (but none else has been criticized for), eg the lack of sources. But that has only resulted in me getting a bunch of new reviews that have been just as unspecified and sweeping. Zero sources are simply not something I agree with. What to do about the comment "not famous enough" (it was higly classified military secret activities).

I have written in Swedish, German and English, creating new and upgrades existing in a series of articles about Swedish and German aircraft constructors and the aviation technology they were pushing the front line aviation technology of 1938-1970, like delta wing and supersonic flight (more need in Europe where the time for USSR nuclear bombers were much shorter to reach us, than the US). They were in the same generation as the US Kelly Johnson (engineer) and the theme of persons and technology is of general aviation history interest.

The articles are about what the people did, what technologies they worked out, the political threats and decisions (such as the Defence Act of 1958 (Sweden) that are the basis for giving them resources and opportunities to create what they did. It is a process of technological development during the Cold War that has no parallels during other eras and I think it is important that it is documented.

The incentive to write the series of articles came when I scanned the photo archive of my father on behalf of the family and found his documentation of his professional life stuck among the photos. This made me seek contact with relatives to his former professional colleagues who together formed a unique team that created unique technology. This is because all of a sudden we had sources and a material to start from. Something to be supplemented and searched further for to create interesting reading. Death runes of people in Wikipedia are so tiring to read, as it says nothing in them, this is about what they did (that is of general interest) and not who they were.

I think the problem is that Einar Bergström is my father and nothing else and therefore it is the only article about them around Erik Bratt that has been rejected, despite it actually having the best sources of them all. Personally, it is not my father but what they did that interests me and is worth reading.

I would be glad if the critics would be more supportive. I think it would be nice if someone took the material and wrote an article from those basics so I do not have to be the author. Can't you write a new article on Einar Bergström and feel free to ask me if there is any information I can try to find for the article? You can read the German and Swedish articles as well (right-click in Chrome for translation)? But so far I have not received any support to finalize.

So what should I do, more than wait for it to be deleted? --Zzalpha (talk) 04:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Zzalpha Hello - I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that draft specifically, so am probably not the best person to ask. I'd suggest asking at the Teahouse for some assistance. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 08:49, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

DRN Status Bot again
It appears that the status bot isn't working, and is only listing two cases when there are six that should be listed. This is not urgent, but is a case of not doing what it should do. Please take a technical look at the bot. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:06, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Robert McClenon - fixed, seems there was some stray wikicode on the page which was causing the parser to not parse things properly. I believe I've also resolved the capitalisation/normalisation issue :) firefly  ( t · c ) 14:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Maybe the Same Thing again
The status bot isn't working, again. It is listing only one case. I thought that it was fixed when you said it was fixed, and I think that the case problem is fixed. However, either the problem of cases being missed has recurred in the same form, or has come in a different form. Thank you for working on the bot. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Robert McClenon  :)  firefly  ( t · c ) 08:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Robert McClenon -, seems there's a mwparserfromhell bug I need to report... firefly  ( t · c ) 13:36, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

QudamaRafiq
Please don't tag articles with WP:A3 (or WP:A1) unless at least 10 minutes have elapsed since the article creation.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Bbb23 woops, must've misread the timestamp on creation. Seafood duly eaten, apologies :) firefly  ( t · c ) 14:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * (smiling) No worries.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:12, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Firefly Bot
Hello, Firefly,

