User talk:TheImaCow/Archive/2020/November

?
I want to post an unblock, i have something prepared, should I post it here or does this Arbcom stuff come into play? (So I should send it to an email address, and if so, to which one? arbcom-en@wikimedia.org?) --TheImaCow (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes you want to email arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:46, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , Done. (arbcom-en@wikimedia.org) Sending adress is gru*******@gmx.de --TheImaCow (talk) 21:09, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * @TheImaCow I see your appeal was accepted. Welcome back. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:32, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I have also just -more or less randomly- seen it. Thanks! but now I have to clean up here... --TheImaCow (talk) 19:37, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Welcome back to Wikipedia! — Yours, Berrely  • Talk∕Contribs 19:50, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --TheImaCow (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Deletion tagging
Hello, TheImaCow,

It is really important, because you are so active, to post a talk page notice to every page creator when you tag any page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AfD/TfD/CfD/etc.). Since you use Twinkle this will happen automatically once you set up your Twinkle Preferences. Please set this up today before you do any more deletion tagging. If you can set up Twinkle to log your deletion tagging to a separate user page, you can set up the Preferences to post notifications.

This is very important to do for every page because it is the only way a page creator knows what has happened to pages that they create. Because only admins have access to Deleted Contributions, page creators can't see that their pages have been deleted unless they get notified. Also, they should have the ability to contest a deletion should they disagree with the tagging. Please ensure that you do this with every page you tag for deletion from now on. I'll be checking back to make sure you do this regularly. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:52, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Might I suggest slowing down as well? 540+ edits in a little over 30 hours is absurd in the areas you're editing. Praxidicae (talk) 01:01, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 *  * 3 hours. Why is it absurd? I thought these areas "i'm editing" were the ones where you normally do a lot of edits, or not? And how is this problematic? Are they all wrong again? --TheImaCow (talk) 01:28, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh..thanks for the reminder. I have now enabled it in the settings for each criterion. However, I've previously disabled it for some templates I marked with G2, especially for people who haven't been here for ages. I guess these people will never read it anyway, so I might as well save myself the message. But if the notification is so important, then I have nothing against it. Thanks for the information! --TheImaCow (talk) 01:01, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * How are you rating and reviewing articles at this pace? That is my point. Be diligent and slow down. This is part of why you were blocked previously, for your inattention to detail...Praxidicae (talk) 01:30, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * well, the last sentence, I completely agree with that. But rating is actually quite simple, just have a look at the program. There is this "ORTS-Rating", which shows in 99% of all cases what I would give (without this). But as you might have noticed, I not just click "Save" all the time, I also add certain projects from time to time, which can be done in seconds. And honestly, if you look at the huge mountains of unrated articles, it's better to have them with maybe 0.5 percent error rate (which is probably just one level too much or too little) than not to have them rated at all. At least that's my view on the subject. --TheImaCow (talk) 01:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

election templates nominated for deletion
Thank you for brining to my attention the fact that non-consensus changes have been made to a variety of templates within the WikiProject New Zealand/politics space. It seems that the editor has brought their own interpretation on the mathematics of voting, and that some serious work may be needed to fix accumulated errors, and perhaps in reaching further consensus as to whether these changes are of any interest. I'd like that any consideration of deletions be delayed until this is resolved, as these templates may otherwise need to be recreated. Fan |  talk  13:39, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Template:Archdeacons of Johannesburg
Can't see why this needs to go Bashereyre (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't. Template:Archdecaons of Johannesburg (note the typo "archdecaons") needs to go because it duplicates the correctly spelled template. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:44, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Frank Kmet
I moved my draft to the article mainspace, so please review it. QL102944 (talk) 19:19, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I removed the deletion tag, sorry for this... this was too fast, my fault. --TheImaCow (talk) 19:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Its all cool. QL102944 (talk) 19:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)