User talk:MJL/Archive 29

Fire Emblem characters
Hi MJL, I dont want to actually waste your time working it, but it already deemed that the article can't be notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.53.61.90 (talk) 00:36, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks IP. I'm mostly just doing it for fun and explore how that list would actually look like were it written. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 14:55, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Movement for a People's Party for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Movement for a People's Party is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. You have been a significant contributor to it, thus why I am notifying you.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Movement for a People's Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SecretName101 (talk) 05:26, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daraj Media has been accepted
 Daraj Media, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Daraj_Media help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 21:56, 6 October 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)

E11Even Miami
Hello, MJL,

I'm surprised you accepted this article which mainly seems notable by the fact that a few celebrities visited it. The lead calls it a nightclub but later on it is described as just a strip club. Is it just a local strip club? The page creator has been blocked for sockpuppetry but not so the article can be deleted for it, CSD G5 Liz Read! Talk! 01:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)


 * So the first thing that convinced me of its notability was this article by Men's Journal. That was a particularly in depth piece for a single night club, and that's what I used for the basis of the The night club has been noted for hosting several high profile patrons line. Secondly, the Miami Herald had pretty decent coverage of the establishment with headlines like: 'You live and learn': G-Eazy parties in Miami with new girlfriend – at a familiar club and Miami's favorite 24/7 nightclub is reopening after 7 months. Here's what to expect (of course there's more in the individual articles), but the only thing I could conclude was that the Herald seemed to view this place as particularly noteworthy in regards to the city's nightlife.
 * As for the strip club / nightclub thing, I don't know. The Independent calls it a strip club in what little I can see outside the paywall. Considering I have never been to either type of club, I couldn't tell you personally if there is much of a difference?
 * My conclusion is that the article demonstrates notability while not being an obvious advertisement. After I accepted the draft, I filed the SPI against the article creator, so I already knew about the socking thing. If you think the article is not ready for mainspace, I'll revert my action to publish it. Otherwise, I can see no policy reason to do so. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 04:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard- October 2021
Hi, MJL! Here is the October 2021 issue of TheWikiWizard!

Wikipedia News

 * Wikimedia Asian Month is beginning once again!
 * Check out the 2021 Community Wishlist's results!
 * For those interested, check out the "Wikimedia CEE Online Meeting 2021" (Click on link for more details and to find out if you can register!)
 * Check out this new feature for The Wikipedia Library!

Humour

 * It's Halloween coming up again, and that means you can have an excuse to eat candy and binge edit Wikipedia again
 * Frankenstein told me this does not exist... (Does not make sense, but okay...)
 * Is Humour funny? I guess we'll have to find out!

Editor's Notes

 * Thank you for your patience, I was busy, and still am, so issues of TWW may be delayed.


 * Like this Issue? Got Feedback? Spot a mistake? Discuss this issue here

To change your subscription, or to subscribe click Here. Enjoy this Issue and have a safe and happy Halloween/October! -- つがる  Talk to つがる:)  🍁 00:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * This Issue was sent to you by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 00:27, 26 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)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021
 News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia
 * From the editor: Different stories, same place


 * News and notes: The sockpuppet who ran for adminship and almost succeeded


 * In the media: China bans, and is there intelligent life on this planet?


 * Opinion: A photo on Wikipedia can ruin your life


 * Discussion report: Editors brainstorm and propose changes to the Requests for adminship process


 * Recent research: Welcome messages fail to improve newbie retention


 * Community view: Reflections on the Chinese Wikipedia


 * Traffic report: James Bond and the Giant Squid Game


 * Technology report: Wikimedia Toolhub, winners of the Coolest Tool Award, and more


 * Serendipity: How Wikipedia helped create a Serbian stamp


 * Book review: Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality


 * WikiProject report: Redirection


 * Humour: A very Wiki crossword

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 20:18, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is, who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:


 * 1) with 5072 points
 * 2) with 3276 points
 * 3) with 3197 points
 * 4) with 1611 points
 * 5) with 1571 points
 * 6) with 1420 points
 * 7) with 1043 points
 * 8) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.


 * wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
 * wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
 * wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
 * wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
 * wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
 * wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who like Homestuck has been nominated for renaming
Category:Wikipedians who like Homestuck has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:22, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Tagging
Hello! Thanks for the input. I agree from your angle. Just based it off some other article/redirect combinations. I will be glad to adjust how I edit on my end. There is a lot of gray area there that is not worth doing a certain way or another. Not worth the trouble. If I can do anything to help, just let me know and how it can be added or adjusted. Best wishes. Red Director (talk) 18:50, 4 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Well you saw you added to Talk:1780 in the US (and every other year), right? That was the primary thing I was trying to tell you about. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 14:34, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, I saw your message. What do you suggest I do about it if anything needs to be done? I can leave it as is as well. What I am saying is that I will adjust my editing in the future to not create those redirect talk pages for just WikiProject templates. Red Director (talk) 15:28, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I mean, please don't keep that tag there. 1780 is as far away from "Current events" as possible. I would go through all "Talk:XXXX in the US" pages and systematically remove that banner. Whether you do that through Rater or AWB is your choice of course. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 15:48, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand now. Yes, I will be glad to remove those on there. I can remove that on all of those but the current year if that works with you. Thanks for letting me know. Red Director (talk) 16:02, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Red Director: Indeed it does! &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 16:03, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Religion in the Punjab
Hey MJL, could you please give some details regarding this closure? 3 users participated. The title suggested in the RM was opposed by 2. But the proposer and one of the !votes seemed to be ok with the alternative title "Punjabi folk religion". But maybe I misread the discussion, so an explanation would be helpful. Thanks, VR talk 00:53, 6 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @VR: Hmmm, I think I messed up with that one. I was going a bit too fast that I might have misread a lot of things (thought it was a procedural nomination). I should've re-listed that and try to be more careful in the future while closing RMs. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 03:30, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
 * &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 03:57, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! VR talk 10:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi thanks for reopening the discussion. In the week following the reopening, from 6 Nov to 13 Nov, the vote had become 3 to 2 in favor of moving the page to "Folk religion in Punjab." It ought to have been reclosed about a week ago, but due to it now being left open for an extra week, it is now tied again. Pinging it you have any input. Sapedder (talk) 08:45, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The discussion is a bit of a mess, IMO. So instead of trying to close it, I'll jump into it and try and find consensus.VR talk 13:58, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've left a reply to your conditions there, hopefully it's adequate. Sapedder (talk) 09:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

PDF RfC without closure
Hello, MJL.

I see the RFC: New PDF icon that you started at Village pump (proposals) has been archived by the bot without any apparent closure. This is a shame, IMO, because I thought it was an interesting issue that you raised, and had quite a bit of discussion. Do you want to (or want me to) pull the section back out of the archive so it can be formally closed? Or would you rather drop it? I think (from memory, as I haven't studied it closely lately) that your Option 2 was building consensus. Do we (you?) have to formally post something at WP:RFCLOSE? I daren't close it myself, as I posted some five times in the RfC (albeit due to much waffling), and ended up ]voting Option 2 myself. What now? &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 23:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Basically, there would be no point in getting a formal close in favour of Option 2 since it requires a second discussion anyways to move forwards. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 06:43, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, it's pretty clear that Option 2 has the most consensus in favour of it (which is a shame imo because File:Icons-mini-file pdf.svg [[File:Icons-mini-file pdf.svg]] would be the best pick). I would recommend you just start a new discussion proposing whichever icon from that discussion (minus Option 1) you think would have the highest chance of gaining consensus.

