User talk:Valereee/Archive 19

ArbCom
Please read the instructions relating to commenting in Arb case requests: please do not comment in someone else's section (as you have done), but open a section under your own name. I'm a bit surprised that as a new admin you're enabling a weakening of the BLP policy, but each to their own. - SchroCat (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey, ! Thanks for the pointers for arbcom, never commented there before, must go figure that out better. But give me some clue on how smallbones asking for clarification and me backing that up is weakening BLP policy? From what I read, smallbones is seeming to say they got full buy in from fram for including their statements. What am I missing? --valereee (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * He didn't entirely get buy in tho, did he? Fram complained about being stabbed in the back any Smallbones. If you look at my statement there, you'll see some of the BLP violations in the article (and that's not taking into account the outright lie in the statement Smallbones is agreeing to delete). - SchroCat (talk) 21:24, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I see your statement. I'm always leaning toward protecting anyone who's being accused, and I'm totally open to the idea that what we're hearing about this case isn't the whole story. But what I'm seeing appears to be retrospective regret from someone whose statements are being quoted. Fram seems to have agreed to be quoted. Smallbones seems to have quoted them, and not unfairly, and been willing to retract statements that may have been objected to and were open to interpretation. We may disagree on whether we should have a news organ, and whether that news organ has sufficient oversight, but the signpost has been treated as our news organ. I think it's reasonable for smallbones to ask Arbcom to state clearly whether the article, without the disputed quote, can be included in signpost. Now I just need to figure out how to post correctly. --valereee (talk) 22:24, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: June 2019
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 23:54, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Arbitration case
Hi, I just posted my own comments at ARC saw yours after I saved. Could I suggest that rather than, you just create a new section for them? There is a section for uninvolved parties (yours would be just below mine). ☆ Bri (talk) 03:51, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Belated congratulations



 * Wishing you all the best of luck! Linguist111my talk page 07:50, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , a plaque! How fun, thanks! --valereee (talk) 13:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Smashed it
Hello, Valereee, and welcome to the admin corps! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:05, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * +1. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ditto! We certainly need people like you! - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the first task on the job, moving DYK prep to queue, - needed every day! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:34, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda, Ret Prof, Boing, Amakuru! --valereee (talk) 16:47, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations. I did mean to support at some point, but it appears I forgot, not that it made any difference... Black Kite (talk) 18:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Black Kite, and no worries, I'm just happy to have it over with so I can start back at the bottom of a steep old learning curve lol --valereee (talk) 18:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Not sure how I feel about Adminship on en.wiki right now... but if we're to have admins, you'll make a fine one. Won't say "Congrats" because it doesn't feel right, but hopefully you'll know what I mean. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks, and yes, agreed. I remain cautiously optimistic that we'll have better times soon. Thank you for your kind words. --valereee (talk) 23:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * A mop for you. Welcome to the club! And congrats! --Rosiestep (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , thank you! --valereee (talk) 13:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Call on me, Valereeeeeee---
Hi Valereee, and congratulations on getting the mop! Just wanted to say, every time I see your username on my watchlist, I think of this:. Best regards, Jip Orlando (talk) 14:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * My FIL used to sing the chorus of The Happy Wanderer to me :) --valereee (talk) 14:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack yourself, as you did on. Please comment on the contributions and not yourself. If you make any further self-attacks you may have to report yourself to yourself, which may result in a self-block. Thank you. M AN d ARAX •  XAЯA b ИA M  20:15, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I'll try to be more careful in future! God, I'm such an idiot!...whoops...--valereee (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hehe. Now, don't make me have to issue a level 2 warning.... M AN d ARAX  •  XAЯA b ИA M  20:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * BTW, let me repeat my congratulations from WT:DYK; you're been doing a great job as an admin. Oh, and sorry if this little "warning" startled you before you realized it was a joke. M AN d ARAX  •  XAЯA b ИA M  21:13, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , no worries, I love jokes here. Especially these days; it's been a rough month. We need more lighthearted jokes. Been getting a kick out of the redirects. --valereee (talk) 22:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If you get concerned about a visit by the "humour police", you can always do something like this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:41, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Tip of the day