Sorry to revisit an old subject but I'm noticing Firefly Bot skipping more notifications that usual. I'll give you one example I was looking into, Draft:Bhutanese name. The page creator didn't receive a notice and I don't see evidence that they had received a notice in the past. Any ideas why the bot wouldn't inform them? They hadn't submitted the draft to AFC, would that cause the bot to skip the notification? Because many draft pages on the SDZeroBot list were never submitted to AFC. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Liz Hmm - I'll have to look and see whether that draft shows up in the logs (e.g. of drafts skipped for some reason). The bot now uses the same query as SDZeroBot (I believe - unless SD0001 has updated it since we synced them!), so the input to the two processes should be identical. With regard to AfC, no - the bot looks at every page in the Draft: namespace, as they are all eligible for G13 when the time comes. firefly  ( t · c ) 08:43, 24 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Here's another one, Draft:Jordan Carlyle. Editor has never received a notice for this one before, as far as I can see. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 06:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, I was wrong about this one but it brings up more questions. Firefly Bot did post a notice to this page creator about this page back in the Spring 2021 but the editor removed the notice from their talk page. I was able to see it in the page history. So, does Firefly Bot have a memory of editors and which pages they have received notices for? I find that rather incredible. I thought the bot would base the action of whether to leave a notice or not by if there was already a notice on their user talk page so how could the bot know it had once left a message when that message is no longer visible on the page? In this case, the page creator made one edit and now it's eligible again so I think Firefly Bot should post second messages in cases like this. Was there a good reason why it wouldn't post twice? Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 06:37, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Liz,
 * The bot does keep a log of who has got messages to prevent the edge case of someone getting a message, removing it from their talk page, and the bot then re-adding it for some reason (e.g. if a process is interrupted and restarted, and it processes drafts it has processed before). However, that 'memory' should have a limit of 6 months, so that someone can get a new message should the draft become eligible for G13 again. I'll check and see whether the timings are wrong, or some other edge-case happened here. Thanks! firefly  ( t · c ) 09:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Liz forgot the ping - woops :) firefly  ( t · c ) 09:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

On a tangent, could I bump the request raised at /Archive 7? Have you found the time to look into this? --Paul_012 (talk) 10:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Paul 012 Sorry for the delay on that one - yes, eminently doable, but will probably need a new BRFA as it's an extension of the task. I'll try to file one this weekend. firefly  ( t · c ) 11:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello!
Hi, Thank you for your excellent work here. I was granted the admin rights on tw.wikipedia.org not long, and I've been cleaning up pages, trying to add/create templates, and doing my best to maintain the tw wiki, which is my local wiki. I would be glad if you could assist me in creating a bot to do stuff that was tedious to do manually and help us create templates. I would also appreciate it if you took a look at my local wiki and share any recommendations on how to improve it. Thank you -- Robertjamal12  (talk)  13:25, 7 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Robertjamal12 Hello! I'm not sure how much use I'll be in practical terms given that I don't read/write the Twi language, but if there's any specific things you want some guidance on I can probably point you in the right direction at least :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Regarding vanity pages
What do you think of ? It appears to be a vanity page. The primary editor has taken a number of photos of Cianci, only edited Bruno Cianci, suggesting a coi. That author has been templated with a coi notice, but hasn't responded to it. Bruno Cianci himself appears to be the anon editor per one of his ES. The primary editor has removed maintenance template (COI & resume) w/o resolving the issues. Cheers Adakiko (talk) 11:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Adakiko from a quick look, the creator definitely appears to have a COI, and the article seems to have a promotional tone. Removing maintenance tags isn't in of itself actionable. The next step may be to assess whether the subject is notable (see WP:BEFORE). If not (I've not looked in depth myself) AfD may be the way to go. firefly  ( t · c ) 12:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * AfD! wp:Articles for deletion/Bruno Cianci is up. Adakiko (talk) 02:05, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Black Women Radicals for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Black Women Radicals, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Black Women Radicals until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Ken Harewood
I have deleted tags that are incorrect in the current version of Ken R. Harewood, where I made the necessary changes yesterday. Removing the history of edits of an article is impossible, and this is what another editor (User: Asukite) demanded I do. If you know how to do it, feel free. If you see any plagarism in the current version, please show it to me. --Zeamays (talk) 15:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Zeamays - apologies, I've removed the templates I restored mistakenly when I restored the copyvio-revdel template. However, the copyvio-revdel template does need to stay - deleting content from the history of an article is indeed possible, see WP:REVDEL for details. I understand that there may not be any copyright-violating content in the current version, however content that infringes copyright must also generally be deleted from the article's history by an administrator. This will happen when someone gets around to it - once that has happened, the copyvio-revdel tag will be removed. firefly  ( t · c ) 15:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">Happy Holidays text.png Hello Firefly: 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, MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @MrLinkinPark333 Thaaaanks! And yourself likewise :) firefly  ( t · c ) 09:50, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy holidays!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:right; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks"> A very happy holiday season, whatever it may be for you and yours. I wish you an enjoyable and safe season, and health, happiness, and success in the year ahead. Have a fantastic time! <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 03:26, 23 December 2021 (UTC)


