This is an archive of past discussions with User:Clpo13. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The Fossasia Opentech Submit in Singapore is looking for speakers. If you're in the area and want to introduce attendees to Wikidata, feel free to send your application!
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Everyone can now see Special:UserRights. Previously only those who could change user rights could. Other users got an error message. [2]
ORES can now show how likely an edit is to be damaging to the wiki with different colours. This only works for languages that have trained ORES to recognize damaging edits. [3]
Changes this week
You will now see categories with 0 pages in Special:Categories. Previously you did not see empty categories there. [4]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 December. It will be on all wikis from 8 December (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 6 December at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
I recently misunderstood one of your edits and reverted it. On Marina Abramović, you were right to point out she is not "best known" for spirit cooking and the citation was not even proving this.
So, I improved my mistake and the text and citation. And now I thank you!
Good day! Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 21:26, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello Clpo13. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.
You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
72.192.72.19
Hi. Thanks for the messages. I was aware of that already but it's good to know that someone else is also on the ball. I've issued a short block. I've given you the NPR user right (see above) which might help your detective work, especially catching socks and block evaders. If you have time, please consider lending a hand with the immense backlog. Cheers. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
Hello everyone, and welcome to the December 2016 GOCE newsletter. We had an October newsletter all set to go, but it looks like we never pushed the button to deliver it, so this one contains a few months of updates. We have been busy and successful!
Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: Nominations are open for election of Coordinators for the first half of 2017. Please visit the election page to nominate yourself or another editor, and then return after December 15 to vote. Thanks for participating!
September Drive: The September drive was fruitful. We set out to remove July through October 2015 from our backlog (an ambitious 269 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of oldest articles to just 83. We reduced our overall backlog by 97 articles, even with new copyedit tags being added to articles every day. We also handled 75% of the remaining Requests from August 2016. Overall, 19 editors recorded copy edits to 233 articles (over 378,000 words).
October Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 16 through 22 October; the theme was Requests, since the backlog was getting a bit long. Of the 16 editors who signed up, 10 editors completed 29 requests. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.
November Drive: The November drive was a record-breaker! We set out to remove September through December 2015 from our backlog (239 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of old articles to just 66, eliminating the two oldest months! We reduced our overall backlog by 523 articles, to a new record low of 1,414 articles, even with new tags being added to articles every day, which means we removed copy-editing tags from over 800 articles. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from October 2016. Officially, 14 editors recorded copy edits to 200 articles (over 312,000 words), but over 600 articles, usually quick fixes and short articles, were not recorded on the drive page.
Housekeeping note: we do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your Watchlist.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk.
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
It is with great sadness that we share the news of the passing of User:Coyau. He was a very active editor on Wikidata and the other Wikimedia projects. He will be deeply missed by his friends and family but his great work on open culture will stay. Feel free to browse and share his work. Thanks Guillaume for this message.
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
Users who have Yahoo email addresses could not use Special:EmailUser to send emails. This has now been fixed. Emails will now come from a @wikimedia.org address. Users who get an email from you will still reply to your email address and be able to see it. [5]
You can now see how many categories and pages there are in the categories in Special:TrackingCategories. This is to help you find pages that could need attention. [6]
Because of work on cross-wiki watchlistsglobal renaming is not working. The plan is to turn it on again on 16 December. Global renaming was turned off for a while in late November and early December as well. [8]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 13 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 14 December. It will be on all wikis from 15 December (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on December 13 at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Basque language Wikipedia develops a most prominent basque and worlwide person born/death in this day for all the day related articles. For example, eu:Abenduaren 19. It also displays interesting red links for people born and dead that day that are not represented in eu:wp.
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Tech News
Because of the holidays the next issue of Tech News will be sent out on 9 January 2017.
The writers of the technical newsletter are asking for your opinion. Did you get the information you wanted this year? Did we miss important technical news in 2016? What kind of information was too late? Please tell us! You can write in your language. Thank you!