 * The fastest way to end a conflict: walk away. Signed: The Welcoming Committee &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

toutes nos félicitations
~mitch~ (talk) 00:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks! --valereee (talk) 10:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Renaming image
Hello, Valereee. I nominated a recent article I created to DYK, but I uploaded without an accurate title. Can you help me rename it? I want it to read "Zeferino Peña Cuéllar - Don Zefe", so it can also pull better searches on Google Images. Thank you in advance. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 18:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I will be happy to try to do this, but it's the first time moving a commons image so bear with me :D --valereee (talk) 18:17, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , hokay, I think I did it -- would you check to see I've done what you wanted? --valereee (talk) 18:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes! Perfect. Thank you! MX (  ✉  •  ✎  ) 18:21, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Happy to help! --valereee (talk) 18:22, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Don't read during Happy Hour
Your edit summaries made me spew my drink. Gross!...but 10,801,016 views?! Atsme Talk 📧 20:37, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , hahaha! Glad I could provide a bit of levity during happy hour. Headed that way myself, and I have a firm rule not to edit after the second glass of wine :D --valereee (talk) 21:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Comments from GoldenRing
I would like to support this when it is brought to the community and I would like to see it succeed. To that end, I have a couple of comments:

I think this would have a lot better chance of succeeding if it had some sort of enforcement provision. You are effectively asking the community to unblock Elisa on the condition that she adhere to this mentoring scheme; that needs to be binding in some way. A number of editors in the recent discussion brought up problems other than copyright violations - eg edit warring and battelground behaviour. I think this would have a better chance of succeeding if it at least acknowledged those problems, and perhaps had some provision for mentors to advise in these areas as well. GoldenRing (talk) 7:04 am, Yesterday (UTC−4) (reply)


 * Thanks, GoldenRing! What kind of binding agreement were you thinking? I guess I was thinking that the risk of being indeffed again would be enough to get someone's attention. And, yes, I do know Victoriaearle is planning to address all concerns from the recent ANI. I think what you're saying is you think they should be specifically mentioned here? --valereee (talk) 8:37 am, Yesterday (UTC−4) (reply)
 * My comments were about what would be presented at AN, I guess; you've titled your draft "draft of plan for Elisa.rolle" and what I'm saying is that that "plan" needs to be something that's not going to arouse a storm of opposition at AN. About the "binding" thing, I think the plan needs to state what the consequences would be if this plan is not stuck to. I'll admit I don't have any very great ideas on what that should be! I'm not sure I'd see a renewed indef as the obvious first choice; if ER inserts two sentences into an article unsupervised instead of one, I think an indef would be somewhat out of proportion (to put it mildly!) and I think a lot of the community would agree. But I think the plan would have a better chance at AN if it had some sort of contingency plan for how such things would be dealt with rather than leaving it up in the air. GoldenRing (talk) 11:21 am, Yesterday (UTC−4) (reply)


 * I'm moving this to my user talk, per suggestions elsewhere to allow Elise a place to work that feels less public. --valereee (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

~ new section ~
Hey Valereeee ~ well it did not take long, for me to ask you a favor ~ by the way once again congrats ~ would you keep an eye on this conversation ~ you don't have to intervene ~ I just wanted you to see how things can get out of hand ~ Thanks ~mitch~ (talk) 00:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I've watchlisted it, thanks. --valereee (talk) 10:24, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
I'm sorry that, due to issues IRL (my master's defense), I was unable to support your recent RfA. Please accept this kitten has my token of gratitude for your work.