 * - why thank you! :) And the same to you! firefly  ( t · c ) 09:51, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi this is rashid zirak i want to make my wikipedia page and currently I am strength and conditioning specialist for UPCA Men's Senior Cricket Team
Hi this is rashid zirak i want to make my wikipedia page and currently I am strength and conditioning specialist for UPCA Men's Senior Cricket Team plz guide and advice 116.72.43.223 (talk) 10:23, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Cleanup on aisle "prescouter"
They've done again, I'm not familiar with this sort of vandalism, can you fix it? They've been AIV'd as clearly a VOA. Mako001 (C) (T) (The Alternate Mako) 15:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @The Alternate Mako yeah, looks like some sort of article hijacking(?) behaviour. Which is silly really, as they're now autoconfirmed and can create pages directly anyway. I'll sweep up. firefly  ( t · c ) 15:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Leave it to me, I need some practice. Mako001 (C) (T) (The Alternate Mako) 15:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that seems fairly straightforward, move it back and G3 or R3 the redirect. Thanks for that. Mako001 (C) (T) (The Alternate Mako) 15:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @The Alternate Mako indeed, although in general it's not necessary to tag talk pages of pages themselves tagged for CSD. The deleting admin will delete both together if they agree with the tag - if for whatever reason the talk page gets left behind, it can be tagged then as G8. Also, the account's edits to the page (that they seemingly made to game autoconfirmed) were reasonably constructive, so there wasn't a real need to revert them. It was indeed weird, but I'm not sure it counts as vandalism.  Thanks!  firefly  ( t · c ) 15:43, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Facepalm moment. Yeah, should've taken a closer look at that, thanks for picking up on it. Mako001 (C) (T) (The Alternate Mako) 15:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @The Alternate Mako No worries :) firefly  ( t · c ) 15:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Happy New Year! Hello Firefly: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)  22:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC) <small style="margin-left:15px">Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.


 * - thanks, and likewise to you! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 15:46, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:State Public Libraries (Spain)
Hello Firefly and thank you very much for your message.I would very much like to be able to keep the article, but it is a list (list of the State Public Libraries in Spain), and I added when I created it the references of the state web pages where they can be consulted. I don't know what more references I could put or what else to do.I have seen other similar pages in Wikipedia (lists) and they don't have more references... What I can do? Thanks and see you soon.--MJSB73MP (talk) 18:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @MJSB73MP Hello! To prevent the draft being eligible for deletion under G13, all you need to do is make an edit to it (any edit will do to reset the clock). As for the substantive changes that may be needed to make it ready for mainspace, I'm not so sure as I don't have much knowledge of the subject area - I would recommend asking at the Teahouse. Thanks! firefly  ( t · c ) 18:29, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --MJSB73MP (talk) 18:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

New Lintercategory
Could you please add the new category to the toll? See special:LintErrors/inline-media-caption it is live since the last update an is flodding the lists and the Lint error total results. Happy new Year --Lómelinde (talk) 07:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Lómelinde yep, no probs. And likewise :) firefly  ( t · c ) 08:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Please do add the new error to the table, but note that I have asked some questions about this new Linter error at . I have requested a revert of its implementation until an explanation can be fully developed. Depending on how the discussion goes, there may be changes needed to the table again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Royal Indian Air Force
Can you please review the article on Royal Indian Air Force for any errors. Cookersweet (talk) 15:47, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:TrudiJ/sandbox/Colcha embroidery can be deleted
Hello. I received your bot-generated message about the potential deletion of Draft:TrudiJ/sandbox/Colcha embroidery. It is fine if this is deleted. I have made edits within the existing article. Thank you, and happy new year! TrudiJ (talk) 12:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @TrudiJ - that's fine, you don't need to do anything else then, it'll be deleted when the 6 months are 'up' :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. TrudiJ (talk) 12:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley
The article Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley
The article Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Murders of William and Patricia Wycherley for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! Happy to help clean up the amazing technicolour templates   firefly  ( t · c ) 14:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Truly the height of beauty these colours -- Asartea   Talk  &#124;  Contribs  14:23, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Don't forget to make it minuscule.  Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 23:08, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Burma-Shave   DanCherek (talk) 01:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * <div style="background-color:#FF10F0;color: #39FF14;-moz-transform: scale(1, -1); -webkit-transform: scale(1, -1); -o-transform: scale(1, -1); -ms-transform: scale(1, -1); transform: scale(1, -1);">You can even do this if you really want to...
 * But please, don't.   firefly  ( t · c ) 07:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Needs more rainbow marquee tbh. Not enough flying gifs with neon yellow text either. Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 14:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * DID SOMEBODY SAY CAT PISS? Chlod <small style="font-size:calc(1em - 2pt)">(say hi!) 15:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * <div style="background-color:#FF10F0;color: #39FF14;-moz-transform: rotate(-15deg); -webkit-transform: rotate(-15deg); -o-transform: rotate(-15deg); -ms-transform: rotate(-15deg); transform: rotate(-15deg);">Thanks! Really cool! User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)  11:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! You probably deserve this more than me though - I only cleared the last few before the end :) firefly  ( t · c ) 20:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, but I left the worst ones for last :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

