User talk:Timrollpickering/Archive 21

Politics of Taiwan
Now that consensus opposes moving Politics of the Republic of China to "Politics of Taiwan", how about converting the redirect, Politics of Taiwan, into an article instead? The page shall be about just the politics of Taiwan (or Taiwan, China) island. --George Ho (talk) 20:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Less housekeeping needed
Hey, I saw you manually changed this list after closing a category discussion. That's currently no longer needed, because a bot is taking care of keeping the list up to date. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

China (cultural region)
Hi, I saw this Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 6 is going on. But some of the people who voted "Keep" should be asked to clarify whether their "keep" is for a hard redirect or a soft redirect. Because hard redirect and soft redirect are different.--Sevilledade (talk) 00:43, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Recent move
I reverted your move of National Police Agency (Republic of China) per a request at WP:RM/TR contesting said move. If you wish to move the page, please start a request for one on the talk page. Thank you. JudgeRM  (talk to me)  20:15, 13 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

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Addis Run for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Addis Run 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/Addis Run 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. TopCipher 09:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Topcipher (talk • contribs)

Category:Utah elections, 1895
I don't understand why you removed Category U.S. State elections by year from Category:Utah elections, 1895. Can you explain, please?—GoldRingChip 17:30, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


 * These templates doesn't work when they populate category redirects like Category:1895 in Utah and the redirect bot can't fix them so the template needs to be transcluded. Timrollpickering 17:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Interesting problem. Perhaps the template can be fixed?  Otherwise, the template on all 50 state categories will have to be transcluded.—GoldRingChip 18:02, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I think I fixed the template category U.S. State elections by year—GoldRingChip 18:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Your recent listings at CFDS
In general, please don't list anything at CFDS unless you understand the reason well enough to state it there. In most of the cases you listed there, it's fairly easy to do, If you can't do this, it's better to detag the category (and inform the nominator of this action) than to list it without any justification. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_July_20
Hi there. CFD is not my strong suit but I think you made a mistake here closing this as delete. The nominator merely pointed to a previous CFD's rationale and that one said "parent articles have been deleted". However, Northern Mexico was not deleted, so the rationale makes no sense here. Maybe you could reconsider? Regards  So Why  12:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It's common for nominations to clean up stray categories left behind when a previous discussion dismantled and removed a whole tree so the nomination seemed in order. Timrollpickering 19:33, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Former/defunct manufacturer categories
Hi there! I was pinged about a category attached to Miyata being renamed, from Category:Former defense companies of Japan to Category:Defunct defense companies of Japan. I was confused because Miyata is not defunct although as far as I know they are not currently in the defense industry, so the categorization seems better as "former" rather than "defunct". Indeed the majority of the companies listed in the new category are similar: extant manufacturers who formerly participated in the defense market but no longer do. At CfD I see the nominator,, acknowledged that not everything in the category is defunct and perhaps a different name would be better; there was no further discussion and you closed as rename anyway, even with the acknowledgement that "defunct" is an inaccurate descriptor for the category. Might I ask that you undo your close and relist for further discussion? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:00, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I suspect the wider category tree may need some thought - there's seems to be a conflict between the defunct companies parent categories and some of the details. It may be best if you nominate the bits you think needs rethinking. Timrollpickering 19:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Co-operative Party
Hi Tim, I would have opposed moving Category:Co-operative Party (UK) to Category:Co-operative Party if I had seen it earlier, because of ambiguity, see Co-operative Party (disambiguation). Would you be prepared to reopen Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_August_1, or should I re-nominate it? – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:47, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Also, Category:Conservative-liberal parties and Category:Liberal-conservative parties (on the same CFD page) were correct to include a hyphen within the compound adjective, see MOS:HYPHEN.

Pinging user:Charles Essie on these two as a courtesy. – Fayenatic  L ondon 10:19, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Probably best to renominate them - re-openings always confuse. Timrollpickering 22:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Lord Wellington listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lord Wellington. Since you had some involvement with the Lord Wellington redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nev&eacute;–selbert 08:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Campbell Island group
Hi Tim - you might be interested in this discussion at CFD - you were involved in an earlier move of one of the categories mentioned. Grutness...wha?  01:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:People educated at Atlantic College has been nominated for discussion
Category:People educated at Atlantic College, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. TM 09:58, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

United Kingdom general election, 1784 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect United Kingdom general election, 1784. Since you had some involvement with the United Kingdom general election, 1784 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nev&eacute;–selbert 23:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Harvard student publication categories
I see that you reverted my renaming of the categories for people from the Harvard Crimson, Harvard Advocate, and Harvard Lampoon. If you are concerned only that there ought to be a discussion at CfD about such renames, that's fine with me and I'll start it. But I want to check with you first whether you had any other objections. Do you? --Tryptofish (talk) 19:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * No objection. Timrollpickering 20:53, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Kinross and West Perthshire by-election, 1963
Hi Tim. What are your thoughts on moving this article to "Kinross and Western Perthshire by-election, 1963"? Thanks and Happy New Year.--Nev&eacute;–selbert 18:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Deaf models category
I've just noticed that you've deleted the category Deaf models. I believe this category should not be deleted nor merged in the List of deaf people since it is like merging the black models in a large list of black pleople. I await for your opinion before going ahead in creating this category. Thank you. Wowspucks (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2018 (UTC)


 * This was implementing this decision from nearly seven years ago. Try Deletion review as the best way forward. Timrollpickering 22:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Adding duplicate signatures to old talk pages
I've noticed that some of your recent edits to old user talk pages seem to include some unintentional changes. They are creating a duplicate of my signature. See, for example, this edit. It's not really a big deal, but I just thought you should know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Seems to be a problem with either Template:Sig or with how AWB handles it. I suspect the rules on automatically transcluding it have come about since many of those comments were typed. Timrollpickering 21:36, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Chinas
I much regret your moving Orders of precedence in the People's Republic of China (I think having "People's Republic of China" redirect to "China" violates NPOV just as much as it would be to have "Republic of China" do so). Both regimes claim to be the only "China" and both are wrong ... "China" is a geographic expression properly only used to encompass both. In any event articles about the technical specifics of either regime should retain specific titles. LE (talk) 03:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * It is standard for subordinate articles to match the name of the main country article and the place to argue the China/PRC issue is on the talkpage of that article rather than have different arrangements all over the place. Timrollpickering 09:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * That misses my second point that such an invariant policy is a mistake, the orders of precedence being a particularist thing akin to the separately specific articles on the President of the Republic of China and President of the People's Republic of China, or the Constitution of the Republic of China and the Constitution of the People's Republic of China. Even if the ROC is passed off as "Taiwan" and the one-China conceit obeyed for the PRC otherwise, articles on specifics of regimes should be specific. LE (talk) 04:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Some of those are complicated by the continuity regime in Taiwan, but the standard for article titles in this area is the short form name for the country per the relevant article unless there's a clear need to disambiguate. Here there isn't. Timrollpickering 23:34, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Move ban for Jimbo. Neil N  talk to me 22:56, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Greek characters
I actually made the initial move by accident - it wasn't my intention to do so without discussing first - but I didn't have the administrative powers to undo it, so I thought I'd be bold and move forward. The category parents include Category:Greek people, so I figured it should be named consistently with Category:Anatolian characters in Greek mythology and Category:Phoenician characters in Greek mythology. I don't care all that much though. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Nationals history
Thanks for all your work on untangling these National branch histories - you've really done a phenomenal job in putting these together and chasing down some of the more confusing bits of the story. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 00:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Independent politicians in Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Electoral district of Hamilton ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Independent_politicians_in_Australia check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Independent_politicians_in_Australia?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Murder of Heather Rich
Hi can you look-over Murder of Heather Rich, please? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 16:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

SA Country Party
Where did you get the leaders for the results table from? I was trying to find out about the leadership the other day and as far as I could tell Chapman and Cameron were the most prominent figures of the campaign but weren't formally leaders (and I seem to recall finding something that Cameron actually denied that he was leader at one point). The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 00:13, 7 July 2018 (UTC)


 * As early as August 1918 Chapman was introducing himself as "the self-appointed leader of a party of one"  (here's a parody of the party room meeting: ), though the election that year is probably a little early. McIntosh is confirmed from Trove - his becoming leader in 1921 and on his departure in 1928. Cameron is explicitly noted "As his party's parliamentary leader (1928-32)," in his ADB entry. Similar to Chapman, at the start the party was not spoilt for choice. Timrollpickering 01:24, 7 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Good enough for me! I knew about McIntosh, was the other two I wasn't sure about. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 01:41, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Offaly/Laois categories
Thank you for moving the categories as requested here. I've realised I should have included Category:Westminster constituencies in County Offaly (historic) and Category:Westminster constituencies in County Laois (historic) in the discussion; are you able to move these as well for consistency, please? Opera hat (talk) 12:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Categories for discussion/Speedy is the best place to do it. Timrollpickering 14:53, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Righto. Thanks again. Opera hat (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

CFD backlog
Good morning, I noticed you closed a few CFD discussions. Would you be willing to close these discussions as well? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Tim,
 * Wow, you're having a productive time on another part of the backlog – much appreciated!
 * You might have missed some backlinks... for some reason I had this page open, and find that it was orphaned by this set. – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:26, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Sultan Rahi
How can you delete a category without any discussion. No one commented on it. You should have listed it again for comments. --Spasage (talk) 17:15, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Reverting category renaming
Timrollpickering, yesterday, you reverted the renaming I made of Category:Themistian asteroids to Category:Themis asteroids. In the meantime, those items I had already migrated were restored to the original category.

With your rationale: "revert undiscussed move of huge category that did not move the contents", and the fact that the short time span between my move and your revert (13 hours) didn't give me the chance to completely migrate all items to the new category, could you please tell why you are opposed to my renaming? Obviously, my rationale: "Themistian to Themis as in Vestian to Vesta > change from adjectival form as for all other neighboring categories" was not convincing. R fassbind – talk  18:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)


 * It was one of many arbitrary category moves that I've reverted over the years when they've left behind large numbers of articles sitting in a category redirect. The redirect system is not a substitute for renaming. As only a few articles had been moved over it was natural to revert and leave the matter to be handled by nomination at WP:CFD. Timrollpickering 19:06, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * So I requested a speedy renaming per per WP:C2C and tagged the category as well.  R fassbind  – talk  11:20, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Isn't there a bot to handle the large number of articles? The editor  whose username is Z0  09:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The bot doesn't process anything in new category redirects (the waiting time is about a week) and also has a cap on it - it's crashed in the past when people have tried to use it to move huge categories & contents. It's primarily there to mop up individual articles that have found themselves in redirects, not to do mass moves. Timrollpickering 09:39, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

CfD closure comment
Hello,

Regarding of the CfD discussion on Perspectives on Muhammad and Jesus, which you closed as no consensus on 21 July, I'd like to add that I'm pretty convinced by 's answer to my objections. If I'm allowed to remove or rephrase my position, I think the discussion shows a clear consensus towards renaming the categories to Religious perspectives on..., provided non-religious articles are removed or moved to Category:Jesus and history or similar. May this bring you to review your closing argument? Place Clichy (talk) 01:59, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * This is apparently about this discussion. But it was closed as rename rather than as no consensus. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I guess I just didn't have my eyes in front of the screen, I had read it as no consensus to delete or rename. Fine then! Place Clichy (talk) 06:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

closing CFD for WW I weapons?
Hey Tim! I see that you closed this CfD about WW I Assault Rifles. The CfD included many different categories. While the CfD is closed, it seems like lots of the categories weren't edited to remove the CfD banner from them. Here are some examples:


 * Category:10mm Auto semi-automatic pistols
 * Category:.380 ACP semi-automatic pistols
 * Category:.40 S&W semi-automatic pistols
 * Category:.45 GAP semi-automatic pistols
 * Category:.40 S&W semi-automatic pistols

Am I confused about the CfD process? Maybe there's a reason these banners are still there. Thing is, the banners link to a CfD discussion that is closed. Why would that be? -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:11, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * There's a system for automatically removing the banners but it runs about once a weekday. They're just waiting to be processed. Timrollpickering 20:48, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Stations on the Nanjing–Hangzhou High-Speed Railway (CfD 26 July)
I do not know whether you saw the full text of my nomination, but I also requested that the three non-proper nouns after Hangzhou be turned to lowercase as is the case with the parent article. If, procedurally, I am required to renominate the merged category in order to enact this change, please indicate so. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 14:36, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * As stated in the close, the target was not tagged so users were not made aware of the proposed change. It needs to be tagged & proposed to be changed. Timrollpickering 19:30, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

CFD for scheduled monuments
Hi Tim, may I suggest you look again at your close of Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_June_7? Only Peterkingiron was in support of capitalisation; all other participants and arguments favoured lowercase, like the more consistent hierarchy of Category:Listed buildings in the United Kingdom. – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:37, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * That one was a tricky case because it was trying to do multiple things with different suggestions so it was best to take the minimal route to get the consensus stuff sorted first and leave the rest for a future nomination. Timrollpickering 19:48, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Removing bios is not easy, even with HotCat
I agree with your closing decision that consensus at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_June_26 was that all BLPs should be removed from the article, as per WP:SEPARATE and other considerations.