Bearian (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks! A master's defense is a really good excuse! Hope all went well! --valereee (talk) 14:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I'm happy with the B that I earned. Bearian (talk) 14:45, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK review of Warming stripes
Hi Valereee, I'm reviewing your nomination for the above article for DYK. I'm not yet finished the review (I still need to check sources etc.) but my comments so far can be found on the template. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  06:24, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Baffle gab! --valereee (talk) 11:08, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries; I've finished my review now. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Prep promotions to queue
Hi, I can imagine it's hard to check two prep sets at a time to promote them to queue. But we have no wiggle room to create prep sets and juggle hooks when all the prep sets are filled. Often goes ahead and promotes a few prep sets to queue, and then goes about checking the first one while it's in the queue on the day before it goes live. That way, only one set needs to be fact-checked at a time, but two empty prep sets are always open for filling. Could you do something like that, too? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 15:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I was really hoping that by my visibly working on the 2nd prep in line, I'd encourage someone else to start working on the first in line lol. Prep 2 is ready to move; I even checked the late addition from when you switched the canadian comedy thing out. I don't have time to do prep 1 today. I don't understand why no one will move the next prep until the last minute. Maybe it's to make it very clear that, yeah, I didn't have time to check this prep, and I'm only moving it now because it's getting to be the last minute, there's actually no time for anyone to exhaustively check it, and we have to move one, checked or not? How can we solve this problem? I don't have time to do a prep a day, so I either do the first in line, and then a couple days later I do the first in line again, and we never end up with more than one in queue. But doing #2 in line only puts us with 2 sets in queue overnight, and then the next day one in line, and then the next day 0, which is usually when I have time to check another set. I really don't know how to solve this. I'd really prefer not to promote sets I'm not going to have time to check, and if I move two to queue, I'm going to end up trying to check them both. And I feel like the rest in prep are just going to be ignored until I move them, and I'm going to end up trying to check a set a day, which I'm not really up for and which I know I don't have the energy to do well. I'm stymied. If you want me to, I'll move 1 and 2 to queue today, I have time today to do that, but honestly I hate moving something I haven't personally checked. I feel responsible for the stuff I move. --valereee (talk) 15:54, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You are doing a valiant effort to check every single hook, and I have the feeling you are doing much more than previous administrators did. The onus is really on the reviewer to check all the criteria plus the writing and sourcing of the whole article before approving it, but with so many new reviewers, that's not happening. I personally review everything again before promoting a hook to queue, but I'm not perfect, I do miss things. I do notice that other editors are not looking at the hooks in depth until they get into the queue anyway, so if you do promote unchecked sets to queue, others will be looking at them. If you promote 2 sets today, Sunday, then tomorrow, Monday, you could promote another set and go about checking the first one in the queue. On Tuesday, promote another set and check the first one in the queue. At this point, I think this is what will work. Pinging and  for input here. Yoninah (talk) 16:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , ditto, I checked every hook before moving to prep, and ditto, I still missed things. :D Damn this being human! --valereee (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

The most important thing to check is the hook. I generally also check that the article is new or recently expanded, give the article a quick scan to see if there are any obvious issues, and that's it. You can't check everything, even reviewers aren't expected to check every fact or source in the article.

I did start promoting sets again a few weeks ago, but unfortunately a week or two in, just as I was getting back into the swing of it, suffered a recurrence of the back injury that kept me on the sidelines for a couple of months earlier this year, which made it impossible to sit for more than a few minutes at a time and therefore virtually impossible to use the computer. My recovery was much faster this time around, although I'm still having some issues, but I'm just plain busy with a bunch of things that need doing off-wiki, so I'm afraid I can't be of much assistance right now. But what I've done in the past is load a couple of sets into prep and deactivate the bot so that they can't be promoted until I get a chance to review them or somebody else decides to activate the bot. That's one way to clear prep if you don't have time to do all the reviewing right away. Gatoclass (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . I'm sorry to hear about your back pain and wish you a speedy recovery! Yoninah (talk) 18:47, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

pinged me a couple of times, and I've been offline. First of all, Yoninah is correct in that, if time permits, I'd rather promote to Queue and check it while it's there. A thorough check can be visibly done by any editor while it is in Queue. It just needs an admin to make the changes.


 * Number One reason is because KrinkleBot doesn't protect the image until the set is in Queue. Sometimes KrinkleBot does that within minutes, and sometimes it takes much longer.  On rare occasions, KrinkleBot has gone down and needs to be reported.  If the image isn't protected, the set isn't going on the main page.  But we don't want a delayed Main Page appearance, so I give the bot time to do its magic.
 * Number Two reason is because Yoninah or someone else requests on WT:DYK that they need empty preps to build sets.
 * Number Three reason is because it's a time period when it looks like the usual Admins are not on line. I don't want a gap in rotations, which in the past has sometimes been several hours late because no Admins were around.