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Kubrick boxed in
Howdy. The IP does have a good point, though. It's 22 for infobox vs 2 against infobox. There's really no reason for bludgeoning the two anti-infoboxers :) GoodDay (talk) 06:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @GoodDay: I agree, but I don't think that how the IP worded their comment was particularly helpful in achieving that stated aim. I already received acknowledgement from one user that they understood why it would be unconstructive, so unless I see it continue I don't see what else can come from further discussing the issue about this issue. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 06:27, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * No prob. I wasn't feeling pressured by the pro-infoboxers. Just found it strange :) GoodDay (talk) 06:29, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Sibelius
Encouraged by the Kubrick discussion, I gave Jean Sibelius an infobox yesterday, as a birthday gift, which was reverted (after quite a while of exposure from the Main page). I asked for support and oppose on the talk but am reluctant to request people's time by another formal RfC. MJL, could you still please just watch over the discussion for civility? The 2015 discussion garnered comments such as "rotten idea", which are simply not helping a factual evaluation. I don't think DS play a role, - I actually believe that they never worked well for this topic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gerda Arendt: I'll happily watch the discussion for you. { &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 18:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Today is Sunday, and I'm determined to be happy which means that I have to ignore for now what Ssilvers wrote (again, after his multi-point collection was rejected for Maritana in 2016, and for Ian Fleming this year), - a user who has contributed little if any to this article. I leave "his" articles alone, and he should leave the articles of others alone, to avoid friction, - that would be so easy. User:Silence of Järvenpää is a key contributor to all Sibelius-related matters, see my talk, and Ipigott, Mirokado and Antandrus to the composer's article. - More tomorrow, today is Sunday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I commented on the article talk. Still on vacation, I enjoyed today's TFA, an Italian opera, my second ever, article written by two dear people, and for the pictured DYK a park where I went with dear people --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria reverted herself. - I wonder how we could avoid the time sink - and the hurtful personal confrontations - next time? The 2020 so-called discussion was a farce nobody I know regarded as meaningful. In the 2015 discussion, the principal editor had one wish: no words about the topic. I added several articles about compositions then, DYK? ... including one about ice-breaking ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * on Beethoven's birthday - DYK that an arb - reelected today - added the infobox for Beethoven, in 2015? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Important Message on my Talk Page
Sorry to bother, but I posted an important message on my talk page (my apologies in advance for the length) that I would like for you to read. Bill Williams 06:17, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

DM me on Discord if you still have it. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 06:23, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a lot of words, and shouldn't you be asleep? :p
 * Yeah sorry for the extremely detailed paragraphs, I just wanted to be open and clear about everything. I will be sleeping soon enough, and unfortunately I haven't had discord for Wikipedia in a while (since my foolish sockpuppetry), but I could get it back if you'd like. Bill Williams 06:24, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Bill Williams: Yeah, it would be better if you got one just because you might like to ask me questions and stuff as you did before your block. Here is the server link. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 06:27, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will make a new account and join the server when I wake up in the morning. Bill Williams 06:49, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well I still haven't slept because someone will not stop arguing with me, spamming multiple paragraphs on my talk page, repeatedly insulting me and using bolded font in various paragraphs... If you want to check it out on my talk page, you can view what is going on, but I deleted my whole story of what happened with sockpuppets because I cannot deal with that right now and this man bothering me. Speaking of, he just posted another rant on my talk page right now. Bill Williams 10:49, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It ended with them being blocked for a week, so hopefully I can continue to actually edit what I want (maps, demographics, leads etc.) rather than argue indefinitely on talk pages. Bill Williams 14:17, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd still love to catch up with you on Discord anytime. Cheers, &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 18:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Incubator multi
Template:Incubator multi has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 00:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Comment on Klaus Becker
Hi! Thank you for reviewing my draft. I actually did not want to resubmit, just save small changes and am still looking for a better source that is not connected to the subject. Sorry that made a seemingly suspicious change 2603:6080:4540:99:353A:B8FF:E4DD:EC5B (talk) 12:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)


 * No worries! These thing happen. { &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 16:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Your review of Anthony Elkins page
Hello. I received a message that you reviewed this draft page I created. But the page still shows that it is under review. Does it mean it requires further review? Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anthony_Elkins

Anderson1970 (talk) 03:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Free content from Microbiome


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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 17:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Wow. Miller Company Collection of Abstract Art
This is really crazy. There is now a statement on this page alleging possible undisclosed payment and promotional! It's art and design history, and has tons of links to a range of sources for more information. Isn't this defamatory?