The problem is, there are about 100s BLPs in the category, and even using HotCat it takes a while to remove them. I just removed 9 BLPs and it was a PITA. AFAIK, not one editor other than me has stepped up to remove a single BLP.

There are maybe 10 non-BLPs in the category, so it would be much simpler to store those 10 items somewhere, delete the category to get rid of all the BLPs at the same time, and then recreate the category and add those missing 10 items.

We are facing this problem now because one user decided unilaterally to add BLPs en masse to the category, but nobody realized what he was doing until too late. Do you have a better suggestion about how to remove all bios from the category, as you and I both agree (as do others) should happen? HouseOfChange (talk) 18:07, 21 July 2018 (UTC)


 * WP:AWB is the best tool for this sort of thing. I've just swept out the category. Timrollpickering 19:21, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, WP:Cat-a-lot is probably the best. Keep it quiet! – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:06, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Biogeographical categories for spiders
When I've tried to sort out the biogeographical categories for spiders in the past, I've usually given up in despair at the muddle. The problems include: Any ideas that would help would be welcome! Peter coxhead (talk) 13:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There are finer geographical divisions for parent categories, like Category:Arthropods of North Africa, than for spiders, which only have Category:Spiders of Africa. So do you put a spider that in Africa only occurs in North Africa in one of these categories – if so which one – or both?
 * Editors (often now banned ones) have without consensus created 'intersectional' categories, particularly ones that combine taxonomic classifications and biogeographical ones, such as Category:Goblin spiders of Europe, but not in any systematic way, so that it's hard to find where articles should be categorized, and both the 'plain' and the 'intersectional' categories get used, either together or for different articles that should be categorized in the same way.

Category move reverts
I realize that you are trying to revert vandalism, but your reverts of ethnicity and nationality category moves creates a huge mess. These categories are intricately linked with other categories and templates. If you feel that I have made an inappropriate category move, please contact me before making a move revert. Thanks, Buaidh  talk contribs 03:03, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Large category moves need to be discussed first, not arbitrarily moved and templates changed to support that. Please nominate them for renaming explaining the rationale rather than just using the move feature. Undiscussed sizeable ones that show up in the non-empty redirect category will be continue to be reverted back to the status quo ante to undo the mess. Timrollpickering 09:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Where would you suggest those discussions take place? I've managed these categories for the last ten years, and while I don't claim any ownership of these categories, I do know a great deal about them.  My recent changes have been to correct national adjectives.  Yours aye,  Buaidh  talk contribs 03:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * WP:CFD is the place to nominate them. Timrollpickering 10:16, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Would please tell me which category moves you reverted and which templates you changed. Thanks,  Buaidh  talk contribs 20:08, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Category:Wikipedians of Taiwanese descent, Category:Turks and Caicos Islander Wikipedians, Category:Bosnian Wikipedians, Category:Antiguan and Barbudan Wikipedians, Category:Wikipedians interested in Georgia (country), Category:Wikipedians from Georgia (country), Category:Nepalese Wikipedians, Category:Taiwanese Wikipedians, Category:Wikipedians interested in Cape Verde, Category:Wikipedians interested in the Czech Republic, Category:Wikipedians in Cape Verde, Category:Wikipedians in the Czech Republic, Category:Singaporean Wikipedians, Category:Filipino Wikipedians and Category:Filipino ancestry Wikipedians. Template:User in Antigua and Barbuda, Template:User in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Template:User in Taiwan, Template:User twn-fam, Template:User in Nepal, Template:User in the Czech Republic, Template:User Ancient Georgia, Template:User in Georgia (country), Template:User Georgia (country) and Template:User Proud Georgian. Timrollpickering 22:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

British/English
Hi there, how do we decide or what logic do we follow when deciding when a person born in the UK should be described as British, English or Irish? For exampl,e Benjamin Hick was down as British until recently following some other British/English category changes? Following the logic you applied to Robert Peel should I return Hick to British? Regards81.149.141.199 (talk) 16:42, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * As a starter don't go randomly changing what's already there without discussion. This has been quite a contentious matter. See Nationality of people from the United Kingdom. Timrollpickering 19:20, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't, and you can see I am not challenging your edit - I can see the issue is contentious and that doesn't surprise me at all. Shall I restore Hick and his son to British, we know they are English anyway?81.149.141.199 (talk) 14:16, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Done - I'm taking the lead from Peel and Disraeli. RegardsRstory (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Arun District
Wouldn't it be better to create the category before populating it? DuncanHill (talk) 11:25, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Articles with incomplete book citations


A tag has been placed on Category:Articles with incomplete book citations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more 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 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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bsherr (talk) 20:54, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

CfD
Thanks for your kind contributions! Regarding this close on Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 24. May I suggest if don't mind considering another solution? How about closing the discussion on Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 15 (perhaps by refering to the one on Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 24), while then reopening the one on Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 24 (or relisting it)? In any case, relisting Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 24 would probably to due. Thank you! Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I noticed now that the older request was closed by . That's fine. Yet, could we enjoy at least one relist on the 24 August request, please, if you don't mind? Thank you! Chicbyaccident (talk) 15:53, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That discussion is overwhelmingly against a rename and there's nothing suggesting prolonging or reopening it will result in a different outcome. Timrollpickering 17:38, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Well. The result is an unexplained exception to all of the category tree. The few opposers in the discussion rely on an interpretation that admitters cannot adhere to the Catholic Church, but only the Latin Church, which they then want to be designated "Roman Catholicism", which applies neither to the main article nor its category. Would you mind giving it at least one relist? Hopefully more arguments can be presented than inconsistent verbiage stalemate? Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Metropolitan Boroughs
Can I suggest that the old titles aren't deleted for the reasons given in the previous CFD about hotcat.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 14:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * It's a bit hit and miss with Cydebot but it's easy to recreate redirects for the ones that get zapped. Timrollpickering 15:44, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Another issue with this mass renaming is the sorting of the renamed categories - at a rough guess there are 40 or 50 of them which now need sorting. Is there a bot which will do that, or is someone going to have to do them all manually?--Mhockey (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I though I sorted most of them when I tagged them, example, though there might be some I missed.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 21:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I noticed the Geography, Local government, Media and Tourist attactions subcats in the Greater Manchester MBs, and some of the subcats in the Merseyside MBs, still need to be sorted (some of them may have been wrong before).--Mhockey (talk) 22:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Another issue: in the People subcats the cathead template does not work for people from places in MBs which are Cities, e.g. Category:People from South Elmsall. Not sure how to fix that.--Mhockey (talk) 21:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I've added a field to the template for cities. Timrollpickering 21:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Category:High school students who committed suicide
Hi there! I noticed you closed this discussion. While it has been a while since I have revisited this subject, I was curious as to why the concluded consensus was simply "not moved." Is this to say, essentially, that there was no consensus? It appeared to me that the "died by" terminology was generally embraced, and that those whom opposed did not direct their comments towards the change. Would you recommend that I resubmit this proposal, but with a broader reference to the Suicide Tree, and reference the previous discussion? Thank you for your advice! ― Bio chemistry 🙴 ❤   22:52, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Support for died by: Biochemistry&Love, Eustachiusz, Johnbod, Peterkingiron, Waddie96
 * Non-support for "completed" language (but no mention of the change in language to "died by"): Mangoe, Carlossuarez46, John Cline


 * Discussions are often a mess when counter proposals fly around; it's best to make a new nomination taking into account concerns raised. Timrollpickering 18:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Closure of two conflicting CFD nominations
In my understanding Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_September_29 is meant to overrule the broader nomination above it. This would imply that the articles should ultimately be in Category:Ancient Roman Christian mystics. asking the nominator to comment. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:06, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * {{yo|Marcocapelle} yes, you understood that right. Sorry for my clumsiness; I mean to exclude Rome from the broader nom, but screwed up. -- Brown Haired Girl (talk) • (contribs) 05:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Ò== Close of Cfd ==

I saw you closed Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_October_2 as rename. This is a major rename, including many categories and many articles. I think the consensus was by far not broad enough to justify the closure. Having said that, I'd admit that I wouldn't have mentioned it, if not that I think this was a big mistake. I have already argued in the past, on one of the categories, that there is a big difference between a film which mentions foo or a film about foo. That is precisely the difference between "foo in film" and "film about foo". Debresser (talk) 21:26, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate categories
Hello! I see you closed a category rename discussion in favour of changing e.g. Category:Iranian music organisations to Category:Music organisations based in Iran. This has led to a bot making at least one inappropriate categorisation in the case of Silkroad (arts organization), which is an Iranian music organisation in the sense that it plays and promotes Iranian music, but is not based in Iran. I've removed the category in this case, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are other cases. I'm not sure how best to proceed here – I don't have time to check many more. Any thoughts/advice welcome! --Deskford (talk) 13:00, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Undeleted Archaea cats
Thank you for closing Categories for discussion/Log/2018 October 18 and I think passing this task on to the bot. There are only a few remaining cats from that nom that still need deletion, since they have now been emptied:



~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 13:08, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

A clear case of WP:SNOW
Maybe you would like to close this CFD....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Cat move on Charlie (Street Fighter)
Something odd happened here, just FYI. -- ferret (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I think that's the bot catching up at exactly the same moment a cat change + general fix went in. Timrollpickering 13:11, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Naw sorry, looks like a past mistake of mine. I had typed a } instead of a |. You changed it to }}, which on surface looks right. Fixed. -- ferret (talk) 13:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Move of Category:Flora of Swaziland
I objected to the move of this category, an objection that was supported by at least one other editor, and at Categories for discussion/Log/2018 November 5 wrote "@Peter coxhead: I have struck Category:Flora of Swaziland, as you requested". So why did you move it? Are you going to make all the consequent changes to the information about the WGSRPD codes that is at multiple pages? Please undo your move until this is properly discussed, which needs to involve WP:PLANTS. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The category was never actually struck from the long list - it seems Category:Endemic fauna of Swaziland was struck instead. I'll put the category in for a reversal. Timrollpickering 11:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that clerical error of mine. I just checked, and found this edit where I struck lots, and unfortunately one of them was the entry immediately after Category:Flora of Swaziland.
 * Thanks for spotting it, Peter, and thanks to @Timrollpickering for fixing it. -- Brown Haired Girl (talk) • (contribs) 11:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Category:Teachers colleges
Please check what you did with. has ended up inside itself, and still has the CfD template at the top. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 17:12, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * A bot is due to remove the CFD notice on all categories listed at Categories for discussion/Working/Retain in due course but it hasn't run for some days and a backlog has piled up. Timrollpickering 17:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * OK. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 20:32, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Cheers
Hello, thanks for your interest in editing categories of gastropods The move is completely non-controversial. It is so non-controversial and apparent, that there is certainly no need of CFD. Maybe I will edit the Bradybaenidae article in the future so also you will be able to see WHY in a wikipedia article with references. However I just wanted to tell you, that I am familiar with taxonomy of gastropods and that you can trust all my gastropod related edits. That's all I wanted to tell. Thanks. Cheers, --Snek01 (talk) 12:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up / tip
I didn't know you could do. Thanks!