Recent changes
Administrators and translation administrators can now use Special:PageLanguage on wikis with the Translate extension. This means you can say what language a page is in. The Translate extension will use that language as the source language when you translate. Previously this was always the wiki's default language. This was usually English. [9]
Wikis connected to Wikidata can now use the parser function {{#statements: }} to get formatted data. You can also use {{#property: }} to get raw data. You can see the difference between the two statements. There are also similar new functions in Lua. [10]
Problems
Some abuse filters for uploaded files have not worked as they should. We don't know exactly which filters didn't work yet. This means some files that filters should have prevented from being uploaded were uploaded to the wikis. MediaWiki.org and Testwiki have been affected since 13 October. Commons and Meta have been affected since 17 October. Other wikis have been affected since 17 November. [11]
Changes this week
There is no new MediaWiki version this week. There will be no new MediaWiki version next week either.
Meetings
The next meeting with the VisualEditor team will be on 3 January at 20:00 (UTC). During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. See how to join.
Clpo13 thank you for being courteous and sticking to wikipedias top 3 pillars, more than can be said for previous contacts I've had. Bottom line there are many non-existent links and sources in this and related articles that espouse a point of view that is simply factually incorrect. Top example the following completely inaccurate line is on numerous wikipedia pages: "Under Dinkins's Safe Streets, Safe Cities program, crime in New York City decreased more dramatically and more rapidly, both in terms of actual numbers and percentage, than at any time in modern New York City history". The sources cited for this in various wikipedia articles range from non-existent or broken links to a letter to the editor and in several cases Dinkins own auto-biography! (which by the way is totally self serving and as far as his term as mayor complete fantasy.) Plus as wikipedia policy states it cannot be the primary source for an article, in fact it is the only source. The fact is the four highest yearly murder totals in NYC history were the 4 years of Dinkins term 1990-1993. To say that the mayor who presided over the 4 most deadly years in NYC history cut crime more rapidly than any time in NYC history is the opposite of the truth and unfitting for wikipedia, I will try harder to take your suggestions, but let's get this corrected for the good of all. Please let me know any suggestions before I proceed, here are references there are many more.[1][2][3]Aceruss (talk) 00:36, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Jill Stein
The topic I removed has very little to do with Jill Stein's political positions. She was running for president herself. That section seems to only be there to scapegoat her for Clinton's loss. If not, we should add similar sections to everybody on who had an opinion on who should be president. You call my removal unconstructive, but the topic has no reason to be there. It isn't constructive. 6,000+ characters on comments she has made regarding the presidency isn't constructive to exist. Seems like another hit piece to me. If not, I'd advise adding similar topics to Gary Johnson and other third parties HRC Supporters wrongfully blame for her loss. Chandler (talk) 06:22, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!
Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.
I had wrote you earlier, but I was busy. Thank you for your response on the desk, but that is not what I was asking. Offered data is too general. Article on Wikipedia specifies when they entered in service, not when they got to the fort, and I have read it a lot of times before the question. The order of battle covers all this war (it was very long), but I was asking what forces were garrisoned on the fort. I don't know where to get that information. I thought some kind of academic expert on that war could help me and provide more data than the currently posted.
Hello, Clpo13! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:39, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, regarding the Dyatlov Pass contribution, it seems you've rejected it because it has no reliable source?
The fireball (ball lightning) theory was believed to be the best explanation by Lev Ivanov the Police Investigator of the Dyatlov incident. N.B. imo the wikipedia page is highly deficient in not stating ball lightning within the explanation section. Although it gets a mention later on.
My theory adds cold weather lightning strikes as an additional cause plus a suggested timeline. This is possibly an original contribution for the DPI for which no reliable source may exist.
@NigelEvans: yes, the lack of a reliable source is a big issue. One very important policy of Wikipedia is verifiability, which means that readers should be able to check for themselves where information on Wikipedia comes from. Reliable sources are preferred for various reasons (follow the link for more info on that). If you can find and include a source that supports your statements, feel free to add more to the article. clpo13(talk)23:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi thanks for the response, yes i can appreciate that it's a big issue.
I think that a subject like dyatlov does challenge this paradigm.
With mysteries such as this no one will ever know for sure what happened and in that sense all explanations are equal, everything is conjecture.
So to rule something in or out depending on it being credibly published elsewhere does seem to be an unfortunate halfway house that in this case promotes nonsense like teleportation of mutants (movie - Devils Pass) and rejects a credible suggestion {imo :) which supports and enhances the apparent opinion of the official investigator which in itself cannot be verified other than it is claimed by a journalist to be the result of an interview with him late in his life, the Soviet authorities supposedly suppressing his opinion in 1959.
