User talk:Quadell/Archive 57

GA Review
Hi, Can you please spent some time reviewing Allahabad. It's a long pending, in list. Thanks, wishes.-- 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 16:58, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * That article deserves a careful and thorough review, and I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to get to it any time soon. Best of luck, – Quadell (talk) 17:04, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Never mind. Thanks. Wishes. -- 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 17:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Request
Hey Quadell. You have previously reviewed Lucknow article for GA status(link? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lucknow/GA1) and i am very happy to tell you that after many PRs and a major copyedit, the article is now ready for re-assessment. So i request you to review the article as i have worked very hard on it and would do anything to make it a high quality article. Thanking You. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 15:31, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your many improvements to the Lucknow article! I'm afraid I don't have time right now to perform the thorough review that an article of this size would require. I hope a careful and experienced reviewer will get to it soon though. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 15:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * If not you, then can you suggest me a reviewer from the community so that i can take it up to him? It's just that i will be out in some some days for a few months so i will not be able to provide solutions to the shortcomings which the article may have during the review and the nominations seem to have been pending since May. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 16:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I haven't done any reviews in over six months, so I'm not even sure who is active right now. – Quadell (talk) 11:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Are trivial/non-controversial unsourced statements allowed in a GA?
Hello again, if you're not too busy or away, I've come to ask you about this. Criteria 2b says only special statements or challenge-able ones need RSes with inline citations but 2c says no OR. I obviously cannot check each of every fact of an article. So is it ok if a few unsourced non-controversial statements pass through a review? or is this allowing original research? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:25, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * That's a great question. WP:NOR does mean that conclusions and statements must have been previously published outside of Wikipedia. I can't, for instance, introduce new speculation about who Jack the Ripper was in that article, unless that theory was previously published. And you're right that the only way to know for sure would be to check all the sources.
 * But that's true even when every statement is cited, especially if offline sources are used. Reviewers are not expected to read all the sources (although spot-checks are recommended). At some point, a writer could introduce false statements, and the reviewer might not spot it, even if he or she is doing everything right.
 * What the Good article criteria are not is the essay I go to first when deciding how to apply the criteria. It's clear that the only statements that need citations are:
 * direct quotations,
 * statistics,
 * published opinion,
 * counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and
 * contentious material relating to living persons.
 * This means most paragraphs will not need a citation at all to meet the minimum criteria. Now I personally will ask for more citations when there are that few, and will encourage the writer to provide sources for each paragraph. But I can't insist on it. If the writer doesn't want to find a source for a given part of the article (and it's not one of the 5 types of statement above), then I have to go ahead and pass the article... even if more citations would be better.
 * One last thing: if a given statement sounds like OR, then it's a good thing to ask. The writer will need to assure you that the statement came from published material, and a citation is the best way to do that. But you can't insist on that for all unsourced statements; just the ones that seem suspect.
 * All the best, – Quadell (talk) 11:17, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Very very helpful. Thanks as always and good to hear from you again, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

! point
Hi, I am unsure why '! point' is a redirect; it isnt a form that I have ever seen. Pageviews will be skewed because it is on the first page of special:allpages and it's Special:WhatLinksHere/!_point is full of pages due to a bug in Cluebot, so that cant be used as an indicator of usefulness in this case. Have you seen people using it? John Vandenberg (chat) 09:49, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know. I see that I created the redirect nine years ago, but I don't remember. I believe there's a tool on the tool server that can show how often a certain page (or redirect) is viewed. I'll try to find it. I doubt there are many people who look up ! point and are stymied because they can't remember the name exclamation point, but that's just a guess. – Quadell (talk) 11:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: It appears the rd is viewed 100 to 120 times a month, though I don't know how many of those are people who see it in at the top of a list and are curious. – Quadell (talk) 11:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately it is also hard to use search tools due to the '!'. That is why I hoped you might know why you created it, having seen it in use somewhere prominent enough to warrant a redirect, which isnt a very high bar. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:20, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, mystery solved. It was the first entry here in a list of article titles in prominent encyclopedias that don't have an article in Wikipedia. A group tried to turn each link blue, either by creating a new article or making a redirect. That's what happened here. I agree that it's of limited value in this instance. – Quadell (talk) 13:22, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

makasih! Down the rabbit hole a bit further I find [http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/36835/point ! point] in PC Magazine-hosted encyclopedia with entry "See bang path." which is of course about UUCP's bang path (a redirect back to UUCP). Oddly enough we dont have an entry about this encyclopedia or its creator The Computer Language Company, but the original can be seen here, and there is a bit of background here. I've never had a reason to look behind the PC Magazine-hosted webpages, but '! point' is shaking me, as I've never heard it used in that context (or any other). I would have been happier if there was an obscure reference work that linked '! point' to 'exclamation point'. As it doesnt, we need to consider changing the target?! I'd really like to find a RS which uses '! point'.