If the page were deleted, then it just means people will find bits elsewhere in search. (Former mrdnartdesign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.172.152.70 (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

It's definitely WP:BITE-y. I'll work on getting it fixed after the holiday. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 22:05, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. There's a string from this user. artdesigncafe is now a "spamblog" of low quality. It's not nice but it's a bit funny. There was a request yesterday by a museum curator to add designs in a compilation to the "spamblog of low quality"!:-) And if you search links there are a number in books, etc. hehe. Because I pushed Tremaine, that seems a target. I'm just passionate about her work; I have well over 5000 sources. Best (Former mrdnartdesign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.172.152.70 (talk) 22:22, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

A lot of people misuse Wikipedia to promote a client or business. It's a big problem, so a lot of these editors are so used to seeing that they see it everywhere (and make mistakes like with you). Please don't stress too much about it. I'll get most of it resolved after today (still with family). Cheers, &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 23:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :-) Rough and tumble wiki is a new experience. If it helps, the "spamblog with low quality" referenced on the Miller Co page, is also referenced for the same content on p. 147 and under journals and magazines p. 201 in a book 'Tremaine Houses' 2019 published by the Getty. I see that book is on google books. One is a reprint of an article published in a magazine, offline. Part of that core research was done connected to a university... (Mystified, former mrdnartdesign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.172.152.70 (talk) 00:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

A little bit more if I may, as I believe a designated senior editor with a visual arts interest is on this, which is great. "Close connection": well, yes, it's a content knowledge, I'd think of it as a post-MA academic obsession. So people that do post-MA research should not be contributing content directly in their knowledge area it seems... "Like an advertisement": first it aimed to be factual: what was done and why, who was involved, and then what happened later, and people add / adjust what they know, if interested. There was nothing on it before I recall, and at that time, I think 5 yers ago, there was little with any depth on the internet. The topic is not so developed to have strong criticisms in the secondary source discourse, but maybe in 10 years, but that would go into theory and quite specialist. I just aim to engage with facts. "Too much on primary sources": I see now it's a wiki policy, but it's interesting because my orientation IS primary sources regarding lesser developed histories, which is encouraged in academic spheres due to problematic secondary sources. There are clear, factual errors in the secondary sources of lesser developed design histories. Some only have just a step beyond a promotional book as a secondary source.

The sources I added to the Elza Temary page are all primary sources because that history is not developed at all, there seem some film books, offline, with minimal entries which I don't have here, and so it was about, with 15-20 minutes, contributing something known to add to that stub. What I've learned is, wiki is a totally different content development orientation, and I should not have added anything, and just focused on what I do elsewhere. But with just this above, this is why I'd recommend everything I ever contributed to be deleted, if / when possible. I just don't get it, it's valued by some and not others, so I shouldn't have bothered. (Former mrdnartdesign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.172.152.70 (talk) 10:14, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Was thinking after this difficult wave, as there is sincere interest in the content knowledge and I won't be adding anything, I could certainly suggest things and point to organized sources for quicker development. In this regard, the I. E. Palmer Co. and Middetown Silver Co. [after Middletown Plate Co.] are two important American design histories with national impact. Also Lilian Hellander was an important design force working out of Meriden in the 1930s. She is a star in the modern silver design specialism. (former mrdnartdesign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.172.152.70 (talk) 11:19, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Steele dossier
Hi MJL. I noticed a whole lot of recent changes at the Steele dossier article and would like more information/explanation. I am never really certain about the correct ref formats for some sources, such as news agencies, websites, etc. That is because there seems to be no real consensus on the matter. My immediate questions are about agencies and news websites, such as Associated Press, Reuters, ABC News, CNN, etc. These are usually used without italics, but your changes italicized them. What's the explanation?