?
why are you cancelling the work of other editors when they're editing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morefactswiki (talk • contribs) 14:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Morefactswiki As I said in the message on your talk page, I reverted the edits you made as they were in large part copied (with a word or two swapped) from here. Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, which means "pretty much anything you find on the web" unless the content has a compatible license. firefly  ( t · c ) 14:28, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * how does the copyright thing work basically? it wasn't finished. is any copyright automatically changed that fast? Morefactswiki (talk) 14:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Morefactswiki essentially, copyrighted text can't be hosted on Wikipedia, even in the page history. Copy-pasting it in and then editing it later won't work - everything that is submitted to Wikipedia must be freely reusable (i.e. not copyrighted) firefly  ( t · c ) 14:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * > even in the page history
 * so if there can't be anything thats copyrighted, then do wikipedia ppl delete everything then?
 * isnt copyright when the whole of something is copied? copyright isn't a part or a piece of a text, since its reuse and remixed?
 * is there a copyright department? Morefactswiki (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Morefactswiki We do delete revisions in page histories if they contain substantial copyright violations (see here for the specific policy line on that), as I have done at Paula White. Reusing parts of a text can represent a copyright violation (aside from things such as attributed quotes) - it's not just copying an entire article that's problematic. There's no "copyright department" as such - Wikipedia doesn't really work that way. However, if you have questions about copyright (or other aspects of editing), you could ask at the Teahouse. firefly  ( t · c ) 14:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * >substantial copyright violations
 * i dont know someone said they deleted the page history or w/e
 * > Reusing parts of a text can represent a copyright violation
 * i dont know, nobody answered this yet, i just got a few rude ppl instead because of all this Morefactswiki (talk) 15:28, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * for the link, its says 'Blatant violations', i dont know why its saying 'Blatant violations' vs 'violations' - why does it even have 'Blatant' for? that doesnt make any sense
 * if it's 'Blatant violations', then that means the person shouldnt have deleted the page history since its you just cant have anything 'copyrighted' on wiki. someone should fix the wording on these links to be much more clear Morefactswiki (talk) 15:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Morefactswiki I am a little confused as to what you mean - I'll reply to each point in turn.
 * someone said they deleted the page history, I said that I deleted some revisions from the page history, not all of it, just those revisions that contained copyrighted content.
 * i just got a few rude ppl instead because of all this, what specifically do you mean? I can't see that anyone has been rude to you at any point.
 * if it's 'Blatant violations', then that means the person shouldnt have deleted the page history The text in question was (apart from swapping out one word here and there) a direct copy of the website text, that qualifies as a blatant copyright violation unfortunately. firefly  ( t · c ) 15:34, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News
Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest. Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
 * The template db-afc-move has been created - this template is similar to db-move when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Lintertool does not work
Since today morning the tool only updates the time but not the numbers of errors

example from german wiki: I have fixed some of the bugs today but the number is still the same. but if you look here the number should be lower than 1,592. It would be nice if you can take a look on it. --Lómelinde (talk) 07:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * there is still no change, the tablecells are frozen. --Lómelinde (talk) 13:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It might have been a serverproblem, it is better now. --Lómelinde (talk) 05:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Lómelinde sorry for the delay in replying - I had a quick look at this yesterday, and got the same results that the tool was displaying when querying the replica DBs directly, so I imagine that it was indeed either replication lag or the scheduled jobs that count the lint errors on the live DBs not running. Thanks! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 07:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Mysteriously, de:wp in particular seemed to have been affected. Today it runs perfectly. Sorry for my panic. --Lómelinde (talk) 07:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Lómelinde No worries! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 08:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