By the way is there a way to keep that in a template without rendering, so that it places that in the page the template is intended to create?

I look forward to your reply,  &mdash; The Transhumanist   00:26, 20 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Erm... not sure. It's a technical area beyond my expertise. Timrollpickering 01:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Categories/CfD
Hello, Timrollpickering,

It looks like this category discussion was closed by you on the 16th but the merging and deletion of categories was not fully carried out. I can't tag the empty categories because they still have a CfD tag on them that says they are involved in a discussion. Can you see to this? Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 05:35, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Timrollpickering, these categories still exist even though you indicated that they should be merged and deleted:
 * Category:Observances set by the Bengali calendar
 * Category:Observances set by the Hindu calendar
 * Category:Observances set by the Indian National Calendar
 * Category:Observances set by the Malayalam calendar
 * Category:Observances set by the Nanakshahi calendar
 * Category:Observances set by the Zoroastrian calendar
 * I hope you can follow-up through on your CfD closures. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 00:36, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


 * They're all sitting on the Working page to be cleaned up in due course. There is a huge backlog of categories to check for backlinks and mergers and things don't get deleted instantly. Timrollpickering 00:50, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Please undo your edit
Your edit to Template:Comics infobox sec/genrecat broke articles such as W.I.T.C.H. Modernponderer (talk) 07:51, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Moving categories early
Good morning. These have been listed for less than 48h. Since they have been fed to the bot already it is probably too late for returning them, but be prepared to react if someone complains. I made a similar mistake a month ago, fortunately without any consequences (I also opened then a talk page discussion).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:41, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ack I must have misread the times on those. Timrollpickering 11:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, when I did this I thought it is a different day (smth like it was 26, and I was sure it is already 27). Shit happens, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Question regarding closed discussion
Hello Timrollpickering, I have a question regarding your closure of this bundled discussion. As of this posting, none of the categories have had their cfd tag removed. My question is: will all necessary things be accomplished by virtue of the close you enacted? If so, how long does it normally take for this to occur? I'm not criticizing, I am just curious. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 11:18, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * There's an automatic system whereby a bot removes the notices and adds one to the talkpage on each category. It normally runs about once a day and gets there in the end. Timrollpickering 11:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

CfD
Hi, should I take Category:Women's sports in American Samoa to a full CfD? My objection seems to have been ignored. Or can I just do a speedy rename request of the reverse since the naming convention under Category:Women's sports by country appears to be the singular "sport" and a number of other categories are currently in CfDS to do the same? Thanks. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 16:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * You can request a speedy reverse. In future it helps if people actually bold their objections rather than just making comments. Timrollpickering 19:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I figured there are so few comments to speedy noms that any comment under them is typically an objection of some sort. I thought it was just something that needed to be considered, so I do apologize for the lack of a more pronounced objection. The fact that there were reverse speedy requests for categories under the same category tree at the same time should probably have made each of those speedy requests invalid. Thanks. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 19:32, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Userboxes & Categories
Please stop changing the categories in userboxes without moving the categories. SportsFan007 (talk) 21:46, 13 December 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007
 * Also, please include the word the. SportsFan007 (talk) 21:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007

Please stop! SportsFan007 (talk) 22:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007


 * The categories are in the list to be moved the cat bot but this has a heavy workload today so hasn't reached them yet. Adjusting the templates first speeds up the process so it's best to do them now. Timrollpickering (Talk) 22:04, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Curious Revert
Is there a reason you reverted my move of Category:Wikipedians interested in Green Bay Packers to Category:Wikipedians interested in the Green Bay Packers? The move discussion was pretty clear that many of these category moves would be grammatically correct. Adding in "the" makes it grammatically correct. The phrase "Wikipedians interested in Green Bay Packers" doesn't make sense. Per WP:C2A, my move was justified. Also, frankly it's annoying that you would take the time to revert the moves and edits instead of contacting me first. « Gonzo fan2007  (talk)  @ 21:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Categories that are moved contrary to a CFD outcome or just moved leaving some or all of the contents sitting in the redirects invariably get reverted to the most recent consensus - WP:C2A is a standard criteria for a proposed move not an arbitrary one without citing it. As for the "the" issue, this seems to vary across categories - e.g. "Wikipedians interested in the Queens Park Rangers" doesn't make much sense either - but nobody identified that one at the time. WP:CFDS is the best place to nominate any individual categories. Timrollpickering (Talk) 22:45, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Did you read the CFD discussion? Specifically 's comment?
 * Also, my move was not "contrary to a CFD outcome." I didn't revert back to the original naming. I improved it based on the comment made during the CFD discussion that some of these categories will need to be renamed to include "the" to make it grammatically correct. I assumed the closing admin would implement this, but when you didn't I corrected one of the categories.
 * The basic question is do you agree that Category:Wikipedians interested in the Green Bay Packers is grammatically correct? If so, then what was the point of your reversion? Ignore the bloody rules&mdash;going through a process just for the sake of going through a process is silly.
 * Lastly, in the future don't close discussions that you are not ready to properly execute. A significant number of your renames have moved a category to a grammatically incorrect naming structure. That's on you, and the expectation that all of your errors should then have to be fixed by other editors is ridiculous. As the closing admin, you need to go through category-by-category and correct all of your renames that are incorrect. « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 16:24, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * To provide some guidance, I would look at most American sports teams first (NFL, NBA, MLB, MLS, NHL) as they almost exclusively use "the". « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 16:35, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

consider undoing...
... the close at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_November_29

I have opened a discussion about this on Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion and they suggested I should ask you first, cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I've reopened the discussion but not moved the category back to save disruption for now so feel free to comment. Timrollpickering (Talk) 00:52, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Huldra (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Working page
I saw you returned a few American categories to the Working page as Cydebot missed a few, but was it was the same rationale for all the others? Cheers, Number   5  7  13:11, 17 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes - with giant lists there's often a few that get skipped (User:RussBot/category redirect log shows them) and an additional sweep helps catch them. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:30, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Sports Team Categories
Please add the to all of the sports team categories that you changed so that they are all grammatically correct. <span style="background:#000000;font:Helvetica;padding:0.4em;font-size: 80%;border-radius: 2em;margin: 0.25em;k; color:#00FF00">SportsFan007 (talk) 23:33, 14 December 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007


 * It would be wrong for me to arbitrarily do that after a formal discussion delivered the current names - you need to identify and nominate them at CFD (WP:CFDS should be fine if done properly). In any case they do not all need "the" in them - e.g. "Wikipedians interested in the Manchester United FC" is not grammatically correct. Timrollpickering (Talk) 23:45, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The Manchester United FC (Football Club) is grammatically correct. <span style="background:#000000;font:Helvetica;padding:0.4em;font-size: 80%;border-radius: 2em;margin: 0.25em;k; color:#00FF00">SportsFan007 (talk) 04:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)Sports007
 * No it isn't. Man U doesn't have a definitive article in usage. See Manchester United F.C. Timrollpickering (Talk) 09:43, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yikes. "You need to identify and nominate them at CFD." You are the closing admin. CFD isn't a binding resolution for all eternity. specifically noted in the CFD discussion, a comment which was supported by the nominator, that some of these categories will be grammatically incorrect under the proposed naming structure. Per common sense and consensus, you, as the closing admin, must take that into account. The onus is not on other editors to correct your mistakes. You performed the moves, you closed the discussion. It's on you. And again, to point out the ridiculousness of this all, I corrected one of the categories and you reverted it! I fixed one of your errors and you reverted it! Why?  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 16:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Whilst informal British usage ("the Wolves won today" or "the Hammers are playing later on") often takes the definite article, formal British usage ("Wolverhampton Wanderers 2, AFC Bournemouth nil") does not. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 17:01, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That was so gratuitous. I am so triggered. From a BH postcode. Britmax (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)


 * This isn't an all-or-nothing situation, some of the titles should have "the" inserted and some should not. It would be best I think if whoever is interested took the list from the CfD and started a discussion about determining which of the titles should have "the" added to them; Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports would be a good place. Then, when there is consensus, an admin can rename those that need to be renamed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:21, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

FYI
You seems to forget Category:Uzbekistan First League seasons process but discussion has been closed by you Hhkohh (talk) 09:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Victorian Liberal leaders who did not become Premier
Can you fix this error from the Robert Doyle article: “Napthine and Baillieu eventually became Premiers and it meant that Doyle along with Alan Brown have been the only Liberal leaders to have never won an election.”

Non-elected Liberal Premiers Lindsay Thompson and Naphthine were both voted out without being elected in their own right. This plus the fact that Brown neither won or lost an election as Liberal leader. The statement was about Liberal leaders who did not become Premiers and this club recently got a new member in Matthew Guy. 122.106.83.10 (talk) 06:00, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Unfinished closure process
Hello good evening. Could you please check Category:Economic_history_of_India_(1947–90) and Category:Economic_history_of_India_(1991–present)? The articles have been moved so the categories are empty, but the categories still exist and they still contain the cfd template. Besides I've seen this happening more often lately; in similar instances I tagged the categories with WP:G6. Any idea what might go wrong in the process? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Mainly it's a combination of the backlink backlog on the Working page and Cydebot's habit of usually leaving a category redirect at the old location which hides the merged categories. Invariably the merged ones get deleted in due course but the pile-up is a problem. I'll add the points to the bot discussion. Timrollpickering (Talk) 18:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Benson Taylor/RSA
Why hass the RSA fellows category been removed from Benson Taylor page?

It seems fairly adequate that it should be on there as brown eyed girl changed it etc.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.166.43 (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


 * A CFD discussion agreed to delete it. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:Pediculariidae
Hi, you reverted my move from to. According to this reference, the former family Pediculariidae is now a subfamily of Ovulidae as Pediculariinae. I had already updated the main article, and was busy updating the articles in the category accordingly. I guess I'll have to make a manual soft category redirect now. Markussep Talk 12:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Copy and paste moves are unhelpful so I've reverted that. In general such a change should go through WP:CFD rather than an arbitrary move and a partial move of the contents. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:09, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


 * You didn't really give me time to move the contents, did you? You reverted my move 20 minutes after I moved the category. As I explained above, this wasn't an arbitrary move, but in line with literature and with the main article. Markussep Talk 13:15, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

AFC cat
I see you're clearing out the AFC cat. It might be easier to let a bot handle it. Primefac (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The bot is on the case as well but it's HUGE so all hands the better. Timrollpickering (Talk) 20:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Happy editing! Primefac (talk) 21:37, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Template:Userspace draft
Hi, your last edit to Template:Userspace draft appears to be leaving a random "|=" and "|#default=" on articles - I think an extra }} has been left. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 22:06, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Think I've fixed that though the cache will take a while to filter it through. Timrollpickering (Talk) 22:11, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Public Integrity (January 14)
Apologies, sometimes the script picks the wrong person.  Whispering ( t ) 16:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

You have the same name
And similar background, to an old pierrepontian I went to school with. Do you know of the school? Edaham (talk) 01:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Not off the top of my head. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

help needed
HI, can you help me completing my page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Divya_krishnan), i can give you all information you need with source, or pls let me know my mistakes, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abidn2 (talk • contribs) 09:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Try adding references to published coverage. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:47, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:People from Tilbury
Hi Timrollpickering. I recently encountered Category:People from Tilbury, which you were the last to edit. I was wondering: is the second line of text ("  ") supposed to be there/visible? I thought it's probably not, but I wasn't sure if it was OK to just remove the line. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 10:28, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * There's some problems arising from various category moves a while back that didn't easily fit the template. I think it should be okay now. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Although it appears that most (all?) of the other subcategories of Category:People from Thurrock have the same problem... DH85868993 (talk) 11:54, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

An invitation to discussion
I kindly invited you to the discussion on Template talk:Infobox election to decide whether to bold the winner in the election infobox. Lmmnhn (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Car safety
Thanks for reverting the series of moves of Category:Car safety for at least until Talk:Automobile safety is resolved but the talk page is still at Category talk:Car:safety. Could you please move that back to (as RMT for some reason doesn't work on even category talk pages) thanks.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:37, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Ping?
Hi, Timrollpickering. Did you get my ping here? Would you mind commenting? Bishonen &#124; talk 13:56, 7 February 2019 (UTC).