In the absence of a firm consensus, I have usually followed the idea that if they are italicized in their own articles, I italicize them in the refs and other mentions. If not, then I don't do it. I use their articles as my guide. Does that make sense to you? -- Valjean (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @: According to cite news/doc, the agency parameter is used for The news agency (wire service) that provided the content; examples: Associated Press, Reuters, Agence France-Presse. Do not use for sources published on the agency's own website; e.g. apnews.com or reuters.com; instead, use work or publisher. (bold in original) My preference is generally to use work because it further states for publisher: Name of publisher; may be wikilinked if relevant. The publisher is the company, organization or other legal entity that publishes the work being cited. Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a website, book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, etc.). (formatting also in original) Hope that helps for why I changed it. I can also change it back if you really want to keep it that way since I haven't contributed all that much to the article. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 22:07, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a good explanation. Learning something new everyday here. Now to remember it.... -- Valjean (talk) 00:37, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Now I just noticed the 24601. Are you a fan of Les Misérables? As you can see from my user page, I'm a big fan of the book, musicals, movies, and music. -- Valjean (talk) 00:41, 29 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I literally just got into it. Last week I saw Les Misérables: The Staged Concert on YouTube for the first time which was the only major exposure I have had with it as a work. I really liked it, and now the songs are stuck in my head. { &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 02:36, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hallelujah! You've hit the mother lode of literature. There are many great books, and it's one of them. I first read it in Danish while learning the language. Then I've read it twice in English. I have also seen it on stage in Copenhagen. We were blown away. Great music. I used to own the DVDs of the 10th Anniversary and 25th Anniversary concerts, but they, along with everything else, were burned in the 2018 Camp Fire. Lea Salonga, one of my favorite singers, acted and sang in both concerts. You can find her performances on YouTube. Here are four from Les Miserables:
 * I Dreamed A Dream and One Day More
 * On My Own (by far the most viewed version)
 * In My Life/ A Heart Full of Love
 * A Little Fall of Rain
 * She was the original Miss Saigon at 18 years of age. It's a modern Madame Butterfly set in Vietnam. Great songs. You can see the Manila performance in two parts. It's professional quality, so throw it onto your smart TV and enjoy a great show (not for small children): Act 1, Act 2 -- Valjean (talk) 04:16, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia <div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 01:27, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In the media: Denial: climate change, mass killings and pornography
 * WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2021
 * Deletion report: What we lost, what we gained
 * From a Wikipedia reader: What's Matt Amodio?
 * Arbitration report: ArbCom in 2021
 * Discussion report: On the brink of change – RFA reforms appear imminent
 * Technology report: What does it take to upload a file?
 * WikiProject report: Interview with contributors to WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers
 * Serendipity: "Did You Know ..." featured a photo of the wrong female WWII pilot
 * News from Diff: Content translation tool helps create one million Wikipedia articles
 * Traffic report: Reporting ticket sales on the edge of the Wiki, if Eternals should fail
 * Recent research: Vandalizing Wikipedia as rational behavior
 * Humour: A very new very Wiki crossword

Thank you for the barnstar
I just wanted to stop by and thank you for the barnstar. It means a lot to me during these difficult times. I hope that when my treatment is complete, I will become super scorpion, return to work and finish my last 9 credit hours at college. Scorpions13256 (talk) 04:07, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

If you are ever in Connecticut, I'm sure we can chill or something. { &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 04:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Scorpions13256: Of course! I know I've been there in the low periods with mental health. It's understandable, and you shouldn't push yourself too hard.
 * I am actually in Boston right now. Scorpions13256 (talk) 02:39, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

EHT
Hi. Hope you had a nice weekend. I had a think, and as you know, I've learned a lot more about the practicals at wikipedia. as we know, drafting a good article takes a lot of time. You decide of course, but I'd argue she does not need that time effort here, while other female historical figure do. (or the effort to save existing articles listed on the WomeninRed page.) in the end, it's very easy for researchers to find current information on emily online, which you have pointed to already. however, the 2-3 designers that I mentioned that Leonor Antunes flagged up, have very little on the internet, and I checked Lillian Helander, the designer. In the latter case, that's all in hard copy books and I recall no short bio at all. It's just the state of the internet regarding sources before 1995 especially.

So it is up to you. I usually communicate with people via email, and for example with Lillian I could send scans from a couple of very respected hard copy books by colleagues, and point directly to silver encyclopedias. But if you are particularly passionate about Emily, I could be helpful, support that with maybe a fact check read of the final draft. My key hope is correct facts, especially with sensitive points, and the book occasionally, as books do, has a few factual errors. So I could send a better, more knowledgeable source showing a correction for any of that. There are often errors in articles and books for different reasons. I talk about this with colleagues often-- it drives us crazy sometimes. Best regards (former mrdnartdesign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.172.152.70 (talk) 23:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Deletion review for Draft:SudShare
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:SudShare. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Yitzilitt (paid) (talk) 06:19, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard- December 2021
Hi, MJL! Here is the December 2021 issue of TheWikiWizard!