She-Ra live-action series
Hello, hope you're doing good. I saw the message you left on my talk section about the upcoming She-Ra live-action series but there's no information yet so that's why I don't edit it; so if there's something new, I'll update the draft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chucheraya20 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit request wizard microtasks
Hi! Student applicants are starting to submit drafts for their microtasks (see T300454), so if you wanted to take a look at them as well, let me know and I can update the instructions. Right now, they just say to PM drafts to me for feedback, but I could update them to say PM them to both of us. There aren't a lot right now but I suspect we'll be getting a lot more as it gets closer to the applicant deadline on April 19. You definitely don't have to say yes to this if you're busy. Thanks! Enterprisey (talk!) 23:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


 * @Enterprisey aha! I’ll take a look today :) firefly  ( t · c ) 10:09, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Cool! Will email with more details. Enterprisey (talk!) 08:49, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Borrowed time...
Really enjoyed reading your article on Ms Sorokin. Great prose. No Swan So Fine (talk) 18:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)


 * @No Swan So Fine Heh - thank you! Not just my work, I shepherded it through GAN, but the article itself is the work of many :) firefly  ( t · c ) 20:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Anna Sorokin
Regarding Euro/US Dollar conversion: In the US, you are wrong. Most people don't know what a Euro is. You may not like it, but it is true. Please don't delete my addition of conversions again. --Zeamays (talk) 14:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Zeamays I removed them not because I personally don't like them, but because I've not seen such conversions used on similar articles, and the relevant section of the manual of style seems to suggest that they're not needed (although I admit that it's not particularly clear). I won't object to restoration - I might suggest that a template (e.g. To_USD) is used to simplify things :) firefly  ( t · c ) 14:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I tried to use the tool you mention, but it just produces an error message. I confess I don't know how to use this tool. I will have to go back to my last edit and use the tool I had used then. --Zeamays (talk) 17:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Zeamays no worries - I or someeone else can have a look at switching to the template afterwards. firefly  ( t · c ) 17:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I already fixed it. --Zeamays (talk) 17:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Mister World 2021
I have retrieved your concerns and as per request will create a new page. Thanking you in advance. Prosper M9 (talk) 08:45, 23 February 2022 (UTC)


 * @Prosper M9 You don’t need to create a new draft, just edit the current one to “reset the clock” on G13 if you want to keep it. firefly  ( t · c ) 22:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

You might be insterested
I supported your RFA, and I think you'd be interested in this song... NYC Guru (talk) 22:45, 4 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @NYC Guru Thanks! And heh, that's a blast from the past. Not the original inspiration for my username, but I like the song anyway :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Three-quarter million award!
seems like that one was overlooked! Granted, this might be me slipping up, but it seems to check out. That number is from 2017 readership, since you got the article to GA in 2018—nice work! :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 07:21, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Theleekycauldron Thank you! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:42, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That article is actually bad right now. Hoping that if you can fix and update it. 110.67.38.99 (talk) 03:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Congrats, and the advice

 * Thank you for this time honoured advice!   firefly  ( t · c ) 16:38, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Congrats on your appointment as admin
Hello Firefly,

I'm just congratulating you on your recent appointment. Keep up the good work. Cheers!! 🥂 Volten 001  talk 06:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Volten001 Thanks :) firefly  ( t · c ) 09:06, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations on your RFA
So except you literally have a skeleton in your cupboard, there is no Jupiter stopping what’s about to happen, which is you becoming the “latest sysop in town” thus allow me be the first to congratulate you in advance. Please I voted for you because you promised to counter undisclosed paid editing and spam in general. Please do not let me down. Oh well you do owe me a pack of fine  when you officially get the mop. Celestina007 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Celestina007 heh, thank you. And yes, UPE etc will remain a focus of mine :) firefly  ( t · c ) 16:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is phenomenal! So far, 100% support! That must be a great feeling. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 17:40, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Liz Thank you! I'm not counting any chickens yet ("it's not over until the bureaucrat sings"? Not sure how our 'crat corps would feel about that analogy!), but it is a great feeling to see such a volume of support. I will have very high expectations to live up to, and I shall do my best to meet them :) firefly  ( t · c ) 17:42, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You might not be counting the chickens, but I just did a quick scan and I'm seeing an awful lot of beaks, and we've run out of seed. Congrats. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  10:56, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Girth Summit Haha, yes, I'm starting to hear clucking...! Thank you! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 11:07, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is probably going to be the most supported unanimous RfA of all time. Fingers crossed nobody opposes or goes neutral in the next few hours.... <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  11:59, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ritchie333: yes, L235 mentioned that possibility earlier. A very surreal feeling to even be within range of such a record! firefly  ( t · c ) 12:16, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As I will likely be away from my computer at the time, I thought I'd drop my own pre-emptive congrats off (It's probably a good sign that my fear is that I might jinx the unanimity, not the actual outcome!) Welcome to the corps, these days you'll actually be able to get a stupid t-shirt. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:22, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Nosebagbear: thank you!   firefly  ( t · c ) 13:24, 11 March 2022 (UTC)



