User talk:Danre98/Archive2


A dispute at WT:WikiProject Afghanistan

There is a dispute located at WT:WikiProject Afghanistan#Disruptive adding of the Nastaliq writing style and I don't know how to work towards resolving it. At first it seemed like a content dispute but now it seems like there are conduct issues at play. Danre98 (alt) (talk) 18:32, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I would like help resolving the dispute. Danre98 (alt) (talk) 18:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Helpers who respond to the {{help me}} request will not get involved in content disputes. You need to follow the escalation steps outlined at dispute resolution if the original discussion on the talk page is not resolving into a consensus. This could involve, for instance, an RFC.
But I see that these other options have already been mentioned in the discussion. The other thing I would advise is to let ambiguous or vague conduct issues slide off if you can. Really bad behavioral problems should be reported at the appropriate administrative noticeboard, but just remember that your own behavior will be looked at as well as that of the user you are reporting. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 21:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Notability (media) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

August Editathons at Women in Red

Women in Red | August 2021, Volume 7, Issue 8, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 206, 207


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:University of Mississippi on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Infobox settlement on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

the Kabul times

Dear good day hope you are doing well, as you know I going to enrich the the Kabul times newspaper please let to finished it, cause there is a lot should I prove, still working on it. whenever my jobs finish will inform you


thank for you understanding

regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navidarian (talk • contribs) 19:22, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Navidarian and I hope you are doing well. I saw you working on the Kabul Times article and I appreciate the effort, it really needs attention. However, you copied text from https://thekabultimes.gov.af/about-us/ which is not allowed, unfortunately. It is copyrighted which means you cannot copy it into Wikipedia. I would suggest paraphrasing the page, summarizing it in your own words. That way it is not a violation of copyright and you contributions can be a part of the article.
In summary, because the material you added was taken directly from a copyrighted source you cannot add it. If you put it in your own words, you can add it. Danre98(talk^contribs) 19:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
@Navidarian, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copying_text_from_other_sources WP:COPYPASTE for more information. You can find information on how to paraphrase at WP:PARAPHRASE. Danre98(talk^contribs) 19:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

--Navidarian (talk)== the Kabul times ==

Ok thanks for your guide, i will try to do it by my own words


thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navidarian (talk • contribs) 19:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

@Navidarian You're welcome, and your recent edit is much better with the paraphrasing (and free of copyright violations), thank you very much. Keep on editing! Danre98(talk^contribs) 02:08, 10 August 2021 (UTC)


Thank you very much dear Danre98 I will try my best.

(Navidarian (talk) 10:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC));

DYK nomination of Capture of Zaranj

Hello! Your submission of Capture of Zaranj 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BuySomeApples (talk) 00:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Yasin Zia

On 20 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Yasin Zia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Yasin Zia, while Chief of General Staff of Afghanistan, personally led government forces against the Taliban on the edge of Mihtarlam, 120 km (75 mi) from Kabul? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Yasin Zia. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Yasin Zia), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Capture of Zaranj

On 26 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Capture of Zaranj, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Zaranj was the first Afghan provincial capital to be captured by the Taliban since the Battle of Kunduz in 2016? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Capture of Zaranj. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Capture of Zaranj), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Request on 19:42:18, 25 August 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mbochart


Would like to further understand the rationale for the page being declined Hi Danre98. Thank you for taking the time to review my article submission for Bush + Renz, and for offering feedback. I would like to make the necessary corrections in order for the article to be published. If I created a new section called "Partnership," and found 2-3 sources that discuss the nature of Bush and Renz's working relationship, would that be adequate in your estimation? I guess I'm a little confused because even well-known articles like Coen brothers or Russo brothers focus overwhelmingly on the filmography/career of that partnership, and have very little information on the nature of the partnership itself. Thank you again, very much, for your time, and for any additional information you can provide. Mbochart (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mbochart: Hello and good day. I did not decline it because the filmography/career section was larger than the other sections, and you are correct that other articles tend to focus more on the career section, Coen Brothers is a good example. I declined it because after reviewing the sources I did not think the subject was shown to be notable, or whether it warrants its own article. For the article to be notable, it has to be shown to pass the general notability guideline (link: WP:GNG).[a]
The general notability guideline says that A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article... when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. So, if there are sources (plural) that meet those requirements, the subject is notable and can have its own article. I looked through the cited sources, and many of them are interviews (not independent) or only briefly mention the partnership while discussing the films and other things the partnership has directed. I did find that the Hollywood Times article met that definition, but the article still needs another source that discusses the detail in significant coverage (and is independent, reliable).
Note: the subject might also be notable under the guideline for creative professionals however it is unclear whether it applies to multiple people and I doubt that the duo would meet it even if it did.