I think it would confuse the reader, if '! point' targeted UUCP especially as is not mentioned in the text. exclamation mark does touch on the use in UUCP, so it isnt terrible to leave it pointing in that direction. Maybe the next step is to as Talk:UUCP, and then a WikiProject, for evidence of it in use. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:43, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

hope
hope you´re doing well  Miss Bono  [hello, hello!]  19:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hi. You have been mentioned at ANI in section Long-term copyright concerns: User:Light show. Your participation would be very welcome there. Please note that with current archive practices it will archive after 36 hours of inactivity. After its archival, the conversation will be found at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive861 or later. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * P.S. The note above inspires me to say that this is not bad tidings for you, in case it means to suggest you're unwell! Hope you're not. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Re-Review
Hi Quadell - a couple years ago you reviewed, and rejected, Delta Upsilon for GA status. In looking at this article it was a real mess. I've just rewritten the entire thing (and significantly shortened it) and I think it's much more balanced and better-sourced now (and includes many of the significant issues DU has had in the past and currently that the previous iteration of the article omitted). I, today, re-nominated it but I wanted to give you a heads-up in case you wanted to be the one to review it as you had looked at it previously. This is the previous version:. One of the biggest concerns is that it only sourced fraternity-produced publications. I've eviscerated those throughout the article with two exceptions: (1) I continue to source DU itself for self-referencing information, such as its official colors, songs, etc., (2) in several places I cite a 1935 book "One Hundred Years of Delta Upsilon" that was published by the fraternity but authored by an independent board of editors (In most of these cases I use it as a secondary reference only to support NPOV sources and, where there is not a secondary reference, caveat it with "according to the fraternity ..."). DocumentError (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Merry
To you and yours FWiW  Bzuk (talk) 15:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
 Dear, HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions! From a fellow editor, FWiW  Bzuk (talk) 20:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Precious again
  declaration of independence

Thank you, lover of "reliable, neutral, and free" from the beginning, for quality articles such as United States Declaration of Independence, for good articles and reviews, help with articles for creation and for new users, and for doing more during your "break" than others do in a year, including: "I remember my mother telling me, 'Don't ever write anything down that you wouldn't want the whole world to see.'" and a fair fair unblock, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (12 August 2007, what a poem!, 1 June 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 727th recipient of my  Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, Gerda. – Quadell (talk) 20:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Inactive on Wikiquote?
Hi, I noticed you have not edited at Wikiquote in quite a long time, and are listed as an inactive administrator. Do you think there is any chance you will be back? Cheers! bd2412 T 04:23, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I replied there, thanks. – Quadell (talk) 20:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Asked another question there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Green political parties
Category:Green political parties, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. PanchoS (talk) 12:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I have no particular opinion on this, but thanks for notifying me. – Quadell (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Special Barnstar

 * Aw, thanks, Samsara! I'm glad to have helped with that. And thanks for all you do on Wikipedia as well. – Quadell (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bruce Archer


The article Bruce Archer has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * title and subject only share surname; unsourced and unable to verify; death is predicted almost two years out?

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. Postcard Cathy (talk) 12:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, my bot created the page as a redirect to L. Bruce Archer, which I think is appropriate. I reverted the page back to that. Thanks! – Quadell (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Maitreya Project jpg
hey Quadell, your name appears on a files for deletion entry:. It looks like another copy: File:Maigtreya_Project_Promotional_Poster.jpg has crept back into the page: Maitreya_Project. I don't have a copy of the first one, but by memory and by the scale of the trees depicted at the base, this looks like the same thing again; probably not depicting the new design. Cheers. David Woodward ☮ ♡♢☞☽ 02:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I can confirm that they are the same image. Before, the uploader claimed the "for Wikipedia use only" was a free license, which is wasn't, so the file was deleted. Now the uploader is making a "fair use" claim, that the image complies with our non-free use policy. If you think it doesn't, feel free to nominate it for deletion. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 11:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Peer review/Mayabazar/archive1
Pavanjandhyala has opened the peer review for Mayabazar (1957), the first Telugu film to be attempted for FA class. Like how Mughal-e-Azam is to Bollywood, Mayabazar is to Telugu cinema. Feel free to leave comments. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 04:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:-
Template:- has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alakzi (talk) 23:33, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Eleutherodactylus articles family errors
Hi there. I am commenting on your page because Polbot's talk page says this is the place. I just finished a project of editing 35 species articles of genus Phrynobatrachus, converting from template:taxobox to template:speciesbox in order to generate automatic italic title. I also systematically changed "Downloaded on" to "Retrieved" as this is more typical of Wikipedia style.