Imo if you accept a heading such as "Explanations" then this list has to be comprehensive or you are not properly representing the matter, corrupting the authority of the site. There are dozens of explanations for this incident on the internet and wikipedia is only stating a small subset of them that randomly satisfy it's rules.
This is not knowledge....
We now have 822 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.
Hitting 17,000 soon
The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.
Second set of eyes
Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.
Abuse
This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and
This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.
Coordinator election
Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.
December blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 December; the themes were Requests and eliminating the November 2015 backlog. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine editors completed 29 articles. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all who took part.
January drive: The January drive was a great success. We set out to remove December 2015 and January and February 2016 from our backlog (195 articles), and by 22 January we had cleared those and had to add a third month (March 2016). At the end of the month we had almost cleared out that last month as well, for a total of 180 old articles removed from the backlog! We reduced our overall backlog by 337 articles, to a low of 1,465 articles, our second-lowest month-end total ever. We also handled all of the remaining requests from December 2016. Officially, 19 editors recorded 337 copy edits (over 679,000 words).
February blitz: The one-week February blitz, focusing on the remaining March 2016 backlog and January 2017 requests, ran from 12 to 18 February. Seven editors reduced the total in those two backlog segments from 32 to 10 articles, leaving us in good shape going in to the March drive.
Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2017 were elected. Jonesey95 stepped aside as lead coordinator, remaining as coordinator and allowing Miniapolis to be the lead, and Tdslk and Corinne returned as coordinators. Thanks to all who participated!
Speaking of coordinators, congratulations to Jonesey95 on their well-deserved induction into the Guild of Copy Editors Hall of Fame. The plaque reads: "For dedicated service as lead coordinator (2014, 1 July – 31 December 2015 and all of 2016) and coordinator (1 January – 30 June 2015 and 1 January – 30 June 2017); exceptional template-creation work (considerably streamlining project administration), and their emphasis on keeping the GOCE a drama-free zone."
Housekeeping note: We do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your watchlist.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk.
Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.
Still a MASSIVE backlog
We now have 822 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced. If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.
G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:
tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.
Thanks much for your guidance on the process. It can seem overwhelming at times to know where to put everything, and I appreciate your help without making me feel stupid. Seeger7 (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi There, sorry about that, thanks for helping and this article also needs help on the deletion discussion page
Hi there! I didn't realize the information was archived elsewhere now, thanks for helping me see that. I will apologize to the other editor on his page as well. I ask you for your help, as the Nikki Phoenix article that has been placed up many months ago by other editors on Wikipedia, (andhas passed review as meeting Notability under WP:PORNBIO; which it does in many areas,) and has been subsequently vandalized, and then nominated for deletion by the same editor. Numerous editors have come to it's defense, clearly citing Notability across a broad spectrum, and I would ask you to go to the deletion discussion page, read the history check the links for yourself to see that she in fact over-qualifies in 2 (not just 1) areas for Notability under WP:PORNBIO. Please cast a Vote to KEEP the article so that it can continue to be worked on and grow, and so that it will not be come and example of how to Vandalize and the be able to Delete a page that many editors worked hard on. Any help you can lend would be greatly appreciated!
Wikipedia and Copyright and the "Black Supremacy" article
Hello Clpo13.
I'm writing in response to your message to me on my talk page regarding Wikipedia and Copyright as pertains to my recent edits on the "Black Supremacy" article.
I actually appreciate your remarks inasmuch as I actually was unaware of the policies pertaining to reproduction of material in cited sources.
If I understand you correctly, one should not simply copy paste but reword the information (or else presumably place the text in quotation marks, presuming the amount of text quoted is reasonably short as per fair use concerns etc.).
I have no problem with that whatsoever and appreciate being so informed.
While I have your attention, may I ask whether it is also perfectly fine to have restored the "Nation of Islam" header?
It is supported by a citation I inserted indicating that the SPLC does indeed describe the Nation of Islam as Black Supremacist.