A bit Surprise.
It is really a surprise, you being a hardcore tory and editing left-wing and trade union pages. That's weird tbh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.100.223 (talk) 22:46, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

The Struggle group affiliation
The Struggle Pakistan Group is not affiliated to International Marxist Tendency. Please correct your text in the Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_Pakistan

I corrected with proper reference, but you did an undo. Kindly, redo the updated information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.100.223 (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Read the article history correctly. I did not make the revert - the reversion returned to my last edit which was to remove a deleted category. Take it up with the reverter. Timrollpickering (Talk) 00:45, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Hanoi FC
Hello, move category back to Category:Hanoi FC, those categories needs to match their main article title which is Hanoi FC, they do not use sponsorship name "T&T" for like two years anymore so there is nothing to really discuss there. I thought that the articles are automatically moved to correct categories by the bots after the category is renamed, but I can do it myself if thats not the case. Snowflake91 (talk) 19:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)


 * There is a bot that monitors the redirects but it's for mopping up individual entries placed in the wrong category, not for performing mass moves out of process (it also won't touch a moved category for a week precisely to allow such moves to be easily undone). Try WP:CFDS for a category move. Timrollpickering (Talk) 20:24, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

14 years of adminship
<div style="display: flex; align-items: center; height: 50px; padding: 1em; border: solid 3px #2B547E; background-color: #E6E6FA;"> Wishing Timrollpickering a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman ( talk ) 01:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

North Macedonia CFD
Congratulations with your 14th anniversary! Just for info, I've reverted my closure of Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_February_15, feel free to close it yourself. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

1937 in Siam etc
Hi Tim

What's all that about?

Why create an obscure and hard-to maintain kludge when the simple solution is to have the decades categories named in the same way as the years? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:33, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


 * That's to solve the problem of a redirect being populated with no easy way to clear it. The preferable way would be to ban this sort of template as it's hard to adapt in such circumstances but for now a runaround is needed. See Village pump (technical). Timrollpickering (Talk) 12:06, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

2016 Senate electoral fraud
Tim they are all simple (but important) facts, so cannot be dismissed simply as a 'point of view'. I am happy to explain the technical details if you want. I also tried to raise this on the Derryn Hinch talk page. Oz freediver (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


 * See WP:UNDUE and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. You have been trying to post this on multiple articles on and off over the last three years (usually without any refs to WP:RSes) and the link on your user page is to a site headlining articles on the matter suggesting an attempt to use Wikipedia as part of a campaign. Only put things in when they've covered by reliable mainstream sources. Timrollpickering (Talk) 21:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Trying and succeeding Tim, because it is an important issue. Derryn Hinch was at the very centre of the 2016 electoral fraud controversy and Australia's ongoing constitutional crisis. It halved the length of his term in parliament. Surely that is due and warranted an explanation on his wikipedia page? Just because a topic is controversial and is a great wrong does not mean it is undue or unwarranted, and I note that this is the second excuse you have given for the same action. I also note you are declining to discuss the matter on the Derryn Hinch talk page, even though you state here that it is your preference to do so and I directed you to it. Oz freediver (talk) 00:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I have put it back in with several reliable sources. As far as I can tell that was the only one of your complaints that was legitimate, though I already had a link to the other wikipedia article that gives all the details. Regarding your comments about it being undue or RGW, you appear to still be claiming that what I post is an opinion, and a minority one at that. You are wrong on both counts. These are all simple facts that no-one is disputing. You may also be claiming that it is insignificant, but that would also be a hard position to maintain, given both the gravity and the controversy surrounding these events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oz freediver (talk • contribs) 09:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


 * First off all the concerns raised are legitimate. Just because you think there is some great constitutional crisis doesn't mean that there is one, nor that this is an important matter to include in articles. Some of your refs are to background pieces, which is synthesis, or to subscriber only websites or go straight through to the main page. Of the ones that cover this, they don't show any great constitutional crisis, just a squabble on allocation methods, with Hinch himself reported as saying "it's a Senate vote – not a constitutional issue". Your own site says:
 * Wikipedia also followed suit in not mentioning key details, and it took some effort by the author to get Wikipedia to acknowledge details of the problem and its history, such as the broken bipartisan senate resolutions.
 * In other words you have been fighting to get this in as part of a personal political campaign. That is the definition of WP:POINT. See if other editors put it back rather than repeatedly trying to force it in all over the place. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Disclosure: I was invited to this discussion by Oz freediver. I was also part of the discussion a few years ago at Talk:Members of the Australian Senate, 2016–2019 that covered the same issue.
 * This article should state (with reference) that Hinch's term was 3 years, as determined by the senate sitting soon after the double-dissolution election.
 * There was no "constitutional crisis", and the senate was free to make the determination in any way it chose. The key references are the three at the end of the second paragraph of Members of the Australian Senate, 2016–2019:
 * I'm not sure it needs three references, and I don't necessarily think it needs to be "controversial" or a "crisis". The Members article gives full detail about how the decision was reached. The Guardian says there was agreement between the major parties; The Australian calls the countback method (the one that would have given Hinch a 6-year term) "controversial" and refers to "...a deal between Finance Minister Mathias Cormann and Labor’s Senate leader Penny Wong"; The Sydney Morning Herald says the Greens called it unfair, and that Hinch threatened legal action (but as far as I know he did not follow through on the threat) and proposed a third allocation method. Three references for one sentence in this article seems extreme, but I don't mind which is chosen. --Scott Davis Talk 03:00, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Update - I inserted two sentences with The Guardian reference, as that is the one with Hinch's name in the headline. --Scott Davis Talk 03:08, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks Scott. I have added a link to the other wikipedia article that explains the details, with some short text that I hope is sufficiently neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oz freediver (talk • contribs) 03:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of your Portal
Note. A portal which you created or substantially contributed to has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are most welcome and can participate in the discussion by adding your feedback at Miscellany for deletion/Mixed bag of group portals. You are free to edit the content of the portal during the discussion, but you 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, –  MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 00:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

removal of accusation
I'd like to ask that you remove your POINT accusation at Talk:Camera_operator. While a comment in that discussion did draw my attention to this page (and others), I have specifically only nominated this one and made a case based on policy alone. Had I, say, nominated several articles all at once, then your comment would be true. That's not the case though, so I ask you to rescind. -- Netoholic @ 13:39, 18 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Anything for a quiet life. Timrollpickering (Talk) 12:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

North Macedonian men's basketball players etc.
Hey, I've seen that you've moved Macedonian men's basketball players to North Macedonian men's basketball players. I'd like to stress that the reverse move by Spiderjerky was not discussed, I was just reverting back to the original situation. The nationality has been a part of a heated RfC which generally concluded (see the detailed consensus) that the nationality shouldn't be changed from "Macedonian" to "North Macedonian". This is also supported by the vast majority of reliable sources. While this is still not an official naming convention, the old naming convention still applies and that's "Macedonian". So if you would be kind enough to revert back to "Macedonian" in all cases where nationality of North Macedonia is involved. I'm also noting this on the CfD. Thanks in advance. --FlavrSavr (talk) 21:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Same applies to "North Macedonian sport stubs", with the exception that there wasn't any consensus on that adjectival use so I used a neutral formulation that is neither "Macedonian" nor "North Macedonian", although strictly defaulting to the status quo policy would probably require "Macedonian". --FlavrSavr (talk) 21:58, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * First off your moves were made by copy & pasting, which destroys the edit history and, with categories, often leaves things behind. When spotted such moves will always be reverted regardless of the situation.
 * I'd advise you nominate all affected categories at WP:CFDS to be reverted, citing both the naming convention and showing the undiscussed moves in question. There have been far too many bold & incomplete moves in this area and it's better to get everyone in the habit of discussing before moving from now on. Timrollpickering (Talk) 22:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Sorry for messing things up, I didn't know this procedure. Should I nominate the nationality categories on that page or would you be kind enough to revert back to "Macedonian" since the original move was done without discussion anyway? --FlavrSavr (talk) 22:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Please nominate all the ones you have identified. Timrollpickering (Talk) 22:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular
<div class="notice" style="background:#fff1d2; border:1px solid #886644; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height:40px; line-height:130.7%; font-weight: 130.7%;"> <span style="color:#5871C6;cursor:pointer" class="mw-customtoggle-ArbCom_2019_special_circular"> <div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-ArbCom_2019_special_circular" style="display:none"> <div style="border-style: dotted; border-color: #886644; border-width: 0 3px 3px 3px; padding: 0 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em;">

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:40, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Sports userboxes
I see that you restored the correct category and colors codes at User:UBX/NHL-Penguins so I want to inform that Jamesmiko has been reverting to his preferred version (dubious abbreviations and/or color codes, changing categories to redirects) at other NHL/NBA/NFL userboxes. Therefore, I thought about reporting him of his behavior, but I am not sure, which place would be the most appropriate. I already left two messages at the user's talk page in April 2019 and May 2019, the last being a warning and an advice to discuss it, but looks like he just ignores it. How this should be handled? – Sabbatino (talk) 07:28, 30 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Report him at WP:ANI. I'm a bit too compromised to start using blocks and page protections myself. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:19, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Reported him and also mentioned you due to your involvement at User:UBX/NHL-Penguins. – Sabbatino (talk) 13:15, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Uh oh, your AWB broke things.
Your edit removed the dialects from my Babel box. I’m sure that I’m not the only one this happened to. I have posted a comment as to why this is a bad idea, and the correct fix on Talk:Babel. Vandraedha (talk&#124;contribs) 18:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Ugh, and errors are contagious. The talk page is actually Wikipedia_talk:Babel. Vandraedha (talk&#124;contribs) 18:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

RE: Move request
I do not understand the removal of my request for technical assistance with the move of Redskin (slang). Does such assistance not include closing a discussion that has elapsed with a clear consensus?--WriterArtistDC (talk) 16:43, 6 June 2019 (UTC)


 * It's standard to reject move requests when there's an ongoing discussion, especially when involved parties are seeking to determine the outcome. As the RM would require move than one page to be moved it needs to be handled carefully by the closing admin who can see all that needs doing. Your post did not including moving the disambiguation page. Timrollpickering (Talk) 17:15, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Theresa May
Regarding this edit, fine to revert but you wrote in your summary that she's 'Acting' without making any reference to it in your revert. Unless you're going to source the Acting part, then your edit summary was very misleading. She stood down as Leader today but carrying on as PM. That means she stopped being the Leader today. It's now been added that she is Acting Leader with a source. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b> 17:35, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Upmerge English operas singers by century categories

 * Please see my proposal to upmerge to the parent "British" category by century: Hugo999 (talk) 04:59, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Category:18th-century English opera singers & Category:19th-century English opera singers

Category:RockyMountaineer templates
Regarding this category, I didn't move most of the contents because they're all nominated for deletion at TfD; I did move the contents that aren't up for deletion. I didn't see a CfD as necessary for a category whose name doesn't match the parent article (and never did), but I admit I don't move categories particularly often. What's the correct level of bureaucracy here? Best, Mackensen (talk) 12:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Post it at WP:CFDS with a rationale in line with the criteria listed and tag it accordingly. When category moves leave behind contents they invariably get reverted to limit the mess. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:54, 18 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Many thanks, that's an acceptable level of bureaucracy. Mackensen (talk) 22:31, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