Notes

  1. ^ Articles also must not be excluded under WP:NOT, however that is not an issue for this subject
Other reviewers may have different opinions. In summary, the article needs another source that significantly covers the pair, is independent of them, and is reliable. Sources that discuss the nature of their working relationship may fit that description. Keep on editing! —Danre98(talk^contribs) 20:42, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your quick reply, and for providing me with additional information. Would this article from Cultured Magazine meet the standard you described to me? It discusses the pair's creative process, as well as the ways in which the juxtaposition of their respective racial and cultural identities directly impacts their work. https://www.culturedmag.com/antebellum-gerard-bush-and-christopher-renz-make-work-that-everyone-can-learn-from/ I welcome your thoughts. Thank you.Mbochart (talk) 21:32, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
@Mbochart Yeah, I'd say that meets the standard. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 21:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Good day,Danre98. I hope your day is going well so far. I added a line in the introductory paragraph that links to the new source of which you approved. Please let me know if this change corrects the issue with the article. Thank you, again, for your assistance and guidance!Mbochart (talk) 14:54, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
@Mbochart: You can submit it if you want. I'll give it another look over and make sure there isn't any other issues when I have time. If there aren't any other issues, I will accept it. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 17:45, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
@Danre98:Thank you. I just resubmitted it.Mbochart (talk) 17:53, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
I accepted it. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 19:18, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

New stub article in Afghanistan WikiProject

Hello. I am just letting active members of the Afghanistan WikiProject know that Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan–United States relations started a few days ago and need a lot of work. Elijahandskip (talk) 02:12, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: Hello, thanks for notifying users. I won't be editing it because the government collapsed recently and I'm not really in a rush to write it when there isn't even a proper Afghan government yet. In addition, it has some OR problems that I don't fancy messing with. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 19:10, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Fall of Herat

On 30 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fall of Herat, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Fall of Herat a United Nations office in Herat was attacked, killing a security guard? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fall of Herat. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Fall of Herat), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Lashkargah

On 31 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Lashkargah, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Taliban secured victory in the Battle of Lashkargah soon after suicide–car-bombing the police headquarters, a crucial chokepoint of the city's defense? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Lashkargah. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Lashkargah), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Malan Bridge

On 4 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Malan Bridge, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to legend, Malan Bridge (pictured) was built by two mythical princesses who mixed egg shells with clay to create a bridge stronger than steel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Malan Bridge. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Malan Bridge), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

(I'm stunned, 23k views) —Danre98(talk^contribs) 04:28, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Abolitionism in the United States on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 46

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021

  • Library design improvements deployed
  • New collections available in English and German
  • Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | October 2021, Volume 7, Issue 10, Numbers 184, 188, 209, 210, 211


Online events:


Special event:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Braunschweig on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Joel Goldstein

I ran across this draft and saw your comments. It seems you may be a bit antisemetic toward the subject and should probably reconsider your tone. Let me ask the TeaHouse what your peers think...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.114.236.14 (talk) 10:19, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

That's fine, but you might want to consider going to WP:AFCHD as it is a more specialized forum. Danre98 (alt) (talk) 10:29, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nation of Islam on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nation of Islam on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Kolkatar Harry

I was about to comment on Draft:Kolkatar Harry but I see you marked it as under review. I found the sources too brief, no in-depth coverage. Primarily the sources consist of announcements about the film and some interview quotes. WP:TOOSOON to be notable enough to meet the requirements of WP:GNG and WP:NFF. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Anachronist: I've unmarked it as under review. I didn't notice that the random submission selected an article moved to draftspace and submitted so soon for me to review until after I had marked it. In other circumstances, I'd have accepted it but I'd rather not move it back into mainspace right after it was (reasonably) draftified. I've also only been reviewing for a month so I'd like to make sure I stay within my abilities. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 17:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
You have to watch for new editors moving things to main space themselves (and watch for experienced editors moving things back to draft space). In this case it was a disclosed paid editor affiliated with an Indian broadcast channel who moved it to main space (that editor has a whole sock farm of colleagues that have already been blocked for similar activity, but I'm leaving this one alone because the account is trying to abide by the rules, starting with the paid editing declaration). Due to the citation to a Zee TV publication, it is safe to assume that the editor who moved it has a COI with that article. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll add that to the list of things I learned today- I didn't check and notice that the editor that moved the article into mainspace was a disclosed paid editor. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 18:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Musalla complex

On 25 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Musalla complex, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that most of the Timurid 15th-century Musalla complex (remains pictured) was destroyed in 1885 by the British and the Emir of Afghanistan, Abdul Rahman Khan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Musalla Complex. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Musalla complex), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Precious

Afghanistan culture and recent history

Thank you for quality articles about articles such as Musalla complex, Fall of Herat, Capture of Zaranj and Yasin Zia, for making navboxes for provinces, for destubbing articles and looking into Articles for creation, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2655 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, you made my day. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 20:57, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Shukria Alimi Raad