@CannotFindAName: You're very welcome. Yes, it's important that we respect the copyright of other people and organizations. Information can only be directly copied from a source if it's freely licensed or public domain (see WP:COMPLIC), though even then, attribution to the original author may be required per WP:FREECOPYING. Additionally, small amounts of non-free text can be quoted with attribution per MOS:QUOTE. I have no issue with adding that the SPLC describes NOI as black supremacist if it's supported by a source. clpo13(talk)15:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
@Clpo13: Thank you for your response. I hope I am following the correct protocol responding to your reply here on your page; it isn't entirely clear where one is supposed to respond to a response (here or on my own talk page linking to you so that you are notified?).
I have some follow up questions and remarks.
One regards citing an SPLC article which describes the Nation of Islam as black supremacist. I found an SPLC article which describes the NOI as black supremacist, whereupon I edited the list of organizations described by the SPLC as black supremacist by restored the header (The Nation of Islam), writing below it "The SPLC describes the Nation of Islam as black supremacist". I appended a citation to that sentence which links to an SPLC article about the Nation of Islam which describes it as back supremacist (https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2011/06/07/black-supremacist-nation-islam-pushes-white-dominated-scientology).
This was reverted by an editor who claimed that the fact that the article's headline describes the NOI as black supremacist is not sufficient evidence that the SPLC describes the NOI as black supremacist, which I do not think is a valid objection. It is perfectly clear that the SPLC describes the NOI as black supremacist; I don't see why the fact that it's in the article's headline in anyway delegitimizes the citation. I would very much appreciate your input here.
Furthermore, after following your instructions and adding the information regarding Farrakhan's restoration of the teachings of the NOI using my own words rather than copying the text from the citation, it was reverted by editor Malik Shabazz with the following comment:
"I don't know what you're smoking, CannotFindAName, but source #7 says simply "Minister Louis Farrakhan, who broke with Mohammed over the change, separately revived the old Nation of Islam." Nothing about Farrakhan's ideology in the source, which (as I wrote) is an obituary of Mohammed and has no reason to discuss Farrakhan."
Now for one thing, the "I don't know what you're smoking" remark is clearly inappropriate for any editor, much less one with higher editorial privileges such as Mr. Shabazz.
"Minister Louis Farrakhan, who broke with Mohammed over the change, separately revived the old Nation of Islam"
means that he restored the teachings described as black supremacist.
Moreover, the existing description of the article cited is extremely misleading, and rather obviously attempts to suggest that the cited article claims that the NOI was no longer black supremacist after 1975, when in fact the cited article only stated that the NOI promoted black supremacy while under the leadership of Elijah Mohammed, that this ideology was abandoned when Elijah Muhammad's son was named leader of the organization after his father's death in 1975, and that Farrakhan subsequently reestablished the NOI and restored the Elijah Mohammed era teachings.
I think that the aforementioned Nation of Islam header with the SPLC citation should be allowed to be restored, as well as my description of Farrakhan's restoration of the teachings of Elijah Muhammed described as black supremacist in the cited article.
I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts about this.
Hi Clpo13. I've been looking for suitable editors to nominate for adminship and think you'd make a good candidate! From looking at your contribution history you've been around for long enough, have contributed to a variety of areas, have a great AfD and FfD record, good CSD log, some content creation history, and are generally friendly and productive. Your ORCP poll was generally positive and most users seemed to say 'come back later'; I think later is now and you stand a good chance! You could do a lot of good with the administrator toolset and I would be happy to nominate you. What are your thoughts? Sam Walton (talk) 23:26, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Sam, I appreciate the offer! I'll take you up on it, but let's wait until Monday to start the process. That'll give me some time to prepare, too. clpo13(talk)00:02, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
No rush at all - happy to take time to make sure answers are good and there's nothing lurking that might pop up during the process. I've started User:Samwalton9/RfA/Clpo13 to give you a chance to draft your question answers. I'll take a more thorough look through your contribs and might have some questions for you before we go live, and I'll give you some broad feedback on your answers :) I'll also see what I can do about the possibility of a co-nomination. Sam Walton (talk) 00:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@Cminguez: you're very welcome. You should sign posts by adding four tildes (~~~~) after the text of your post. Signatures are required on talk pages and any other discussion pages on Wikipedia (but not articles). See WP:SIGNHERE for more information on that. Hope that helps. clpo13(talk)17:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
Some users have a problem with the watchlist. Some changes in categories make the watchlist a blank page. The developers are working on this. Until this is fixed you can try some things that have helped other editors if you have this problem. You can turn on Hide categorization of pages in your watchlist preferences. You can turn off Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent in your watchlist preferences. You can remove problematic categories from Special:EditWatchlist/raw. [12]