Do we need the formality? I suppose so
Primefac (talk) 15:34, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Speaking as someone who was noticing your good work as far back as early 2009 under your first username, and probably would have supported you *then* — this is more than a decade overdue. Congratulations, Firefly! -- Dylan 620 (he/him · talk · edits) 15:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Congrats Firefly! I'm glad to see another admin willing to help with CCI and copyright! Signed, The4lines &#124;&#124;&#124;&#124; (Talk) (Contributions) 15:40, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Congratulations for adminship !!  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:39, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you all - and specific thanks to for flipping the bits. I have a very high expectation to live up to as already mentioned, and will do everything I can do meet it. :)  firefly  ( t · c ) 15:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on receiving the mop. Scorpions13256 (talk) 15:51, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Congrats on becoming a sysop and also congrats on getting so many supports, a place at WP:RFX200. Enjoy the shirt and if you're lucky, you'll enjoy the admin things you'll have to do too. :P --Ferien (talk) 16:08, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 247. There is no reason for concern. -- Victor Trevor  ( talk ) 16:56, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, Firefly, we are lucky to have you on the custodian squad! Practice and take things slow at first. There are some "Intro to Admining" pages that are very useful to review.
 * My only advice is to never hesitate to ask for a second opinion from an admin who has more experience in the area where you are thinking about taking action. While most admins are generalists, we each have areas that we concentrate on so we all have areas we are less familiar with. I still go to admins I respect and ask their opinion if I have doubts or questions about taking a particular action I rarely do. You'll almost always be met with support and advice. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 21:16, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Liz thank you! And thank you also for the advice, which I shall definitely keep in mind. I agree entirely that asking for advice is never a bad thing. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 21:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! It's years of hard work that earned you all the supports that you got, and the (almost) drama-free RfA. Good luck with the mop. :) — Bilorv ( talk ) 17:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Bilorv thank you! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 17:41, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

 * - oh wow! Thank you very much!   firefly  ( t · c ) 20:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