5% rule
I started a discussion at Talk:2020 London mayoral election. You may wish to contribute. Yaris678 (talk) 12:25, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit on my user page (bypass category redirect, replaced: : pt-br → : pt)
Hi Timrollpickering. I noticed your in my user page. I trust you fixed some problem, but, as I don't fully understand the edit summary, could you please tell me what the problem was? Out of curiosity. Thank you. --Marc.2377 (talk) 21:55, 4 August 2019 (UTC)


 * It's set out at Wikipedia talk:Babel - basically the template has been populating category redirects because of the entries in the user boxes and they need to be adjusted otherwise they clog up the redirect system. Timrollpickering (Talk) 22:07, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 13
You closed Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 13, but forgot to list, and  at WP:CFDW. Could you do it now? Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 13:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Autoapplication of MOS, etc.
Don't you think some kind of centralized discussion was due before making such mass changes, ones which seems to be at such odds with style conventions? El_C 23:10, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Please don't continue with the mass changes while this remains outstanding! El_C 23:12, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


 * These are reversions to the longstanding text. Take it up with the user who sought to push the mass changes through. Timrollpickering (Talk) 23:13, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see. My mistake. El_C 23:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * FWIW - I'm the fella who made the decapitalizations. GoodDay (talk) 23:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Afrobeats
Hi, you moved Draft:Afrobeats to mainspace as per a request, but it seems you forgot to uncheck the redirect box, so the redirect from Draft is still there, so the Draft page needs to be deleted as well. Thanks. Sir Joseph (talk) 01:05, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Heavy hardcore
Hi, I saw you recently reverted my edit to Category:Hardcore music groups and Category:Heavy hardcore groups, I'm just letting you know that my edit was undiscussed. I was in fact reverting a mass edit done by another editor in the past to all pages linking to heavy hardcore, changing them to link just to "Hardcore music". That was an entirely unsourced and undiscussed change but when I reverted those edits I didn't realise there was a category that they had edited too. Issan Sumisu (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

"de"
Good morning, TRP. I notice you recently had an exchange with an editor who is systematically removing the term "de" from the titles of biographical pages concerning mediaeval English personages. This editor has only been operating (at least under this username) since 2019, and seems to base his/her action on the forms of names found in Burke's Peerage, and on the principle of WP:Concise. The latter however specifically states that "neither a given name nor a family name is usually omitted or abbreviated for conciseness", and indeed it is evident that there must be many objections to what Aforst is doing. Quite apart from the fact that Burke's Peerage, for all its good points, does not reflect either the forms found in the primary, contemporary sources, and the forms which the personages used of themselves, nor do these changes embody forms which would normally be used in current scholarship for the most part - quite apart from this - there is the objection (1) that it deprives the nomenclature of its intrinsic relation to place, many of the knightly and baronial names being taken from the names of the places in which they lived or originated (a matter of historical interest and relevance in itself), and (2) it raises rather absurd questions of inconsistency when one comes to forms such as "De la Beche", "De la Haye", "De la Warre", and indeed what to do with "Le Strange" which sometimes or later, in certain lines, becomes "Lestrange" - and so forth. Obviously there is some looseness of usage during the 14th and 15th centuries as the usage fades out or becomes restricted to the principal family heirs, but it is a much more complex thing than can merely be dealt with by a blanket "modernization". It is also rather galling for the many contributing editors on historical biography who, using great care to choose scholarly and verifiable sources and putting in many hours of work, now find their subjects reformulated in this way to suit the taste of one single editor who has ony been editing for 6 months and thinks that Burke's Peerage should be the authority. Many of these articles have stood as they were for a decade or more, and yet they are all falling to this singular editor's onslaught. Each of them is picked off one by one and contributing editors cannot say anything, or revert, without getting into an edit war conducted in snappy one-liners in edit summaries. I don't think this is respectful editing, but it may be that I am missing some awesome Wikipedic edict affecting the matter. I am almost entirely Exopedic in my engagement in WP admin processes, and like any sensible human I am allergic to controversy, but I mean to say, what, dash it all, can't something be done about this? Hence I draw the matter to your esteemed and highly experienced attention in the hope of some enlightenment, and perhaps even, who knows, a change of course? Yours politely, Eebahgum (talk) 11:11, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * If there's a general problem with a single user over multiple articles, first try their talkpage but if that gets nowhere then consider going to WP:AN/I and following the instructions there. It is overkill to have to break out processes like RFC because of one individual editor's determination. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:14, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your advice. Eebahgum (talk) 11:36, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Wicket-keepers
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Wicket-keepers. 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. Störm  (talk)  17:12, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Good luck
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px; " class="plainlinks"> 豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune. このミラPはTimrollpickeringたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！ フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE! ミラP 04:10, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Category:Corporate inversions
HI Timrollpickering. Sorry about that mess with me trying to move/rename Category:Corporate inversions. I had never done it before and mistakenly thought it was the same as an article. Read the section on WP:NCCAT and applied the tags and thought that the rest happened automatically? I would still like to rename this category. The actual name should be Tax inversions (as per the Wikipedia head article to which this category belongs, and to which I have contributed), however, Corporate tax inversions is also an accepted term (and is a valid redirect to the head article). The term "Corporate inversions" is less common and is more of a short-hand/inaccurate term for Tax inversions (or Corporate tax inversions). Is this something I can still do, or does an Admin always need to do it? Would it fall under WP:C2D, or do I need to propose at WP:CFDALL? Thanks for your help - categories is something that I should get more familiar with :) Britishfinance (talk) 12:14, 5 January 2020 (UTC)


 * If there's a main article with a settled title then WP:CFDS should be fine; otherwise a full nomination is best. Anyone can nominate and remember to tag the category accordingly. Timrollpickering (Talk) 12:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that. Kind regards, Britishfinance (talk) 14:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Section 44 of the Constitution of Australia
Hi, thank you for putting back the Sykes section. I must have read it too fast. 208.95.49.53 (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color:#E6E6FA; border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em auto; padding: 0.5em; width:90%; text-align: center"> Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus templates categories
I've seen that lately you have been changing the coronavirus templates categories from pandemic to outbreak. Is there a reason for it? Shouldn't the category reflect the name of all the articles?! Alexiscoutinho (talk) 17:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * There's a process for renaming categories that gets the articles moved in good order. Individuals simply renaming the category and not moving (all) the articles can leave confusing messes behind so it's best to revert the situation to the status quo ante and encourage those who want to to pursue a renaming through CFD. Timrollpickering (Talk) 19:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

An AFD discussion that could be closed
It is this one. The alert is over, the alert was the whole basis for the article and so far it is 5-0 (6-0 if you count the nominator) in favor of delete. It is a snow with no chance of being kept. Maybe you can close it early....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Category Art media switched to Visual arts media
Hi there! Sorry to bother you (and sorry for how long this comment is going to be! I had a hard time editing it down). And thank you for all the great work you do on Wikipedia!

I thought I would ask you about the result of the discussion here. You closed it and said the result was "Rename."

It seems like there were 6 people that were for the rename and 3 or 4 people that were against it and offered alternatives. Since it's not a "voting" process, I'm not sure why the discussion was considered to come to a consensus? It seems like the discussion was pretty divided even though it slowed down, so I was just wondering.

---

I'm also largely mentioning this because new information has come to light that makes me concerned about what this change did, and I think it warrants further discussion. The Opposers (that mentioned that not all of these categories are about Visual arts) seemed to end up being correct. Now that the name change has been initiated, many of the non-visual subjects that were tagged under the "Art ___" categories are now innaccurately tagged under "Visual arts ___" categories.

Here are some categeory changes I saw in the result of this that are not considered "Visual art genres", but were automatically tagged as such: (this is not an exhaustive list, but just from the first page or two of your Contributions)
 * Category: Performance art
 * Category: Olfactory art
 * Category: New media art
 * Category: Interactive art
 * Category: Art games
 * Category: Installation art
 * Category: Plastic arts
 * Category: Replicas
 * Category: Multimedia
 * Category: Land art
 * and handicrafts like:
 * Category: Lacquerware
 * Category: Jewellery

And here are a few articles that were incorrectly categorized to "Visual arts genres" (instead of the original Art genres) (again, there are much more in reality):
 * Virtual art
 * Robotic art
 * Rain activated art
 * Conceptual art
 * Generative art
 * Interactive art

---

From what I can tell, this change leaves a huge hole for any fine art form that is not really considered "visual," since many non-visual fine arts were being categorized under this. And most of the support on the discussion mentioned that all art is visual, or that everyone who uses these categorizes uses them for Visual Art, and I think this new information discredits that theory now.

And the list above is just some of the changes from the "Art genre" to "Visual arts genre" change. I can't tell you how many Art awards, Art exhibits, and Art competitions that aren't considered specifically "Visual". Even two of the Supporters (one of them the original nominator) mentioned that they don't think the change is necessary with all of the listed categories. And two of the Opposers only received a single reply to their !vote that didn't really address their concerns. I just wonder if there should have been more discussion before a consensus was called because of these points.

Best - Whisperjanes (talk) 21:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion had been open for three weeks so it's not clear what more discussion would have actually been forthcoming. The proposed change was in line with the parent category and the discussion was in the direction of following the standard convention to match that. Timrollpickering (Talk) 19:58, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't want to take up any more of your time, because I really respect the work you do as an admin, and know how important it is (so I decided to change my reply, since you are probably busy). I assume from your reply that you are probably not interested in relisting the discussion, and I completely understand. Thank you for your time (and all the work you do)! Best, Whisperjanes (talk) 03:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * It seems that a continuation of this discussion about further Visual Arts subcategories is being had at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_18. Since it seems there is more discussion to be had and some new users have additional thoughts to bring up about the renaming (for example, about the “Visual arts" vs "Visual art”), I was wondering if you would consider opening up and relisting the old discussion to allow for users to discuss further. Best, Whisperjanes (talk) 17:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I think that would just create more confusion. There's a separate discussion now ongoing and reopening the old discussion post change would just lead to messes about what is the status quo ante and what things should be aligned with. Timrollpickering (Talk) 17:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Medical outbreaks
Hi Tim, is it too late to reopen Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_21? There were three votes already to rename to "Disease outbreaks" to be consistent with another part of the tree. – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Probably easier to propose the name separately even speedily. It always gets messy when counter proposals get made. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:52, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Please ...
... don't change a Dutch year format into an English year format in a quote in Dutch. --Sb008 (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2020 (UTC)


 * That's a standard conversion by Citation Bot - you'll need to raise it with the developers. Timrollpickering (Talk) 00:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Let me see if I understand it correct. If you shoot me by accident with a gun I gotta complain with the manufacturer of the gun because that's the standard objective of a gun and therefore you carry no responsibility at all? --Sb008 (talk) 06:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * It standardly converts the punctuation from angled to straight apostrophes and runs automatically. That is not changing a year format, that is simply standardising the characters. If that is a problem then it would need to be fixed at the script level. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes it's a problem since it's quoting a title. You don't touch quotes even if it's as small as changing an apostrophe. You don't need to explain to me how a bot operates. What you don't seem to understand is that your bot executes the script and therefore it's your responsibility. So you have two choices, you either stop the bot from running the script or you contact the developers to have it changed. Most certainly don't tell someone else to raise it with the developers. Is it your habit to direct others to take actions for mistakes you caused? I guess u|Vandraedha (see below) has to contact the developers as well? Oh, and btw, this case is easy to solve, build in an exception for the title parameter in cite macros where the language parameter indicates a language different than English. --Sb008 (talk) 13:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * First off it is not my bot and it is a tool used widely across the community to fix reference and common format errors so I can't stop it using the script myself. You are the one who sees this particular thing as an error and so are the best placed person to explain why the bot is making a mistake and request a fix for it - expecting others to report a problem only you see and chase it up is not a recipe for success. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:26, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Enough said, over and out. --Sb008 (talk) 15:39, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) The comment says: "Alter: title. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here. | Activated by User:Timrollpickering | Category:Sports events postponed due to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic | via #UCB_Category undo)". Are you Timrollpickering or is someone impersonating you? Maybe the bot isn't yours, but you surely activated it. Ergo the consequences are yours.
 * 2) I didn't ask you to report a problem, I asked you to stop changing the format. It was you who asked me to report a problem caused by your actions.
 * 3) Your an administrator and refuse to take the responsibility for your actions. A fine example.
 * 4) If it happens again I know what I will report, and it won't be the error.