Humour

 * Christmas is here again, time to bug people to get you the stuff you really, really want! (Anyone going to get me some butter cookies, or that giant Costco teddy bear?)
 * If you don't like turkey, there's always the rotisserie chicken!
 * If you ate too much turkey and regret it, then you should have read the above message ;)

Wikipedia News

 * We don't have much to report this month, but we do have the following...


 * The Simple English Wikipedia has almost reached 200,000 articles!
 * Wikipedia Asian Month which took place in November, has finished. Now, all the articles are judged and then it is determined who gets the postcards, even if you don't get one, or didn't participate, there is always next year, and we thank you for everything you have done!
 * Arbitration Committee Elections December 2021 took place earlier this month, for elegible editors. (At the time of this writing it was still taking place, but I assumed by the time this issue was sent, it would have been finished - It is set to finish at December 6 2021 at 23:59 UTC )

Editor's Notes

 * I haven't forgotten about TWW ;) Don't worry.
 * TWW is in the process of getting a new main page, if you have any ideas, or would like to help, please shoot a message on the TWW talk page.
 * That's it for this issue! This is the last issue for 2021. See you all in 2022! Have a safe and happy holiday season!


 * Like this Issue? Got Feedback? Spot a mistake? Discuss this issue here

To change your subscription, or to subscribe click Here.
 * Happy Holidays! -- つがる  Talk to つがる:)  🍁 01:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * This issue was sent to you with the help of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 01:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

How can you claim it is a constructive edit?
Excuse me, I saw your edit on my talk page, can you tell how it was a constructive edit? WP:OR is not allowed, any edit which is original research is not allowed and should be treated as disruptive editing, and I have welcomed many many IPs and editors before who have been constructive or non-constructive, check my edit history if you want to. If you need a link here it is WP:DISRUPT So, your accusation of me misusing ROLLBACK and biting new users is absolutely wrong, I am deleting it from my talk page, I don't feel it was a proper constructive criticism. <b style="color:#000">Quantum</b><sup style="color:#300">Realm  (<b style="color:#609">meow</b> • <b style="color:#F63">pawtrack</b>) 20:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't see how the edit seriously wasn't an attempt at being constructive. This is explicitly the intentions of the character within the story. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 20:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @QuantumRealm: I did check your history, and do think this is absolutely a one-off issue. However, the edit clearly falls under WP:PLOTSUMMARY/MOS:PLOT/WP:PRIMARY.
 * Using rollback is meant for undoing obvious vandalism or disruptive editing. There are plenty of situations where using the undo button is fine, but using rollback isn't. This is one example. It may seem trivial, but using rollback for things that aren't vandalism or disruptive editing can get you in trouble. I had trouble getting granted pending changes reviewer because of two instances where I used rollback when I should have used undo. MJL was trying to help you, not just criticize you. Accusing anyone who criticizes you of misunderstanding policy and being wrong is not a way to become a better editor. I've been the subject of bitter criticism before, and sometimes it was valid. I have learned from it. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:00, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox pronoun module
Template:Infobox pronoun module has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:25, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Difference in admins
Hi MJL, My draft article about Susan Phoenix, who is an author with multiple best-selling books behind her name, got deleted in a somewhat harsh way by Theroadislong. He said that it was too promotional. The only information which was displayed in the article was information about her background (birthplace, kids and further family), what she studied (PhD in psychology and that sort of stuff) and of course, what books she wrote. Furthermore, all sources were independent and referencing was done in a proper way. Is is possible to reserve you as a reviewer for when I try to write the article again?