Now have discovered that many species articles of genus Eleutherodactylus list the family as Leptodactylidae in the taxobox and the body of the article. But Eleutherodactylus is now considered to be in the Eleutherodactylidae family. Some articles that need this fix are Eleutherodactylus amplinympha, South Island telegraph frog (redirected from Eleutherodactylus audanti), Eleutherodactylus auriculatoides.

This genus is too big to do by hand. Can you generate a bot to edit each of the Eleutherodactylus species articles and set the family to Eleutherodactylidae if it is not already? —Anomalocaris (talk) 05:46, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I no longer have access to the environment Polbot ran on, so I'm unable to run scripts that edit Wikipedia. Perhaps you could ask at Bot requests though. Good luck! – Quadell (talk) 11:46, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Done ... see Bot_requests —Anomalocaris (talk) 04:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Wiggles images
Hi Quadell,

So I'm working on re-vamping and updating The Wiggles, which happened to my very first FA. It needed it! We unfortunately don't have images of the new iteration of the group; however, we do have separate images of them. I was wondering, then, since you created a composite of three of the Noodles for Elmo's World, if you wouldn't mind making a composite of the new kids. Here are the images in question: :,,. Thanks so much! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd be delighted, Christine. I'll let you know when I have something. – Quadell (talk) 11:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I created File:WigglesActors.jpg. I notice that Pryce gets more room in the image than the others (since his photo originally had a wider aspect ratio). If you like I could make his part a bit thinner, though it would probably cut off his ear. Or I could leave it as is; it's up to you. Also, you might want to tweak the description. Let me know what you think! – Quadell (talk) 11:41, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ooo, pretty! Very nice, thanks so much.  I think we should keep Simon's ear as is. ;) The description's good, too.  I'll go and add to the article now! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Recado rojo
Hi Quadell,

Oregano, cumin, clove, cinnamon, black pepper and garlic were not available in Prehispanic times. I erased the part "mayan peoples". It is mestizo cuisine. --Opus88888 (talk) 18:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No problems. – Quadell (talk) 10:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for deletion
Template:Ni-eb has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:18, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other events of 1931. Since you had some involvement with the Other events of 1931 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 03:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other events of 1851. Since you had some involvement with the Other events of 1851 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I don't really have any opinion about any of these. – Quadell (talk) 10:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Akbar Page Improvement
Hello Quadell, I was writing a paper on great rulers who had early-life shortcomings, and while in the early stages of learning about Akbar I noticed on citation number 11 that a better source was needed about Akbar's illiteracy. Later in my research, I found a source that you may want to look into as a possibility for improving this citation:

Smith, Vincent Arthur. Akbar the Great Mogul: 1545-1605. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1919. In the first edition, the information about his education (and Akbar's refusal to except tutoring) is on page 22.

I hope this helps! Hollyyama (talk) 02:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks! With this edit, I made the change you requested. Feel free to make these sorts of changes yourself, when you see opportunities for improvement -- Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit! If the page is protected, or if you can't figure out how to get the formatting, feel free to leave a note on the article's talk page and someone will get to it. All the best! – Quadell (talk) 11:53, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

File:TreeRedwoodSky.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TreeRedwoodSky.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Nick&#8288;—&#8288;Contact/Contribs 16:09, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have no real opinion about this. – Quadell (talk) 12:44, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Frank Jenner
Hi Quadell,

Thank you again for performing the good article review for the Frank Jenner article two years ago. I recently nominated the article for featured status here. If you would like to contribute to the discussion, your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 15:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see the article is being continually improved on and expanded. I'm not doing FAC reviews right now, but I wish you the best. – Quadell (talk) 12:44, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Eisenach.jpg
Hi Quadell. Just letting you know that a case that you closed satisfactorily 6 years ago has been reopened. Please could you kindly contribute your opinion? The original case is. The new discussion is  Thank you. Storye book (talk) 08:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I commented there. – Quadell (talk) 12:44, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * It was truly my pleasure, old friend. I hope your time on Wikipedia brings you much joy. – Quadell (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

FA FAQ
Hello again.