Category:North-American Interfraternity Conference
In the process of moving them using AutoWikiBrowser, at the same time moving Template:North-American Interfraternity Conference and North-American Interfraternity Conference, considered the name change based on the organization name change uncontroversial.Naraht (talk) 12:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The category moves were reverted because there were articles still at the old redirects; when this happens reversion to the status quo is best. Category moves are best done through WP:CFD as this gets the move done properly without leaving bits behind. Please don't do copy & paste moves that leave the history behind. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:06, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'll propose moving Category:Former members of North-American Interfraternity Conference there.Naraht (talk) 13:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 March 1
Hi there, I noticed that you often close discussions on categories for deletion. If you have the time, would you mind closing some discussions at Categories for discussion/Log/2020 March 1? Thanks for your help.--TM 14:36, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Black British people
Good morning! First of all, thanks for closing so many discussions at WP:CFD. However, about this discussion that you closed: it seems to me that WP:BLP issues have largely been ignored by the keep voters. Would you be willing to provide some further comments on this? Marcocapelle (talk) 09:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Marquis of Montferrat
I changed the category on almost every page, yet instead of moving the couple of pages I missed you just reverted everything. Why? Srnec (talk) 13:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)


 * When an undiscussed partial category move has been made (and in this case no reason had been given), it's standard to revert it all to the status quo ante and leave it for the standard discussion to take place to make the move properly. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Reversal of COVID-19 moves
Hey, thanks for rolling back to the category moves. I think "undiscussed" is a bit of an exaggeration, but regardless, I did not intend to move the categories with the other article and template moves. --  tariq abjotu  02:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

JP High School is not second oldest school of Nepal. It is Tri-Juddha Mahavir Prasad Raghuvir Ram Higher Secondary School.
JP High School was established in 1995 BS whereas Tri-juddha was in 1994 BS. So it's my request to please research on it and correct it if it is wrong. 🙂🙂 RohitShah98 (talk) 09:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I have never edited that article. I do not know what edit you are referring to. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:05, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:KROQ
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:KROQ. 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. --evrik (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Oregon Territory election categories
Thanks for reworking the Oregon election categories. Can you figure out how to make the template work for the years at the top? And it also created an odd category: Category:Template Category U.S. State elections by year with place parameter not matching title place. —GoldRingChip (it/they) 15:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The easiest way is probably to create them using the existing naming structure of using "... Territory" for the pre state era as that's the existing consensus. I find these templates an utter nightmare because they are often created too simplistically with no consideration for how to handle situations where the names aren't simply the same. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Babel Extension
Instead of editing my talk page to reflect incorrect information, please configure the Babel Extension properly to use the correct categories. If you are unaware of how to configure the Babel Extension, please see this link or ask for help. Thanks. -Vandraedha (talk&#124;contribs) 10:15, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Help was asked for for years on this and little was forthcoming beyond that at Wikipedia talk:Babel which was followed. (As noted there, your suggestion of switching to lower case does not work and just clogs up the category redirect system.) Simply restoring the redirects is not a solution and that media page shows a convoluted task that doesn't seem to currently be maintained. If you want to keep using those entries you'll need to get the Babel Extension configured yourself. Timrollpickering (Talk) 12:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * You should follow your own advice. Since you were the one who decided to take it upon yourself to edit my userpage, it's your responsibility to make sure that it does not break existing (working) code. This would be like me going on to your user page and changing all of the university names in your userboxes to "a generic university". I will consider any further edits of my userpage by you to be intentional vandalism and report them as such. If you actually wish to "get help", you should read FAQ/Technical. It would actually let you correct what you perceive as a problem, instead of creating more problems by blindly running a bot.-Vandraedha (talk&#124;contribs) 22:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)


 * First off the code is not working correctly in the way you wish it to because the dialects are not supported by the Babel extension. And I have sought help for this over the years and applied the only solution that has been forthcoming that actually works. For the record AWB is a tool not a bot and it is not "run blindly"; it is run to apply the necessary changes to work around the problem. As the extension does not fully support what you wish it to do and you oppose the application of the only available fixes it is down to you to sort out the configuration. I posted once again on Village Pump on this matter this month but no alternative technical solution was suggested. If you insist on maintaining the mess I will have to take what advice there has been. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Quick note on Template:SouthAfrica-newspaper-stub
Thanks for your edits to Template:SouthAfrica-newspaper-stub.

Don't forget to review the changes you make with AWB! You changed the category name to "South Newspapers published in Africa stubs". Good luck figuring out what that means xD Aasim 15:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Two category changes with similar names clashing within the system - a problem that often comes up with these stub templates. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Deleted category
Hi. Category:Moses Sumney songs was previously deleted because it was populated solely with redirects, per Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 17. With the creation of Virile (song), this is no longer the case. Per WP:SMALLCAT: "subcategories of Category:Works by creator may be created even if they include only one page." Per the CSD you cited (WP:G4): "It excludes pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies." I grieve in stereo (talk) 12:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * A look at the article history shows that's not the case - it was already in the category. Recreating a category the very next day is clearly an applicable case especially as it's still on the processing page (and will likely stay there for some days yet). Try Deletion review to get the deletion decision superseded. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The article was already in the category when it was merely a redirect (created by myself), not a written article. I'll check out deletion review. Thank you. I grieve in stereo (talk) 16:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Now at Deletion review/Log/2020 May 28. —Cryptic 00:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

CFD work on media categories
Thanks for fixing the list at CFDW today. I had hoped the new bot would handle the list without trimming. Something else came up and I did not get back to check promptly.

About the back links for Stub categories, please would you fix the red links at WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types/Culture? – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! For info, I have updated another bunch at WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Stub_types/Culture. – Fayenatic  L ondon 10:49, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:Earthquake magnitude
Hey there, thanks for doing the AWB work on the template to fix things up post-rename. There were a bunch of redlinks created as a result, but I think I patched them up. I'm wondering if you could check my work to see if I missed anything. If you could check the documentation page too, that would also be great.  bibliomaniac 1  5  22:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Formula One tire suppliers
Hi Timrollpickering. You recently closed this CfD discussion. The rename was originally proposed (by me) at Categories_for_discussion/Speedy. Now that the full CfD has been closed, would it be appropriate for me to remove the entry from Categories_for_discussion/Speedy? Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 10:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I see you have done it. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 13:57, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Sequel film categories
At Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 24 there seems to have been confusion about what was nominated, as the nomination only applies to the year categories, not the decade categories which had existed for a few years; an administrator supported deletion saying they were "populated almost entirely by a single editor", referring only to the year categories which were created recently by two editors. Even if there is support for deletion there is Category:Sequel films they should have been merged to. Peter James (talk) 13:13, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The nomination included both the year & decades as is pretty standard when proposing changing or deleting a by year structure at CFD. Merger was only mentioned in the very last comment - the discussion as a whole opted for deletion. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Category:Disambiguation page with short description
How is that no consensus? Nobody gave any reason for the existence of this category, they were just discussing whether it should be plural or not. The category itself is utterly worthless, it just contains every dab page therefore is redundant to Category:All disambiguation pages. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 11:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * As the original proposal was about renaming not deletion there was no need for people to address the existence of the category. The counter-proposal to delete came midway and was not commented upon by earlier participants. Given the size of the category a deletion would need clear consensus across all participants or better still be part of the initial proposal. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:04, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Kudos
Good job on the memory front T. I spent several November the 23's watching each of the regeneration stories and then we reached the point that they wouldn't fit into one day :-) Now I try to watch one story for each Dr, chosen at random, starting on November 1st. I hope you are well and safe. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 00:56, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_June_23#Twitch
Hi, please can you rethink your decision at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_June_23? This makes no sense, as there is no other possible meaning of "Twitch streamers" in the context of any other entry at Twitch. When there's no ambiguity then we shouldn't disambiguate, and I don't really understand why it would be renamed, other than as a box-ticking exercise because the main article is at Twitch (service). Thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Matching the main article is standard and overrides the objection. The discussion had clear consensus to rename. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:13, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Where do you get "matching the main article is standard" from? Please could you point me to that guideline, because I haven't seen it before, although I haven't been involved in category naming as much as other areas. The first section at WP:CATNAME says that "naming conventions apply]]", with a link to WP:AT, so following that I'd have thought the WP:PRECISE policy, which says not to use more precision than necessary, should apply here. I can see that there was a numeric majority in favour of renaming, but there was an oppose !vote which your close didn't consider, and per usual Wikipedia process, unless the rename is backed up by policy and there's legitimate objection, then it should not be made. Please could you at least relist the discussion for further debate? Thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * One solitary opposition does not yield no consensus and prevent a renaming. The standard has evolved at CFD over the years in numerous discussions and is written up most directly in the speedy criteria. There is no reason proffered as to what makes Twitch streamers a special case. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:03, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Television films described as "shows"
Thanks for your recent category changes including this one. I know you're implementing the outcome of a very heated discussion but do we really have to start calling television films (movies made by television companies) "shows"? Next we'll apply it to cinema films too. Welcome to the Star Wars Show!! --Northernhenge (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I thought that had already been inflicted on the world back in 1978?
 * As for the category change, the whole thing is a straightforward rename done by both bot and admin because of the sheer scale of the task. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:54, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Withdrawn opposes at speedy
Hi Tim

At WP:CFDS, you recently moved a bunch of listings to the "opposed" section.

Mostly fine, but you included the aircraft by manufacturer categories, even though @Ahunt had explicitly withdrawn their opposition: it isn't worth pursuing further, including not worth a full CFD, which would just duplicate this discussion and outcome, and so simply waste time that could be spend writing articles, so please do go ahead.

Please can you move those cats out back out of the opposed section? There's no point in having a full CFD if the lone objector doesn't sustain their objection. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 17:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

:Category:Iranian Major generals
Do you know why?