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Line Redline (talk • contribs) 15:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

It does appear that Susan Phoenix meets WP:GNG. If I may suggest a few sources for you, because I do see many new users get this wrong (and make articles that look like this ). This BBC interview would likely be an awesome catch if you can find it. The Independent also did a really excellent profile of her in 2011. I don't have access to it, but the Belfast Telegraph covered her in depth. While less detailed, I found coverage in News Letter and Deadline (?). I couldn't find any reviews of her books besides this (don't have access though), but I'm sure they're out there since I saw her work cited in several different places. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 19:35, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Line Redline: I don't normally take reservations, but sure I don't see why not!
 * Hi MJL, thanks for your response! The article you pointed out as wrong in your reply was acutally written by me. Can you maybe point out what is wrong about it so that I can write a proper article the next time I try? And how can I reserve you as a reviewer when uploading the draft version for submission? Please, only spend time on this when you actually have time. I don´t want to bother you. Line Redline (talk) 14:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

What noise does a fish make?
Please have some trout in exchange for eating up some of the project's time with a needless RfC at Talk:Pig War (1859) regarding whether or not a pig is a casualty of war. To [mis]quote Robert Lambert Baynes, I'll say you should try not involve great nations in a war over a squabble about a pig. Best wishes, Alex Eng <small style="font-size:80%;">( TALK ) 23:21, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Wikisource/Category
Template:WikiProject Wikisource/Category has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 (talk) 00:11, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 22
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#606060; background-color:#f8f8f8; 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"> Hello everyone, and welcome to the 22nd issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter. This issue will be covering new and updated user scripts from the past seven months (June through December 2021).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

About the newsletter

Archive

Subscribe or unsubscribe

Discuss this issue

Goyim Defense League
I didn't know about this until I got an email from the ADL (not sure why}. Seems to be in the news now. Doug Weller  talk 17:33, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, they're definitely notable (and a lot bigger) at this point. It probably could be an article since the content wouldn't be the same as what the AFD covered. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐🤶 19:37, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hopefully I'll find time. I've copied it to User:Doug Weller/Goyim Defense League. Not asking you, but do you know anyone who might want to help? Thanks. Doug Weller  talk 09:08, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022 with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 28 December 2021
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia
 * From the editor: Here is the news


 * News and notes: Jimbo's NFT, new arbs, fixing RfA, and financial statements


 * Serendipity: Born three months before her brother?


 * In the media: The past is not even past


 * Recent research: STEM articles judged unsuitable for undergraduates below the first paragraph


 * Arbitration report: A new crew for '22


 * By the numbers: Four billion words and a few numbers


 * Deletion report: We laughed, we cried, we closed as "no consensus"


 * Gallery: Wikicommons presents: 2021


 * Traffic report: Spider-Man, football and the departed


 * Crossword: Another Wiki crossword for one and all


 * Humour: Buying Wikipedia

<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 21:10, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

Throwaway comment
..., yes; but, unfortunately, only before the indef block, not after it. *facepalm* Happy New Year to you and yours MJL! SN54129 —  Review here please :)  17:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC) Either way, happy new year to you as well! &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times"> MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 17:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, looks like they choose suicide by admin instead..}

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Template editor granted
I've granted you the template editor user group. You may need to use it to edit through template editor protection when carrying out clerking tasks. If you don't want the user group, let me know and I can remove it. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 22:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Indian state legislative assembly constituency
Template:Infobox Indian state legislative assembly constituency has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 00:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions topic area changes
In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.

The topics proposed for revocation are:
 * Senkaku islands
 * Waldorf education
 * Ancient Egyptian race controversy
 * Scientology
 * Landmark worldwide

The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
 * India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
 * Armenia/Azerbaijan

Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.

Community feedback is invited and welcome at Arbitration/Requests/Motions. --Barkeep49 (talk) 16:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions topic area changes
In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.

The topics proposed for revocation are:
 * Senkaku islands
 * Waldorf education
 * Ancient Egyptian race controversy
 * Scientology
 * Landmark worldwide

The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
 * India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
 * Armenia/Azerbaijan

Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.

Community feedback is invited and welcome at Arbitration/Requests/Motions. --Barkeep49 (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia <div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 20:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Special report: WikiEd course leads to Twitter harassment
 * News and notes: Feedback for Board of Trustees election
 * Interview: CEO Maryana Iskander "four weeks in"
 * Black History Month: What are you doing for Black History Month?
 * Deletion report: Ringing in the new year: Subject notability guideline under discussion
 * WikiProject report: The Forgotten Featured
 * Arbitration report: New arbitrators look at new case and antediluvian sanctions
 * Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2021
 * Gallery: No Spanish municipality without a photograph
 * Obituary: Twofingered Typist
 * Op-Ed: Identifying and rooting out climate change denial
 * Essay: The prime directive
 * Opinion: Should the Wikimedia Foundation continue to accept cryptocurrency donations?
 * In the media: Fuzzy-headed government editing
 * Recent research: Articles with higher quality ratings have fewer "knowledge gaps"
 * Serendipity: Pooh entered the Public Domain – but Tigger has to wait two more years
 * Crossword: Cross swords with a crossword

February with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

TheWikiWizard- Jan/Feb 2022
Hi, MJL! Here is the first issue of 2022 for the TheWikiWizard!