I consider myself a fairly experienced editor here but feel completely ignorant of the FA process. I was surprised there hasn't been any FA FAQ, though I did read the numerous general and user essays related to it at the see also section in WP:FACR. I've created a rough draft in my sandbox containing a few questions which have bothered me for long. Please tell me what you think on how I should proceed. I somehow want this, if possible, to be and answered and written into a general essay so that it can be kept for all to see. &#x2011;Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello. I answered there. – Quadell (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for answering it. Hope others find it useful too. I'll link it somewhere in the See also section of WP:FACR if nobody minds. &#x2011;Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:09, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Circle Pines Center
Hi Quadell,

I see that you deleted a page for Circle Pines Center. I'm guessing that you did this because it lacked proper citation. I am interested in beginning a new page that better documents the history of Circle Pines Center and its place in cooperative history. This page would also serve to provide a link to the numerous references that are already present in Wikipedia to Circle Pines Center. Is the old page still available for editing or do I begin from scratch. I am new to Wikipedia editing so I would remove all the history that could not be cited and begin with basic information that could be built on over time. If you look at the references on Wikipedia regarding Circle Pines, you will see that its current documented history indeed merits a page on the encyclopedia where that history can be expanded and refined to illustrate Circle Pines Center's place in the American cooperative movement.

Thanks for your help. Mevans45 (talk) 18:28, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The article was deleted back in 2006 because it was copied directly from http://www.circlepinescenter.org/index.php/history, which is a copyright violation. A new article could be created at any time, so long as it cites its sources and doesn't copy text directly from another source. You may find it useful to start at Articles for creation. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 11:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Template:Rk
Greetings, a decade or so ago you protected the Rk template for being high risk. Nowadays, given that it's usage has dramatically decreased to less than 250 entries, would an unprotection be suited?Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it would, yes. I unprotected it. – Quadell (talk) 01:26, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Aw, thanks! – Quadell (talk) 14:13, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of List of countries by population (graphical) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of countries by population (graphical) 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/List of countries by population (graphical) 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 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. — foxj 19:45, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Sounds appropriate. I was really just practicing my chart-making skills with that one. – Quadell (talk) 14:13, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Talk:Antisemitism/Draft


The article Talk:Antisemitism/Draft has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This 12 year old draft appears to now be obsolete

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. Oncenawhile (talk) 08:27, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it's no longer useful. – Quadell (talk) 14:13, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Talk:Antisemitism/Draft
Talk:Antisemitism/Draft, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Antisemitism/Draft and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Antisemitism/Draft during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Safiel (talk) 03:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a little odd that this draft hasn't been looked at in a decade, and then in the span of a week two people want to delete it. But regardless, I'm not going to use it, and I have no reason to want to see it kept. – Quadell (talk) 13:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Fdw-puf
Template:Fdw-puf has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 14:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Squigs for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Squigs 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/Squigs 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 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. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:44, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

A Jack-bean listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect A Jack-bean. Since you had some involvement with the A Jack-bean redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ''This is one of two odd creations by your bot Polbot that someone flagged today. Wondering if you have any input. Cheers.'' Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 13:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Tun Abdul Razak bin Dato' Hussein listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tun Abdul Razak bin Dato&. Since you had some involvement with the Tun Abdul Razak bin Dato' Hussein redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 06:06, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Abdulaziz al-omari alive.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Abdulaziz al-omari alive.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

File:TreeSaplingsRedwood.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TreeSaplingsRedwood.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Please claim your upload(s): File:Wigs on display.jpg
Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as own, amending the information added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add  to the media by uploader tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the information where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transfered to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)


 * It would be helpful if you could update your other uploads as well :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Since these images were uploaded with the comment "Photo by Quadell", I consider them already claimed. – Quadell (talk) 12:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

No time no see
Hi Quadell, hope you're well...! We've missed your sage comments at FAC, would you be interested in stopping by again (in your own time of course)? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Just to let you know
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:05, 8 September 2016 (UTC)please ping me
 * Ottawahitech, I don't see myself mentioned there. – Quadell (talk) 16:33, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Culturally significant listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Culturally significant. Since you had some involvement with the Culturally significant redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

God
He's basically the god of Wikipedia. Bow mortals. Whitetiger401 (talk) 15:41, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Request for Comments on use of certain files not copyrighted in the US
Hello,