Thank you for looking at the draft. Just needed some clarification. You said that quotes need to be trimmed. Do you mean that each quote should be trimmed or that there is a max number of quotes that I can have? Please clarify. Meanwhile I will look into secondary source. Thank you once again. Rezanaul (talk) 22:11, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Rezanaul: Sure, I'll be happy to clarify. Roughly half of the article consists of the quotes section which is way too much. Using that many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style.[1] (In addition, if material produced by Voice of America wasn't public domain, it would be a copyright violation.) Reduction of that section somehow is needed or possibly elimination. Because Wikipedia is not a place to list quotations, I would recommend removing that section entirely and incorporating useful quotes into the rest of the article. This would include paraphrasing much of the material in each quote and directly quoting Voice of America in a few cases. Let me know if you have any other questions about this. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 22:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ MOS:QUOTE

User has since been blocked as a sockpuppet —Danre98(talk^contribs) 19:51, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

RfA 2021 review update

Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:

  1. Corrosive RfA atmosphere
    The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.
  2. Level of scrutiny
    Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.
  3. Standards needed to pass keep rising
    It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.
  4. Too few candidates
    There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.
  5. "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:

  1. Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
    Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.
  2. Admin permissions and unbundling
    There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.
  3. RfA should not be the only road to adminship
    Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.

There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | November 2021, Volume 7, Issue 11, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 212, 213


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Subhas Chandra Bose on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun

Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 47

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021

  • On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
  • Search tool deployed
  • New My Library design improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

December 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | December 2021, Volume 7, Issue 12, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 214, 215, 216


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:PragerU on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

January 2022 Women in Red

Happy New Year from Women in Red Jan 2022, Vol 8, Issue 1, Nos 214, 216, 217, 218, 219


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

  • Encourage someone to become a WiR member this month.
Go to Women in RedJoin WikiProject Women in Red

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

RFA 2021 Completed

The 2021 re-examination of RFA has been completed. 23 (plus 2 variants) ideas were proposed. Over 200 editors participated in this final phase. Three changes gained consensus and two proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration. Thanks to all who helped to close the discussion, and in particular Primefac, Lee Vilenski, and Ymblanter for closing the most difficult conversations and for TonyBallioni for closing the review of one of the closes.

The following proposals gained consensus and have all been implemented:

  1. Revision of standard question 1 to Why are you interested in becoming an administrator? Special thanks to xaosflux for help with implementation.
  2. A new process, Administrative Action Review (XRV) designed to review if an editor's specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools, is consistent with policy in a process similar to that of deletion review and move review. Thanks to all the editors who contributed (and are continuing to contribute) to the discussion of how to implement this proposal.
  3. Removal of autopatrol from the administrator's toolkit. Special thanks to Wugapodes and Seddon for their help with implementation.

The following proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration:

  1. An option for people to run for temporary adminship (proposal, discussion, & close)
  2. An optional election process (proposal & discussion and close review & re-close)

Editors who wish to discuss these ideas or other ideas on how to try to address any of the six issues identified during phase 1 for which no proposal gained are encouraged to do so at RFA's talk page or an appropriate village pump.

A final and huge thanks all those who participated in this effort to improve our RFA process over the last 4 months.

This is the final update with no further talk page messages planned.

01:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of Shakespeare authorship candidates on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

February with Women in Red

Women in Red Feb 2022, Vol 8, Issue 2, Nos 214, 217, 220, 221, 222


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:09, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Books & Bytes – Issue 48

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021

  • 1Lib1Ref 2022
  • Wikipedia Library notifications deployed

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

  • AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
  • The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Revision deletion on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

March editathons

Women in Red Mar 2022, Vol 8, Issue 3, Nos 214, 217, 222, 223, 224, 225


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:The Royal Canadian Regiment on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

April Editathons from Women in Red

Women in Red Apr 2022, Vol 8, Issue 4, Nos 214, 217, 226, 227, 228


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Module edit

Next time, I'd advise adding the reasoning BEFORE making the edit. Cheers. Firestar464 (talk) 02:26, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@Firestar464: I do think I am allowed more than 2 minutes to post (I did it in 6). However, I do understand how you could have interpreted my summary to mean that I was using the weak sources existing on the page to justify my edit. I probably should have put "will post on talk" instead or done as you suggested.
I do appreciate that someone is watching that page to try to undo low-quality edits. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 02:32, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 49

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022

  • New library collections
  • Blog post published detailing technical improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:05, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

May Women in Red events

Women in Red May 2022, Vol 8, Issue 5, Nos 214, 217, 227, 229, 230


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Consensus on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing newsletter 2022 – #1

Read this in another language • Subscription list for the multilingual newsletter • Local subscription list

New editors were more successful with this new tool.

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at most WMF-hosted wikis. You can join the discussion about this tool for the English Wikipedia is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Enabling the New Topic Tool by default. You will be able to turn it off in the tool or at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

The Editing team plans to change the appearance of talk pages. These are separate from the changes made by the mw:Desktop improvements project and will appear in both Vector 2010 and Vector 2022. The goal is to add some information and make discussions look visibly different from encyclopedia articles. You can see some ideas at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project#Prototype Ready for Feedback.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

23:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)