User talk:Julle/Archive

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Cirt (talk) 11:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Thanks
Thank you for catching and correcting my error on the spelling of "Hope Mirrlees". I appreciate the follow-up. I would guess it's a toss-up as to whether to eliminate all the bad references or to leave them in to catch other misspellings, at least until a genuine "Mirlees" makes its presence known. Thanks again. Originalylem (talk) 14:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Åcon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Åcon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Åcon until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  « l | Promethean ™ | l »   (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for catching the vandalism on my talk page. :)  Wikipelli   Talk   10:13, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Happy to be able to help. :) /Julle (talk) 10:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Swedish Wikipedia
If you have a minute, could you fill me in on how the admin reconfirmation thing works over there? Do you think it works well or is it largely condemned as a disator? How many admin do you have and how many reconfirmations are there per week? What do you do with admins who are inactive? I'm genuinely curious to hear how it works, because I'd like to see something similar done here, but there are various obstacles, like the number of admins, that make it impractical. Thanks, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   21:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to. We've had this system since 2006, and whereas there are (of course) those who feel that it's a bit unnecessary, I'd say it has a strong support, and we're not likely to abandon it. We have re-elections in January, April, July and October (though new admins can be elected whenever) -- if you'd be elected admin now, in May, you'd have to be re-elected in April 2012 and then again in April 2013 et cetera. We're somewhat divided on the subject of inactive administrators. You can't leave the project altogether, of course, since you either have to renominate yourself or (more common) accept someone else's nomination on your talk page, but if you have a strong track record, you're likely to stay admin even if you haven't done much throughout the last year. However, some users will vote against inactive admins (and others will stay neutral, even if they don't outright oppose them), so if there are other reasons why people might oppose you it won't exactly help.


 * It works well for us. The threshold to become admin is lower, partly because it's not very dramatic to remove them next year, and we have a far easier way to rectify our mistakes. I'd say that being administrator is more of a big thing here. However, we have around 100 admins. It could be that English Wikipedia simply has too many administrators for this to work, even if you spread out the re-election over the entire year. We also spend less time on RfA, since we're more likely to have seen the RfA candidates before -- smaller project, easier to keep track of the active users. /Julle (talk) 21:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Another note on inactive administrators: if you have been a good admin, turned inactive, and lost your tools, pretty much everything you'd have to do to get them back would be to become active again and make a new request for adminship. /Julle (talk) 21:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Hannu Rajaniemi.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Hannu Rajaniemi.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Avic ennasis @ 12:51, 29 Av 5771 / 12:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Improving portal visibility on Wikipedia

 * I appreciated your stance about improving portals on Wikipedia, and the notion of people focusing their efforts upon portal improvement, rather than a hasty deletion of them. I've started a new discussion with a specific focus upon increasing portal visibility on the portal discussion page here: Wikipedia talk: Portal - Ideas to increase portal visibility. — Northamerica1000 (talk) 06:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Your input is needed on the SOPA initiative
Hi Julle,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The  Helpful  Bot  16:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 04:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Account activation codes have been emailed.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
 * The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Removal of autosave isue
You agreed to add the temporary autosave issue for The Last of Us under Development section. Why was it removed again? KahnJohn27 (talk) 12:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't been involved in editing the article since that discussion and haven't kept track of it, so you should probably ask the user who removed the information. I still don't think it actually adds anything necessary to the article and wouldn't consider it a loss of if the information was permanently removed, but it's a minor issue. /Julle (talk) 17:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

2013–14 FC Steaua București season page
Hello. Please block this user Narcis90 for vandalizing 2013–14 FC Steaua București season page and delete utill informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.12.219.185 (talk) 11:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You might want to get into contact with someone else. I'm not an administrator on English Wikipedia. /Julle (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi !  We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

--

Merger discussion for Space Goth
An article that you have been involved in editing, Space Goth, has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 173.48.81.211 (talk) 23:42, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways: Sign up now Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
 * Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
 * Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
 * Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
 * Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
 * Research coordinators: run reference services