HandsomeFella (talk) 18:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


 * There was a redirect in the way that needed to be deleted first. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you. HandsomeFella (talk) 20:33, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Categories: "programs" to "shows"
Hi,

Is there some reason this isn't being done by a bot? It seems to me that would be the best way to do it because a) less chance for error and b) it wouldn't be cluttering up the watchlists of a bunch of people who tend to edit a lot of TV-related articles. —Joeyconnick (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * It's being done by both bot and admin because the task is so huge - one category has over 15,000 entries. HotCat makes this easy to speed through and I think there's a way to hide it on watchlists. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Thief/Garrett
Could you do something by hand to address this? The articles have a bad case of assuming you already know what's going on, and I picked the template that seemed least bad as a fit. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  17:55, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I tried to fix the template but it's a convoluted one that can neither be done through changing the entries nor editing the category list. It's one of these overcomplicated cases that causes too many problems. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I Can See Your Voice categories
Hello. I'm recently created the first season page in Falsez pentru tine, i've now already created two pages in the Romanian ICSYV franchise. Now i declared a "green light" to recreate your deleted category. Thank you and sorry for your late responsiveness. - UNSIGNED COMMENT BY User:Makoy Canlas 00:55, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Macedonian academics has been nominated for renaming
Category:Macedonian academics 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. <b style="font-family: Tw Cen MT; color: FireBrick">HapHaxion</b> (talk / contribs) 01:12, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Userspace draft and Category:Userspace drafts
Hello! From looking through some of my bot tasks just now, I noticed that one of them had not resulted in any edits since 31 December 2018. Looking more into it, I realized that when you removed the Category:Userspace drafts created via the Article Wizard dated maintenance category in Special:Diff/878215765, you also removed the Category:Userspace drafts dated maintenance category (note the ). Given that I see no mention of Category:Userspace drafts on the CfD, I'm assuming that was an accident? The subcategories are still being created by User:AnomieBOT and deleted by administrators. <b style="color:#FFF">Hazard</b> <b style="color:#FFF">SJ</b> 21:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


 * It looks like I was trying to zap the deleted category (the closing admin had presumably not amended the template) and often these convoluted templates are not clear as to what does what. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Are you open to re-adding the dated Category:Userspace drafts categorization back to that template? <b style="color:#FFF">Hazard</b> <b style="color:#FFF">SJ</b> 01:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Sure, put in what's necessary but please make it as simple as possible. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:29, 29 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The page is template-protected, and I'm neither a template editor nor an administrator. Could you please make the change, or would you prefer if I used Edit template-protected? Special:Diff/970219093 should be the simplest change needed to make it work. <b style="color:#FFF">Hazard</b> <b style="color:#FFF">SJ</b> 00:36, 30 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Probably best to request it and have someone more expert on templates do it. Timrollpickering (talk) 09:53, 31 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've submitted a request at Template talk:Userspace draft. <b style="color:#FFF">Hazard</b> <b style="color:#FFF">SJ</b> 18:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

"Charles Waterhouse (English politician)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Charles Waterhouse (English politician). The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. GPinkerton (talk) 15:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Category:Technology-related YouTube channels
I'm not really acquainted with the policies regarding categories. Could you take a look at Category:Technology-related YouTube channels? It is empty except for a subcategory called "Technology YouTubers". Is there anything that needs to be done here? It seems redundant to me.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 06:10, 6 October 2020 (UTC)


 * YouTube and technology are not trees I'm too familiar with. If you feel it needs merging or deleting feel free to nominate it. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:American Society of Cinematographers members
User:Erik has asked for a deletion review of Category:American Society of Cinematographers members. 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. —Cryptic 19:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of voting records of an MP
Hello Timrollpickering,

I don't understand why you are removing the voting records of Laura Sandys. Voting is arguably the most important thing that an MP does. As I'm sure you're aware it changes the law in the country. Yet Wikipedia articles record what school they went to, the committees they sit on, their personal life and scandals, and other items of information that I believe to be less important than the contribution of the MP to the laws of the country.

I have supplied a discussion on reliable sources noticeboard that assesses the source I have used. It was given a positive review.

Could you please elaborate on your opposition? Do you think an MP's voting record is not applicable on Wikipedia? Is it to do with Laura Sandys in particular? Just to avoid any misunderstanding could you please declare that you have no conflict of interest?

Thanks, 92.40.182.73 (talk) 11:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)


 * See Talk:Boris Johnson for a straightforward rejection of your IP's attempts to get this onto articles. Voting records do not appear on most MPs' pages because the information lacks context. Many votes are whipped, other motions go through consensually, many MPs are not around for backbench debates and private members' bills, some bills are killed with procedural motions (although is that because of opposition to the proposal itself or to get a no-hope bill out of the way so the Commons has time to discuss a more support measure?), the reasons for voting may vary (e.g. Is an MP who voted against imposing equal marriage on Northern Ireland voting against LGBT rights or in favour of devolution? Did the Liberal Democrats vote for or against a "fairer alternative" approach to university tuition fees?) and the selection itself is invariably biased (for example there's nothing about education or law & order or non-EU foreign & defence or several other subjects in the list you're trying to put in). All the small discussion of that noticeboard goes into is whether the source is reliable or circular drawing on Wikipedia not whether it should be included on articles. I can't recall any consensus for including out of context lists, just editors putting them in and hoping they survive long enough on some low traffic articles. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

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

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:The Mandalorian episode redirects to lists


A tag has been placed on Category:The Mandalorian episode redirects to lists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more 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 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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 14:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021 Senedd election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Isherwood. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Fully-protected redirect
Back in May you appear to have increased the protection level of the redirect from template-protected to fully-protected. It had been protected to the level of its target, Navboxes, and I wonder if it could be decreased back to template-protected? Thanks in advance for your consideration in this matter!  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 22:21, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, I misread the protection level. No action necessary.  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 23:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Please see
Please see Talk:West London College (further and higher education). ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  18:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/India-related_articles
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/India-related articles. -Vijethnbharadwaj (talk) 17:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston
Hi Tim. I've apologised to DrKay regarding my canvassing of the two editors who supported my previous request, and have reverted my messages to both of them accordingly. Can I ask if there is anything I can possibly do to save the RM? Would notifying all those who participated in the prior discussion help matters? Thanks, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I think at this stage it is too late. Reverting messages doesn't remove the notification and in any case making the same proposal just a couple of months later is not conducive to constructive discussion. Best to just withdraw it now. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, I understand. Per WP:RMCI, . One editor has already supported the move, so I'm not sure if I can just withdraw it. &#8209;&#8209;Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 01:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color:#E6E6FA; border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em auto; padding: 0.5em; width:90%; text-align: center"> Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Category:People associated with the London Business School has been nominated for renaming
Category:People associated with the London Business School 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. BD2412 T 01:56, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:21st-century Somali soap opera actresses


A tag has been placed on Category:21st-century Somali soap opera actresses requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more 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 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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 13:25, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:21st-century Somali television actresses


A tag has been placed on Category:21st-century Somali television actresses requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more 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 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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 13:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:21st-century Somalian actresses


A tag has been placed on Category:21st-century Somalian actresses requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more 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 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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 13:13, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Capitalization
Hi. I am sure you have noticed that MOS:JOBTITLES, which does represent community consensus having gone through multiple discussions, is not the only style guide I am citing. I am citing three more reputable style guides, including the UK's most respectable academic style guide. Nearly two years ago I also made this analysis of job title capitalization in the biographies of Lord Salisbury, to which you never responded; it shows that job titles are not standardly capitalized in British academic practice. Reverting without citing anything back is hardly constructive. Surtsicna (talk) 08:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Do you intend to respond to any of my comments on any of the talk pages, this one included, or are you set on solely reverting? Surtsicna (talk) 21:38, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Companycmd/Conveyor Technologies in Food Service


A tag has been placed on User:Companycmd/Conveyor Technologies in Food Service requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jusdafax (talk) 00:06, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Coordinators and help needed
Hi, if you are active on Wikipedia and are still interested in helping out with urgent tasks on our large Schools Project, please let us know here. We look forward to hearing from you. Sent to project members 13:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC). You can opt of messages here.

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Sanaa Governorate geography stubs


A tag has been placed on Category:Sanaa Governorate geography stubs 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! 15:57, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

sudra kingdom
this page Actual name sura kingdom but admin forcefully moved Sudra Kingdom again again idk why  please look at this page विक्रम सिंह बनाफर (talk) 16:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

CfD backlog
Good morning! Would you have time to close some discussions at WP:CFD (especially the older ones of early-mid October and the one of September)? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

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

De-stubbing
When removing stub templates, please also update the assessment on the article talk page, per WP:DESTUB. Otherwise you're introducing a discrepancy. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Reverting Kala to Cala
Hello Timrollpickering,

I was wondering why you not only moved Kala back to Cala but also protected the page from being moved. Cala was changed to Kala to correct a grammatical mistake. This seems to be at odds with WP:ONLYREVERT. I made many of these changes over the course of the last few months in good faith and good sources. One user, BilledMammal, reversed all of my edits over 6 hours. This feels like WP:HOUNDING to me. Why is that move controversial in your opinion? Why are all of my edits being reverted without discussion or review? I have not broken any rules and I have only been trying to update these articles to reflect the current times. It was my understanding that edits in good faith require discussion before being reverted. Especially when there is overwhelming evidence to support the fact that these names are changed.

I have written a further explanation here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_South_Africa/Politics_task_force


 * My opinion is irrelevant. It is clear there is disagreement about the change and your move was reverted so you should have discussed it instead of moving again. It is down to the person seeking the change to get consensus for change ad that consensus has not yet been shown to exist. If you're so confident about the change why haven't you opened a Requested Moved to determine the name? Timrollpickering (talk) 19:18, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Contested move suggestion
You moved the page "Kiev Day and Night" to Kyiv Day and Night with majority vote directed by latter editors except. Depending on vote rationale, the editor who opened the move discussion (Exlevan) must fully sure his decision on the move, but later becomes ambivalent by saying "I'll leave it up to the closer to decide whether this constitutes a proper English source" after I added an English source that supports Kiev Day and Night. In this case, the move should be revoked because Exlevan doesn't show outright support. Regardless of Kyiv/Kiev consensus, we are in English Wikipedia and words should use in English language usage. So, as I flagged an English source still exists in the article, reference is very important to support each statement, but the existence of this source is unimportant when the article moved to Kyiv. Thus, I considered this situation unfair judgement. The Supermind (talk) 19:17, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The discussion was closed by User:Sceptre who set out their rationale. Exlevan's comment looked like a straightforward exiting the subthread with the closer to determine rather than going in for a pantomime style back & forth argument between two users. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:40, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Taiwan
You can not say Taiwan is a country, it is an island controlled by the government of the Republic of China in Taipei. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mingzhen Wu (talk • contribs) 01:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Basically the exact same discussion is happening on my talk by the same user, would appreciate comments there.  Just ' i ' yaya  01:50, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Where? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mingzhen Wu (talk • contribs) 02:18, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Desertambition potentially move-warring
Hi Tim. I hope you don't mind me bringing this to you, but I thought it would be a reasonable place to start as this discussion already occurred on your talk page, and I want to avoid bringing a new editor who's only mistake seems to be misunderstanding WP:RMUM and WP:AGF to WP:AN3.

User:Desertambition recently moved Kubusi River to Khubusi River. I reverted the move, as I couldn't find any use of "Khubusi River", but shortly after they re-moved the article, and requested that if I want to move it back I should open an RM. I explained RMUM, and requested they self-revert, but they don't seem interested in doing so; could you take a look and provide comment? BilledMammal (talk) 01:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Tim, just noting that I have now taken this to WP:ANI, as the issue has unfortunately expanded. BilledMammal (talk) 09:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
<div style="display: flex; align-items: center; height: 60px; padding: 1em; border: solid 7px orchid; background-color: yellow;"> '''Wishing Timrollpickering a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! CAPTAIN RAJU''' (T) 01:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

"Nationalist (Northern Ireland)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Nationalist (Northern Ireland) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 9 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Olchug (talk) 09:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Alumni of the Medical College of St Bartholomew& has been nominated for renaming
Category:Alumni of the Medical College of St Bartholomew& 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. Elshad (talk) 20:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

My Wikipedia was removed by you
Someone using your iPi has removed my Wikipedia please explain? 2601:381:8100:4E90:A09C:4362:761F:4364 (talk) 15:58, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * It is utterly unclear what you are referring to. Please provide links. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Atlantic hurricane disambiguation pages has been nominated for discussion
Category:Atlantic hurricane disambiguation pages has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or 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. R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Cat mv
RE: ; I get the point, but respectfully, it's just pointless process in my opinion. When every single other category in this particular tree is titled one particular way, it's a completely uncontroversial move, even though it is longstanding, as it is outright incorrect. Just my two cents, and of course I respect your opinion on it. Curbon7 (talk) 02:45, 26 August 2022 (UTC)


 * A number of countries use that format and it is not "incorrect" but a better structure. That particular category move was rejected by a full discussion in the past so is clearly not controversial. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:02, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:People educated at St. Paul& has been nominated for renaming
Category:People educated at St. Paul& 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. Gaois (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:People educated at St. Patrick& has been nominated for renaming
Category:People educated at St. Patrick& 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. Gaois (talk) 22:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Please clean up after moves
Hi Tim

Just a note that when you move pages, particularly highly visible pages such as William, Prince of Wales, you should go through and fix all double redirects that such a move creates. There will be a large number of incoming and external links to such redirects (e.g. Prince William, William, Duke of Cambridge etc) and although a bot will eventually clean them up, it is much preferable to do it immediately. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:17, 9 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I have been loading AWB for that precise purpose. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:19, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well fair enough, but IMHO it should be the first thing you do after the move of the main page, before tackling templates and subpages and suchlike. I found myself unable to locate the page for a minute or two when I looked 10 minutes ago, because all the known redirects no longer pointed to the article itself. I've cleaned up all the ones on the William article itself anyway, so all good. Wishing you a good evening. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Archie and Lilibet of Sussex
I have checked with a colleague at Debretts and they confirm their titles, although The King will announce it in due course. Kind regards. Heidi bradshaw (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

"State of Myanmar" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect State of Myanmar and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 12 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Privybst (talk) 14:07, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Redirects can be resolved
Hi Tim, some templates such as Fictional character redirect can resolve category redirects, with the effect that edits such as this are not necessary. Provided that the original category is redirected to the new one, the template will resolve the redirect and generate the target category. It may take either a delay or a null edit to make this work; if the daemons are slow, I sometimes use WP:JWB to make null edits on the whole set.