I agree with Yoninah that your efforts are admirable. And the fact of the matter is, you might temporarily inspire others to join your efforts, in the end it will be you putting out all that effort. So, it's probably best for the process if your checks of the Preps are done in the sequence in which they will be promoted. And we like you enough to keep you, so please don't burn out. — Maile (talk) 19:03, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd never thought about promoting to queue and then checking, but actually no reason not to; it opens up space and attracts input from other editors. Yes, definitely not interested in working at anything approaching burnout levels! That's actually pretty important to me. And again thanks for the kind words. Ugh on the back injury, gatoclass, I've got a tricky back, too; best wishes. --valereee (talk) 12:00, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for 1963 Freedom Ballot
valereee (talk) 00:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

IABot
I have been checking the updates to an article which I started – Susan Beschta – and notice that you made a systematic edit to its sources using a bot. There seem to be some issues with this:


 * The sources were all claimed as "rescued" even though the URLs are currently live.
 * Some of the major sources such as The Times and NYT have paywalls whose appearance depends on the reader's status. If the reader is new or a subscriber, they will see the full article.  If they are restricted due to a lack of subscription, GDPR issues or censorship, then they won't see so much.  The version which has been archived is a limited view, not the full view and so is mostly useless as a source.  This seems disruptive.
 * All the traffic from clicking through to the sources will be routed to the Internet Archive rather than the sites of various sources. Those sites are the copyright holders for their material and cutting off potential readers will tend to have an adverse commercial effect on them.  Acting in this way may be contrary to legislation such as the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.

Perhaps there is some general policy about these issues but I'm not familiar with it and so am starting here. Please advise. Andrew D. (talk) 10:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Hey, Andrew D! When I check an article for DYK, I generally run that bot just as a way to make sure the current version of the link gets archived and can be found later. It's not that the links are dead now, it's to prevent them from becoming dead (and perhaps unfindable) later. The archiving just asks the wayback machine to archive the current version. The original link to the source is still there and clickable; you only go to the archived version if you click on the archive link; the assumption is that most people will click on the source first and only on the archive if the source has become a dead link. Or at least that's my understanding of the process; my understanding is always to be taken with a grain of salt! I'm not sure it's actually necessary, as all new links added to wikipedia are supposed to be archived automatically, but this makes the archived link easy to find. Just a habit I've picked up. You should feel free to revert if you prefer! --valereee (talk) 11:43, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I was mainly worried that the URL was being changed but if the new one is additional then that's not so bad.  There might still be issues as major sources like The Times have their own established archive going back hundreds of years which I often use for historical, pre-internet topics.  But the Internet Archive is useful for more ephemeral sources too and so it may be good to have a choice.  I'll mull over the options and look to see how they are done. Andrew D. (talk) 13:48, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Sean Sherman
valereee (talk) 00:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Talking to yourself here?! 😎 &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:21, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , and answering! I actually was wondering whether I should be moving to queue a set containing a prep that I was involved with. I wouldn't review one, and I wouldn't move it to prep. And I don't feel right doing the final check on them -- I actually asked TRM to do that, which he graciously did -- but the actual move to queue I guess is okay? --valereee (talk) 11:49, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably fine. I don't know if there's an official rule about that. Given that errors sometimes slip through even after a reviewer, promoter, and admin have passed the hook on, it doesn't seem like the extra bureaucracy is doing much anyway! Thanks for the work anyway. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 14:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bo Songvisava
Hello! Your submission of Bo Songvisava at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MWright96 (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Links
You removed some links in Johann Münzberg, and I don't know why. Common praxis to link both lead and body, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:15, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , hm, I've seldom linked in body when I've already linked in lede in a short article -- if it's linked in the lede and then the next mention is a big scroll down, I will, but not generally in an article this short. But if you prefer it, I have no objection to you adding back the ones you think are necessary! --valereee (talk) 17:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say necessary, but think that some readers may skip the lead and go right to the real thing. When I began, I carefully looked to not ever repeat a link, the result was that in a listing of players of an ensemble, the really important ones who were already mentioned in the lead, had no link in the more complete list in the body. So when - writing FAs - I learned about lead-body, I happily duplicated, regardless of article length. I just wanted to understand better what the edit summary meant. - In articles about composers, with a life and a work section, we even link twice in the body, again because other wise the really important works mentioned in the bio lokked as if they had no article in the music section. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:38, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Admin bling
At my page I suggested some decorative stuff you could add to your userpage. I see that you already have the mop topicon here on the talk page. If you want, you can add the userbox to your userpage. And I notice that you haven’t created your adminstats page yet. That is something you will want; it is useful and kind of fun to see how and what you are doing with your mop. For example, here is mine: See Template:Adminstats for how to set it up. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , oh, interesting! I'd seen that stats thing before, but hadn't thought about how it might be useful for others to see. I've added it. Or I think I have, it doesn't seem to have change my userpage any, but it looks like there's a bot that eventually gets to it. I suspect mine will be uninspiring, as moving DYK preps to queues isn't very adminny. :) Whoa, I hadn't even noticed the mopicon (see what I did there?)! --valereee (talk) 20:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Interesting, I wonder who added it! It's usually put on the user page but there's no reason it couldn't be here. (mopicon, topicon, I love it!) -- MelanieN (talk) 20:17, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the bot takes a day or two. Maybe it has to run a background check to see if you really are an admin. 0;-D -- MelanieN (talk) 20:20, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Johnuniq • Kosack • Valereee
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Ad Orientem • Ched • Gadfium • Jonathunder • Nick • Yelyos
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Bald Zebra • Beetstra • Doug Bell • Journalist • Ruud Koot • Splash • Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg RickinBaltimore