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

To fix
This. /81.233.54.29 (talk) 00:22, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Andreas Roman


The article Andreas Roman has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Searches found nothing at all and thus there's simply nothing better overall to suggest better notability and improvement.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SwisterTwister  talk  08:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Dodil
"The sources are just reliable enough..." Have you missed a not out of that sentence? Your delete !vote does not make sense otherwise. SpinningSpark 14:50, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Thanks for pointing it out! /Julle (talk) 15:18, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Area, Perimeter, and Volume
How did you know about my draft?! UnbeatableFlame154 (talk) 23:54, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi UnbeatableFlame154! Because it was your last edit prior to asking in the Teahouse. If you follow the second link I gave you, you can see your edit history, which made it easy to find. All users' edit histories can be seen – if you exchange your name for mine in that link, you'll find mine. You can also see it under "Tools" to the left, under "User contributions", when you're looking at someone's user page. /Julle (talk) 00:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

About Teahouse Message
Hello, Julle... I have tried what you have told but it didn't help me at all. In your opinion I should put a notice to my profile page about situation?

Hrm. I think this thing is not supposed to be like that. Hehe... /MessengerGeek (talk)
 * Hi MessengerGeek, I'm not sure what you tried, but you probably need to email the functionaries. If you do, make sure to explain your problem in detail and why you need this. I'm not exactly sure what the response to new accounts typically is, but those are the folks you need to talk to. (: /Julle (talk) 23:24, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Thank you. Best of luck with your editing. Just take it slow, add small pieces and make sure they're properly sourced. (: /Julle (talk) 12:34, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Mwah
Certain details in this made me smile :-) Good overview, but that's not surprising, coming from you.  --bonadea contributions talk 19:50, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, I imagine it's rather easy to see from where I took certain details – especially for you. (: Thanks you. /Julle (talk) 20:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

High15
High15's song No Drama just charted at the official Heatseeker chart. So thank you for helping improving the article. So it was Kept after the AfD process.BabbaQ (talk) 16:37, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. /Julle (talk) 16:41, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Judith Merril
I wouldn't expect Bronx House to list Judy's mother, but Bronx House itself is not documented in the story, so I think a citation explaining what it is would be a good idea. Too bad they don't have a WP page, or else we could just link it. OK? Bellagio99 (talk) 19:11, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Bellagio99: The best solution would probably be to create such a page! But this is far from my area of expertise – and interest – so I'm not the best person to do it. In the meanwhile, Manual of Style is rather explicit: "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article." (: /Julle (talk) 19:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Bellagio99: To make this less confusing, I've moved the conversation to Talk:Judith Merril. /Julle (talk) 19:35, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Susanne Lingheim
Regarding this AfD, did you ever hear from the Ingmar Bergman Foundation as to what Susanne Lingheim's job was on Fanny and Alexander? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Metropolitan90: No, they never got back to me, unfortunately. /Julle (talk) 16:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Christian Bale
Hi there Julle! I had a question about the Svenska Dagbladet ref we included. Since you were able to access the October 1987 article, I was wondering whether you could insert the URL and access date for precision. If you'd like, you could also add the quote that specifies Mio's release period and "url-access=subscription" since the newspaper isn't free, but these aren't crucial. Cheers! KyleJoan talk 03:52, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * KyleJoan: Sure. I read it through a separate archive of digitalised material which I've never found a good way to link to individual issues or pages through, much less articles, so out of habit I tend to treat that as offline material, but I do have access to the Svenska Dagbladet subscription service as well. I'll take a look at it later. /Julle (talk) 06:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

RfA 2021 review update
Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, and.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:
 * 1) Corrosive RfA atmosphere
 * The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.
 * 1) Level of scrutiny
 * Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.
 * 1) Standards needed to pass keep rising
 * It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.
 * 1) Too few candidates
 * There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.
 * 1) "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors: 1. Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere) Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.

2. Admin permissions and unbundling There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.

3. RfA should not be the only road to adminship Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1. There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun
Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. 16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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