There is an ongoing discussion about the use of files on Wikipedia that are not protected by copyright in the US because there is no copyright relations between the US and the country of publication. You commented in a 2012 discussion on the same topic that resulted in no consensus. You are invited to share your views in the ongoing discussion. AHeneen (talk) 21:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Precious three years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Aw, thanks, Gerda! – Quadell (talk) 12:19, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Genealogy - newsletter No.1
{| style="position: relative; margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; padding: 0.5em 1em; background-color:Cornsilk; border: 2px solid #bddff2; border-color: rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 ); border-radius: 8px; box-shadow: 8px 8px 12px rgba( 0, 0, 0, 0.7 );"
 * Newsletter Nr 1 for  WikiProject Genealogy (and Wikimedia genealogy project on Meta)

  Participation:

This is the very first newsletter sent by mass mail to members in WikiProject Genealogy, to everyone who voted a support for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, see below)

Progress report:

Since the Projects very first edit 9 december 2002 by User:Dan Koehl, which eventually became the WikiProject Genealogy, different templates were developed, and the portal Portal:Genealogy was founded by  User:Michael A. White in 2008. Over the years a number of articles has been written, with more or less association to genealogy. And, very exciting, there is a proposal made on Meta by User:Another Believer to found a new Wikimedia Genealogy Project, read more at Meta; Wikimedia genealogy project where you also can support the creation with your vote, in case you havnt done so already.

Future:

The future of the Genealogy project on the English Wikipedia, and a potential creation of a new Wikimedia Genealogy Project, is something where you can make a an input.

You can 


 * discuss on the projects talk page how the project should be developed
 * sign as member or supporter at the projects member list
 * Check the goal, tasks and see if something interest you.
 * put the User box on your user page by inserting the Template:User WikiProject Genealogy with the following code:.
 * develop or update the Portal:Genealogy?
 * in case you havnt read Wikimedia genealogy project take a look
 * support that project with your vote.

Cheers from your WikiProject Genealogy founder and coordinator

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery Dan Koehl (talk) 22:28, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stephanie Jones


The article Stephanie Jones has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * The three references for this article are all dead, and have been removed. It's therefore a completely unsourced BLP, but too old to be eligible for prod-BLP

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. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:21, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Slavic languages.jpg
Hello. On Commons we have a little debate going on about apparent derivatives this file at c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Linguistic maps of Slavic languages. Although the file is now on Commons, it began life here and was eventually deleted by you in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=%3AFile%3ASlavic_languages.jpg. Could you kindly look at the oldest version of the deleted file and please tell us who uploaded it, when, whether it was own work and the license status. I'm guessing it was, circa 2005 and PD-self but we would be really appreciative if this could be confirmed by yourself. Thank you for your time.  Green Giant  ( talk )  18:45, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:A small blue flag icon.svg


The file File:A small blue flag icon.svg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Orphaned file, not likely to be useful for encyclopedic purposes.

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

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

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob 13 Talk 03:10, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

William & Mary listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect William &. Since you had some involvement with the William & Mary redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nev&eacute;–selbert 21:17, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

HRH the Duke of Kent listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect HRH the Duke of Kent. Since you had some involvement with the HRH the Duke of Kent redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nev&eacute;–selbert 19:49, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Template strikethrough
Template:Template strikethrough has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 15:57, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Precious four years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:40, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux  Talk 04:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying me. I can see why it would be insecure to let inactive accounts hold elevated permissions. I loved being an admin, but I'm really not active anymore, so perhaps it would be best if my rights were removed, at least for now. Should I later decide to become active again, I can go through whatever process is necessary to reacquire those permissions. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Quadell. Actually, by editing above you have stopped the desysop process.  If you won't be using this access for a while you can request removal by leaving a very short request at WP:BN.  If you return without a lengthy inactivity after that you can just request reinstatement at WP:BN as well.  Sometimes policies change but the normal WP:RFA process is also available.  Thanks! —  xaosflux  Talk 00:05, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh wow, even a comment counts? You're really just turning off privileges for the completely inactive accounts then. No, I guess I'm motivated enough to respond to comments and requests, edit articles very occasionally, and leave open the possibility of returning to regular editing in the future. And if that's enough for the community (for me to keep admin rights), then that's enough for me. – Quadell (talk) 12:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yup, this was purely a procedural process - sometimes editors leave the project for any reason and we turn that off so that if their accounts get hacked we don't have exposure. Someone who is gone would be unlikely to notice that their account was compromised.  Good to see you are still around - feel free to mop up the messes still! (CAT:CSD is always dirt :D ). —  xaosflux  Talk 15:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Monsters and imaginary beasts listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Monsters and imaginary beasts. Since you had some involvement with the Monsters and imaginary beasts redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 04:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)