But now that you have edited all the redirect pages, feel free to delete the old category page. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Category:Prisoners and detainees of the Ottoman Empire
On further inspection, Category:Prisoners and detainees of the Ottoman Empire was part of, not , and should therefore not have been merged to Category:Prisoners and detainees from the Ottoman Empire. I will reinstate it. – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:41, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your work at CfD
It's nice to see 3 discussions left on today's closing pageinstead of 18, when I start to work on it. I've become slightly worn out after almost single-handedly closing all of the CfD discussions, so it's always great to have someone else helping out.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1665691237739:User_talkFTTCLNTimrollpickering" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  20:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

"Standard" plurals?????
The plural of referendum is referenda, same as it has been since the 1840s. Fowler is a distinct minority with his etymological quibble. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  22:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The standard plural is "referendums" - see Referendum, the article titles throughout Category:Referendums and The Referendum Conundrum. The ~a plural is a hypercorrection as it's not a noun in Latin and so follows the standard English plural rules even before getting onto the general trends for incorporated words. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:11, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

CfD closure
Are you able to track which articles were previously in Category:15th-century Ottoman Jews, in order to recategorize these articles, as nominated? Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorted. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Revert CfD closure
Per User talk:Qwerfjkl, can you undelete the categories in that discussion? I can then repopulate them by reverting the CfD bot's edits.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1668669119205:User_talkFTTCLNTimrollpickering" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  07:11, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Done. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:31, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fonzi Thornton (November 22)
<div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Fonzi Thornton and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help 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_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Fonzi_Thornton Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eagleash&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Fonzi_Thornton reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eagleash (talk) 13:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:User pages with short description
Hi Tim, I see that you have purged the entries in Category:User pages with short description. I had started to work through the remainder as many of them were eligible for speedy deletion under U5 or G4, or at least blanking as WP:COPYARTICLE; in fact I was just about to ask some regular CSD-patrolling admins to join me in that endeavour. Ah well, I suppose I could still work through, although the category seemed to have lost the pages that transclude userpage and was reduced to actual draft articles. Perhaps Petscan could exclude the latter. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:37, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Fonzi Thornton
I'm not clear what happened with this one? It looks as though you discovered a old draft in the creator's sandbox and added a submit notice. I tidied it up and moved to draft only to discover the original editor had created a mainspace item sometime ago (possibly by C&P). I therefore declined the draft and you got the notification thereof. Eagleash (talk) 13:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Some odd things have been happening with what should be straightforward null edits to purge a category - possibly some long ago changes in process were never implemented on these user page drafts. I reverted that one but it seems to have still appeared as a submission. There may be a few other such cases. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Aha.. OK cheers, I saw something odd at another page recently but spotted it earlier before I started 'meddling' with it. Eagleash (talk) 16:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Timrollpickering!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! Timrollpickering, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 20:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 20:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Linguists from Foo CFDS
Hi. You recently closed the CFDS nom for the Category:linguists by nationality tree, but the previous naming scheme was the result of a 2012 CfD, which should have precluded CFDS. I raised this at WT:Categories for discussion, but Oculi (the nominator) has informed me that the usual procedure was to bring it to you directly as the closing admin. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The objection is valid and the form 'from Foo' is used in categories such as Category:English-language writers by nationality (which I had not noticed). So I would support restitution of the categories and do not wish to list them at full cfd. Oculi (talk) 18:48, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If you can put a list together in the right format I'll stick it through. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:53, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, it appears Fayenatic london has just taken care of it. Thanks all. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:05, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleting non-empty categories
Please don't delete categories like Category:Drafts with short description until they are empty, to avoid populating Special:WantedCategories.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1673385022723:User_talkFTTCLNTimrollpickering" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  21:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That doesn't work when the category is populated by a template that reads to see if the category exists. Only by deleting the category first will the template stop population. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This category was removed from Short description; all that is needed is to wait for the jobqueue, or to null edit the category members. I'm fairly sure that Short description never checked if the category existed.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1673387557535:User_talkFTTCLNTimrollpickering" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  21:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Some test edits were suggesting otherwise with those categories and they were showing on the pages. There isn't a one method fits all to zapping a template category. The real problems are the convoluted way many are generated and the slowness of the job queue. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:04, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Please relist Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_28
I am the creator of the childern's comics category. I have not been notified of this discussion. I would have voted keep. I think procedurally this is an error (creator was not nominated) that invalidates the AfD (CfD...) at this state. Please relist so I can offer my opinion, which would obviously make it no consens at least per vote's tally. TIA. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:20, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Piotrus, for what it's worth, this is not compulsory at CfD.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1673507876189:User_talkFTTCLNTimrollpickering" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  07:17, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The discussion was open for a total of four weeks. There is no requirement for a category creator to be notified and so this does not invalidate the discussion. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:Dipsadinae to Category:Dipsadidae
I noticed you changed Category:Dipsadinae to Category:Dipsadidae. Dipsadidaeis the old taxonomy, Dipsadinaeis the new. I've been moving them as I go along rather than at oncebecause there are over 100 genera in the subfamily. Can you please stop or suggest a better way to aloow changes....Pvmoutside (talk) 22:59, 2 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Use Categories for discussion to propose category changes. Arbitrarily manually moving them is not the way to go about it. Timrollpickering (talk) 09:18, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:CFDS processing error
In January you processed these two categories from WP:CFDS, but only listed on of them to WP:CFDW. Could you fix that? Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 22:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:User simple-N has been nominated for discussion
Category:User simple-N has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or 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 * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 23:52, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Independent schools in Yorkshire


A tag has been placed on Category:Independent schools in Yorkshire 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! 01:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Mozi
In the mozi article on the section science and maths there is mentioned that (collected writings of those in the tradition of Mozi, some of which might have been by Mozi himself) contains the following sentence: 'The cessation of motion is due to the opposing force... If there is no opposing force... the motion will never stop. This is as true as that an ox is not a horse.' which, he claims, is a precursor to Newton's first law of motion. but the citation doesn't even mentions about Newton's first law. Cuando de hyiopi (talk) 07:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Fictional females
Hi

Thank you for reverting those moves.

There is alsoo:


 * Category:Fictional women by occupation
 * Category:Fictional women by medium

and their subcats, as well.

Thanks again. - jc37 13:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Victoria (Australia) categories
Hi, regarding the Victoria categories that were recently closed as "move", they have been listed at Categories for discussion/Working so will process them sooner or later, indeed it has done some already and there should be no need to manually alter categorisation in pages like. But the bot has not yet finished, and so edits have caused redlinked categories to appear on many pages. If JJMC89 bot III moves the category page but does not amend the stub template within a few minutes, that is the time to step in. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 10:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Association football positions
Please can you refrain from moving the categories using AWB, and instead let the bot do it? It makes it infinitely easier to hide the edits from my watchlist - I have nearly 6,000 articles which are going to be affected... GiantSnowman 20:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

CNP
The CNP is no longer Right Wing, It is now Left wing, I am part of the CNP working to rebuild the party, please do not change this again as the wiki stating its Left wing is correct 185.254.148.29 (talk) 16:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hello, Timrollpickering,

Thank you for moving all of those WikiProject participants categories back to their original locations. I wanted the editor who mistakenly moved them to revert their moves so they understood why we can't move a category page like it's an ordinary page but it's more important that the errors get corrected than which editor did the page moves. I know that this was probably time-consuming so thank you for taking the time to do so. It's appreciated! Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 18:15, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi there Timrollpickering! A big thank you for correcting my mistake. I apologize for causing this mess in the first place. Thanks to you too for explaining what I did wrong. I now understand that category moves don't work like that, they have to be properly moved by a bot. And now I'm also clear as to why not; moving a category like a normal page kind of duplicates the category and just adds a soft redirect. I assure that such mistakes will not happen in the future, and now that I know better, I will be a constructive editor at WP:CFD.   ❯❯❯  Raydann  (Talk)   20:19, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Lists of Turkish people by school affiliation


A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of Turkish people by school affiliation 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 removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 16:43, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Foo Members->Participants
I just saw that Category:WikiProject Louisville participants was deleted even though it had already been moved per the discussion to do so. I had already connected the new category to the project, but now I've lost that. Is another category move happening? Stefen Towers among the rest!  Gab • Gruntwerk 16:09, 20 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The page was not moved but rather a new one was created. This prevents the bot from processing and, seemingly, handling what's linked from the original page so it's been deleted to allow the page history to be moved over in the current run. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, got it. Thanks! Stefen Towers among the rest!   Gab • Gruntwerk 16:13, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Categories for discussion/Working/Large is ready for another batch of "members" categories
I have checked and manually updated all affected pages for the categories listed at Categories for discussion/Working/Large. The page is ready for another batch of 300 to 400 categories. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, it looks like there are somewhere around 300 userboxes remaining to be converted. Done. I have done a few hundred over the last 24 hours, but if you and AWB want to have a go at the list, that would be great. There are some false positives in those search results. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Due to life commitments I have not been able to look at this today. I will take a look tomorrow. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Sounds great. Here's another potential AWB run during the mop-up phase. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think this edit actually worked. You should have received a Preview error message telling you that there were too many clc transclusions. Some of them return false zeroes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:06, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:Taxa named by Jean Baptiste Christian Fusée-Aublet
Move clearly meets WP:C2D, but whatever. YorkshireExpat (talk) 17:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Category:People educated at Licensed Victuallers& has been nominated for renaming
Category:People educated at Licensed Victuallers& 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. <b style="font-family:Courier New;">House Blaster </b>talk 19:49, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

CfD nomination at
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or 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  on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkl talk  17:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:Cathedrals in Moldova mistakenly deleted
Hi, I mistakenly listed Category:Cathedrals in Moldova for deletion in the recent discussion (it should have been Category:Cathedrals in Monaco). I recreated the category to remedy this, but it was deleted by bot once again. Any help would be appreciated in restoring this category. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Try again now. I've removed it from the list the bot works from. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Fiction redirects
Hi Tim,

I'm not sure why you bothered editing the Tracey Beaker redirects, e.g., because the categorisation was working fine by resolving the category redirect at Category:Tracy Beaker series character redirects to lists.

As it happens, you changed not only the parameter but also the template, from R from fictional character which needs a shell, to 's Fictional character redirect which includes a shell. This would have worked if you had removed the shell, but now the page displays a shell within a shell.

I think the same goes for the whole set. – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Because the template is so convoluted it was easier to amend the entries and whilst doing so it made sense to match the instructions that are actually in the category, including its recommended template. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:33, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Re: Biographical images categories
Now we have a problem, because we have some images that are asserted to be non-free, and other images that are likely free, published in the same year, and we have the images asserted (but not necessarily confirmed) to be free in a redirect category, which is clearly wrong. BD2412 T 16:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Update: I've gone ahead and containerized them. BD2412  T 18:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)