A belated congratulations!
Congratulations on passing your RfA, and breaking the record for largest unanimous RfA! May you enjoy your service with the mop. — 3PPYB6 — T ALK — C ONTRIBS  — 12:57, 13 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @3PPYB6 Thank you! It was certainly a pleasant surprise to see that I'd hit that record. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:58, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the protection of Bigg Boss Ultimate (Season 1)
Hello! I wanted to try to explain to you about why the page of Bigg Boss Ultimate 1's protection level should be decreased. You know like if you take a look even for 30 seconds, you'll see that there's a lot to edit about and most of the extended confirmed users like me don't watch the episodes as we have to pay for that. But there are several auto-confirmed users who pay to watch the episodes. And there are a lot of things to edit like the tasks have to be mentioned and the nominations like if you check the page, you'll see that for the 6th week, the nomination hasn't been edited. Like at least the nominations (Who nominated who) have to be edited. I hope you understand me and comprehend how this is going to be a pain to edit after like a month. Just try to think in the place of the editors who have to do that and sometimes re-watch the episodes so as to write everything down in the page. If there're are sock-puppets, I will definitely report them to you or an another administrator. Just please think about the troubles that we're going to face to edit the page if we don't at least start now. Thank you and take care! Nikita Bhamidipati (talk) 17:14, 13 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Nikita Bhamidipati you are welcome to submit edit requests on the article’s talk page with the information as you get it, which other (extended confirmed) editors can then action. firefly  ( t · c ) 20:58, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Congrats on passing your RFA!
I've never seen anyone pass an RFA with 200+ supports, 0 oppositions and 0 neutral votes. Congratulations! I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 03:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @I.hate.spam.mail.here thank you! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 06:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations
I almost forgot about your RFA. Hearty congratulations. I always knew you would pass with flying colours. Wish I could someday become like you. Anyway, lots of love and support. May your journey as an administrator be great. Regards. <b style="background:linear-gradient(45deg,#f05,#b49);border:2px solid #000;padding:2px;color:#ef4;">Itcouldbepossible</b>Talk 09:18, 16 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Itcouldbepossible Thank you! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 09:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Your block of LittleCharleyBear2029
Seems we have a duck. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:16, 16 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Skywatcher68 Blocked - many thanks :) firefly  ( t · c ) 15:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Discussion Closure
Could you please close the discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Weather? It is an extension of the previous RfC which was closed already. The initial discussion was put up on the talkpage on February 6, with a continuous RfC notification since February 12. The nature of the second discussion is mostly to clarify the scope of the first, which may have been a bit ambiguous. All participants of the first discussion were pinged in case of any confusion. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#009200 0.3em 0.4em 1.0em,#009200 -0.2em -0.2em 1.0em;color:#009200">Noah Talk 13:48, 9 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Hurricane Noah Are you asking them to do this task when they are given the administrator role? SoyokoAnis  -  talk  15:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Im asking them to do this an uninvolved user who is somewhat familiar with our project. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#009200 0.3em 0.4em 1.0em,#009200 -0.2em -0.2em 1.0em;color:#009200">Noah Talk 15:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Hurricane Noah I will try to take a look this weekend once I have time to read the discussion fully and do it justice. firefly  ( t · c ) 16:01, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks. Let me know once you have looked at it. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#009200 0.3em 0.4em 1.0em,#009200 -0.2em -0.2em 1.0em;color:#009200">Noah Talk 22:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Hurricane Noah Done! firefly  ( t · c ) 18:48, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2717 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:11, 18 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Gerda Arendt Oh wow - thank you very much! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 19:53, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yours was a very unusual RfA! Normally, when I don't know a candidate, I give Precious and then support based on that. I saw soon that you didn't need my support, - so kind of late, here you get the award from the cabal of the outcast. What do you think about the discussion at Cosima Wagner? I don't want a formal RfC, - waste of time for all involved, - still licking wounds after the completely unnecessary one at WT:DYK, closed yesterday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Gerda Arendt - hmmm, infobox disputes. Always a fun one. I see there's a proposal for a compromise, which is usually a good idea (at least worth a try). Ultimately I don't have any strong feelings on infoboxes one way or another, and feel that the amount of time sometimes dedicated to arguing about them could in many cases be better spent elsewhere... firefly  ( t · c ) 11:26, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * disagree with "always fun" ;) - seriously: working on Artem Datsyshyn. I don't know what you know about infobox discussions, - I can tell you that they more or less died out, nothing serious since 2018. In this case, a new editor aded malformed DOB etc. They would have been served better by formatting help, not a revert based on no more than a 2012 discussion. N. is the only user who would revert that way. Could you - uninvolved, without a history - perhaps talk to her? I'm not up to her English, sorry. It could be so simple if you ask me: Some readers want the entry structured, others in prose, both can meet in the body, it's not one or the other, why not both?? If she'd stop reverting in articles she never edited before, those wars were over, imagine! - Back to the dead dancer, who has an infobox, naturally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Editor of the Week
User:Sennecaster submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
 * I nominate Firefly to be Editor of the Week for outstanding and versatile mainspace and behind-the-scenes work. Starting in 2005, Firefly was part of BAG and now is a template editor and bot-operator to a host of highly valuable jobs, including G13 draft notices and DRN statuses. His other bots have fixed messes caused by MediaWiki bugs; something we all can appreciate! FireflyBot filled the void after the loss of HasteurBot. Now, editors receive notices from Firefly Bot after 5 months of inactivity and they are reminded to return to working on their drafts thereby increasing the number of quality new articles. Away from technical work, Firefly helps out at copyright cleanup, helping close smaller cases at CCI, and is a trainee arbclerk, where you might see his name with some frequency. Between all of that, he still has time for writing articles! He took the more eclectic Anna Sorokin and Chicken gun to GA, along with a couple of more technical articles up to the same standard. Firefly is an extremely well-rounded editor that helps make the project run smoothly with a friendly attitude. User:Vami IV, User:Liz, User:Giraffer and User:Gwennie-nyan all seconded this nomination.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

Thanks again for your efforts! &#8213; Buster7  &#9742;   17:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)