There was a problem with the visual editor for several days. You could not save edits that triggered a CAPTCHA. This would for example be when a new user added external links in references. This was fixed on 2 May. [13]
Changes this week
When you edit you can switch between the visual editor and the wikitext editor. This works if the wiki you edit has the visual editor. The menu will now say Visual editing and Source editing instead of Switch to visual editing and Switch to code editing. This is because it was confusing when the menu said you could switch to the editor you were already using. [14]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 9 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 10 May. It will be on all wikis from 11 May (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 9 May at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
You will be able to get a notification when a page you created is connected to a Wikidata item. This will come to Wikivoyage on 9 May. If there are no problems it will come to most Wikipedias on 30 May. It will come to other projects and English, French and German Wikipedia later in the summer. It will be opt-in for existing users and opt-out for new users. [15][16]
Markup that looks like code for language variants might need to be fixed. If -{ is used in transclusions or web addresses it has to be escaped appropriately. You can use -<nowiki/>{ for transclusions and %2D{ in web addresses. A transclusion could for example be when you use -{ in a template: {{1x| sad :-{ face }}. This is because of some code fixes to the preprocessor and affects all wikis. [17][18]
I've been watching your RfA and I think that you have a good chance in passing it. Just wanted to wish you luck with it (I supported it). TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:44, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
I did add a comment to the RfA but then edit conflict with the person closing it so I reverted the edit. Despite reverting the edit, my congratulations still stands. Who knew getting a mop is so time consuming? I just go to the closet and get one! (Disclaimer: This is my attempt at a little bit of humour, not being serious in last 2 sentences.) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:04, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Mops from the closet are easy to get, but unfortunately don't have special powers. Thanks for the support once again! clpo13(talk)16:09, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Definitely glad it's over, though it went very well compared to how I was worried it might. Still, I appreciate the concerns that some people brought up and I'll keep improving. clpo13(talk)16:28, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
That's the spirit! I think everyone who goes through an RfA fears the worst - I know I certainly would (haha) - at least at the beginning (for successful ones) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
welcome to the mop corps
Congratulations on your successful RFA! Allow me to impart the words of wisdom I received from the puppy after my RFA passed – ten long, sordid, jeez-why-didn't-I-find-a-better-hobby years ago:
Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable.)
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.)
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for?
Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway.
Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. All rights released under GFDL.
Watergate scandal
Hi, I saw your edit on Watergate scandal recently (it is in my watchlist). I think our anon sneaky user created an account. In any case, the IP user has stopped editing, but another user by the name "Uusername678" is making edits with same style. As it is a quarter past three of the night here, i should try to sleep. Would you please keep an eye on the article for a while? I will appreciate it a lot.
PS: when did you get the admin user-right? It is going to be a bumpy ride as an admin lol. Best of luck :-) —usernamekiran(talk)21:48, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
+1 Glad we have another admin who knows image policy well, we need you there. Followed your advice [19], previous revision will be ripe for deletion tomorrow. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Congratulations. Image issues have been the bane of my existence on Wikipedia, and I was impressed by your understanding. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:10, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
For when the going gets hard. Congrats on the most successful RfA I've ever seen. See you around
RFA's can be stressful .You deserve a good deep drink from this Indian delight.Hope you get Admin rights ( I have supported you) FORCE RADICAL (talk) 09:08, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Anyone who gets as near-perfect an RfA these days as you did deserves at least ten barnstars, so here's number three! Congratulations! —Gestrid (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I suspect he deleted it for the same reason I would have done - Wikipedia is not the place for kids to chit chat about their YouTube channels. (Expect messages like this to be a regular feature on your talk page from now on, Clpo13 :-D) Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) If you have not already done so, I suggest you make a FAQ of some sort about "Why I deleted your page". That way, you can just point to that in, for example, your editnotice. —Gestrid (talk) 14:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
![[19]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:StrataCompanylogo.jpg&diff=778600054&oldid=778569127){kind=link}