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Beeblebrox
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg RickinBaltimore

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, the page Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
 * A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.

Arbitration
 * Editors may now use the template Ds/aware to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.

Miscellaneous
 * Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
 * The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing  here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist. Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: July 2019
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 08:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Nice work
Thanks for creating Race to grow the hottest pepper. Interesting article that will get lots of readers. I've grown most of the peppers listed, and two of the photos on the Carolina Reaper article are mine. The Butch T is definitely hotter than the Carolina Reaper, but the Reaper is delicious and tastes like sun dried tomatoes. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks! I'm pretty unsure about the article name...I redirected from 'superhot peppers' and was wondering if that should be the article name, but I really started writing it about the race itself. Figured I'd go ahead and move to article space and see what others thought. And lol that a pepper that hot would taste like sun-dried tomatoes; I like spicy food but I'd be afraid to even try it! :D --valereee (talk) 21:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Warming stripes
valereee (talk) 00:02, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for a spectacular hook and image. I'm sure Raymond would have liked it (smiles at you on my talk) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Gerda, the thanks actually goes to, who created the article, came up with the hook, and found the free-use image! --valereee (talk) 13:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the hint, will properly do that tomorrow, - out for the day singing! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:10, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Asma Khan
valereee (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Sorana bean
— Maile (talk) 12:02, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Bo Songvisava
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thank you! I had been looking at the Chef's Table article and saw that she didn't have an article! --valereee (talk) 11:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thanks, ! Sorry, I don't know how I missed seeing this before! --valereee (talk) 11:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Archiving references
Hello valereee, I saw your recent edit to Callum Wilkie where you added archive links to live references. Is this something I should do for all articles I create? – Teratix ₵ 12:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , I have a habit of doing that, but I'm not sure it's strictly necessary. I believe all new external links are now archived pretty quickly, so they're easily recreated if needed, but this just puts the archive link into the reference to make it easy to find for those who don't know how to recreate a link. OTOH I could be just wasting my time when it's a brand new article lol --valereee (talk) 13:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Garçon Wines
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Jessie Grayson hook
Apologies, I edited the prep page to remove the one I'd put elsewhere, and then forgot to save. Thanks for sorting it! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries! --valereee (talk) 17:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)