 * My head is going to explode with all the positive things people have said about me over the past week or so! Thank you very much to all who put me forward for this ( pinging in appreciation )  firefly  ( t · c ) 17:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Fawlty Towers
Hi - when you redirected most of the episodes to the main article, I'm just wondering what your rationale was for keeping only Waldorf Salad out of all the series 2 articles. The Germans I can understand, but if you ask me WS is not one of the most highly rated episodes - it's one of only two S2 episodes that have less than 9/10 on IMDb, if that's any guide. MFlet1 (talk) 13:42, 20 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @MFlet1 The only reason was that it had more independent sourcing than the others - I agree that critically it's not highly rated, but I could only go on what I could see on the page. It has references to multiple books; I didn't check them, but I took it on good faith that they mention the episode. You are of course entirely free to redirect it yourself if you feel it shouldn't have a discrete article :) firefly  ( t · c ) 13:44, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

OK, I think I'll leave it - if anything it would be good to bring back the other episode articles if we could get more/better sources for them - but thanks for the explanation. MFlet1 (talk) 13:49, 20 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @MFlet1 you can do that too if you wish, but in my personal opinion they'd need more sourcing about the individual episodes (i.e. rather than about the series as a whole). firefly  ( t · c ) 14:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

more-ip-info.js
Very useful tool which I've just installed. Two suggestions for when you have time: Good luck with the RfA, and fingers crossed that I can give you the coveted admin t-shirt. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 01:26, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * At the moment the IP block entry shown when only one block is active is essentially duplicated. It may be worth hiding the range block which is shown already. Don't mind the information remaining duplicated as it does show that the tool is working as expected, and hiding it for certain criteria might be unnecessary.
 * The range block listed in your blue box doesn't include any partial block information. Take Special:Contributions/120.22.0.0/16 which shows that there exists a range block on that /16 but doesn't say that it's a partial block. If space is a concern, you could still say "partially blocked" instead of "blocked" which means you wouldn't need to have the specific pages partially blocked from shown.


 * @Dreamy Jazz Thank you, for the wishes and the bug reports - I'll try to fix those this weekend. :) firefly  ( t · c ) 12:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Dreamy Jazz partial block issue fixed, I've not added displaying the specific pages yet, but it does at least display that the block is a partial. As for duplication, what do you mean by that you don't mind the information being duplicated - do you mean the blue box showing up even if it's empty? Thanks! firefly  ( t · c ) 18:11, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Firefly the red box showing the same info as the blue box is what I meant by duplication. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 20:25, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

FireflyBot G13 notices down?
Hi, Firefly, I was curious about a recent G13 of a draft I created, and after looking at FireflyBot's contributions, it looks like something happened to the notification task of the bot. The task is still listed as Active on its user page. Prior to 26 February, the bot sent numerous notifications with an edit summary of Notification of potential CSD G13 nomination of ... pretty regularly. After that, the notifications almost stopped entirely. There were eight on 5 March, and then twelve on 21 March, but the edit summary changed to simply read Pywikibot 7.0.0. I'm guessing something changed with an unintended side effect, so I figured I should report this. Thanks for the bot in the first place! -2pou (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @2pou Hmmmmm! Something's broken there isn't it! I'll have a look, thanks for the heads-up. firefly  ( t · c ) 17:36, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @2pou :)  firefly  ( t · c ) 17:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I came to ask the same question. Page creators whose drafts expire March 30th just received their notices yesterday. I always come across user talk pages that don't have notices from FireflyBot but we've discussed the times when the bot skips notification so I didn't realize that there was a bigger problem. Glad to see that it's fixed and it looks like the bot even took care of some of the backlog! Thanks again. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 23:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I came to ask the same question. Page creators whose drafts expire March 30th just received their notices yesterday. I always come across user talk pages that don't have notices from FireflyBot but we've discussed the times when the bot skips notification so I didn't realize that there was a bigger problem. Glad to see that it's fixed and it looks like the bot even took care of some of the backlog! Thanks again. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 23:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination – Successful


Hey Firefly,

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email us at merchandise@undefinedwikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!

On behalf of the Merchandise Giveaway program,

-- janbery (talk) 16:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

A belated congrats on your successful passing on your RFA!
It's been at least–well, at least 10 days since your success, and I wish you a belated congratulations. You're already doing great as an admin, per your contributions. Severe storm  28  12:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Severestorm28 thanks! :) firefly  ( t · c ) 13:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)