Humor

 * Since it's/was Lunar New Year, you can bug your boss at work for that extra fifty dollar bill ;)
 * New Year, New world, Same TWW :P
 * Did you work off that turkey? Don't worry, editing Wikipedia burns calories... I am pretty sure...

Wiki(p/m)edia News

 * Check out The "Education/Eduwiki Week 2022"!
 * Modussiccandi had a successful RFA!
 * The 2022 Steward Elections are open to editors who meet the criterion.

Editor's Notes

 * We are combining two months' issues into one, to try out a new format. This is the first issue of 2022. Happy New Year!
 * That's it for this time, see you in the next issue!


 * Like this Issue? Got Feedback? Spot a mistake? Discuss this issue here

To change your subscription, or to subscribe click Here.
 * Wishing you a good 2022! -- つがる  Talk to つがる:)  🍁 01:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This issue was sent to you with the help of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 01:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard- Jan/Feb 2022
Hi, MJL! Here is the first issue of 2022 for the TheWikiWizard!

Humor

 * Since it's/was Lunar New Year, you can bug your boss at work for that extra fifty dollar bill ;)
 * New Year, New world, Same TWW :P
 * Did you work off that turkey? Don't worry, editing Wikipedia burns calories... I am pretty sure...

Wiki(p/m)edia News

 * Check out The "Education/Eduwiki Week 2022"!
 * Modussiccandi had a successful RFA!
 * The 2022 Steward Elections are open to editors who meet the criterion.

Editor's Notes

 * We are combining two months' issues into one, to try out a new format. This is the first issue of 2022. Happy New Year!
 * That's it for this time, see you in the next issue!


 * Like this Issue? Got Feedback? Spot a mistake? Discuss this issue here

To change your subscription, or to subscribe click Here.
 * Wishing you a good 2022! -- つがる  Talk to つがる:)  🍁 01:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This issue was sent to you with the help of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 10:44, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tom DeLay series
Template:Tom DeLay series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 12:36, 15 February 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.

Hopefully...
... your remarks at the page of LL will really make him calm down. The last weer he is really annoying regarding the articles Corofin, County Clare and Corofin (parish). As if he really has no clue about what he is taking about. I can use a break from his antics. The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 21:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Collapsible portal box
Template:Collapsible portal box has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

March editathons
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 27 February 2022
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia
 * From the team: Selection of a new Signpost Editor-in-Chief


 * News and notes: Impacts of Russian invasion of Ukraine


 * Opinion: Why student editors are good for Wikipedia


 * Special report: A presidential candidate's team takes on Wikipedia


 * In the media: Wiki-drama in the UK House of Commons


 * Serendipity: War photographers: from Crimea (1850s) to the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022)


 * Technology report: Community Wishlist Survey results


 * WikiProject report: 10 years of tea


 * Featured content: Featured Content returns


 * Deletion report: The 10 most SHOCKING deletion discussions of February


 * Recent research: How editors and readers may be emotionally affected by disasters and terrorist attacks


 * Arbitration report: Parties remonstrate, arbs contemplate, skeptics coordinate


 * By the numbers: Does birthplace affect the frequency of Wikipedia biography articles?


 * Gallery: The vintage exhibit


 * Traffic report: Euphoria, Pamela Anderson, lies and Netflix


 * News from Diff: The Wikimania 2022 Core Organizing Team


 * Crossword: A Crossword, featuring Featured Articles


 * Humour: Notability of mailboxes

<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 20:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
 * 🇨🇽 AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
 * Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
 * GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
 * Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
 * 🇺🇳 Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
 * 🇨🇽 AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
 * Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
 * GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
 * Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
 * 🇺🇳 Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)