This is an archive of past discussions with User:Interstellarity. 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.
Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.
Could you take a look at this RFC? I started it before making any changes to the election articles because I wanted to seek a consensus before making any changes. Nobody has responded to the RFC for more than a week. Since there were no objections at the time, I made the changes to the election articles. However, my edits were reverted quickly and people have posted objections on the RFC. I would like to know if I did not wait long enough for people to respond or whether the RFC was not advertised properly. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Don't be offended. This is a pretty normal situation. No one has to respond to an RFC or even know that it exists. If you get no response to the RFC, it's okay to proceed on the non-response as if it might be considered "no objections", if not quite the same as consensus. But as with the BRD cycle, sometimes you have to make your proposed change before anyone will notice and voice their disagreement. But now you have what you wanted: a discussion is started, see if you can engage with your objectors to find some common ground. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs)23:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
@Jmcgnh: Thanks for the response. I believe I was doing the right thing by engaging in discussion since Wikipedia works by consensus. Just needed some advice on how to proceed. Interstellarity (talk) 23:29, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello Interstellarity/Archives/2020,
Year in review
It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
NPP Technical Achievement Award
As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Oval portraits in US party convention pages
Hi Interstellarity. I reverted your removal of the oval portraits of presidential and vice presidential nominees from US party convention articles. There's a reason ovals are used in all these articles; I believe it's based on an old convention of how parties announced their tickets after their conventions. See the featured picture on the right for an example. There are two WP:CONSENSUS-related issues here. Firstly, oval portraits have stood in these articles for quite a long time, which indicates at least an implied consensus, and possibly an explicit one based on a discussion I'm not aware of. Secondly, many of these pages have had discussions (some of them quite lengthy) on which images to use in their infoboxes. While I can't speak for all articles, I know this is the case for the 2020 Democratic National Convention. There was some pretty insane edit-warring over Biden's photo that lasted for months. One of the articles you changed, 1880 Republican National Convention, is a stable featured article. Generally, changing infobox images without discussion is ill-advised. Please start talk page discussions instead. If you do make edits like this, you should be prepared to justify them with more than just your personal feeling that the existing images "look terrible". This is especially true when changing a large number of articles in a series, or when editing in a contentious topic area such as American politics. Thanks. ― Tartan357Talk08:31, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Tartan357 and thanks for reaching out. You might want to look into this discussion where we discuss the ovals. We also talked out using the ovals on the election pages. You are welcome to comment there. Also, not every convention page uses the ovals so that's part of the reason why I changed them. I hope this helps and hopefully we can come to an agreement on how we should do this. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 12:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Interstellarity, thanks, I'll weigh in on the RfC. I wouldn't get too hung up on the fact that some articles don't have them; they take time to create and we need to tolerate some inconsistency in order for articles to progress. Also, I'm a fan of making these decisions on an article-by-article basis wherever possible. That's certainly the case for the 2020 convention articles; the oval images for those pages were the products of a lot of discussion. ― Tartan357Talk13:44, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
TheWikiWizard-December 2020
Hello, Interstellarity! Here is the December 2020 issue of TheWikiWizard.
Pilot Project, trying a smaller and different style newsletter
Here are the events of December 2020
Wikipedia News
On the French Wikipedia, the new vector skin design has already been rolled out! Check it out here!
Wikipedia will soon celebrate it's 20th Birthday very soon! Go back to 2001 by visiting nostalgia.wikipedia.org !
EN Wikipedia has more than 6,200,000 Articles!
Humor
Santa is watching you.... Don't vandalise Wikipedia, or he will reward you a block and no presents this year if you do so. (Seriously don't vandalise Wikipedia, even if santa isn't watching)
More turkey on Christmas
Notes
We are trying out this pilot style newspaper, making it easier for you, and our editors to use. Please let me know what you think about this new 'style' of newspaper!
The Wikipedia Ads section will be omitted, to make the flow of this newsletter easier. Discuss this issue here
Yep - couldn't be much worse. At least we got something to take our minds off Brexit here in the UK for the last year. I'm not sure if you can view this on BBC iPlayer, wherever you are in the world, but our family just watched this on TV and had a jolly good chuckle over its topicality. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: I would love to see it, however, I'm not in the UK. I'm in the US and it says that I can't watch it unless in the UK. Anyway, not a big deal if I can't watch it here. Interstellarity (talk) 15:09, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Merry December
Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
@Lee Vilenski: Thank you for your kind message. I wish you the same. However, your signature has the phrase best wishes in it and it has messed up the greeting. You might want to consider removing that phrase and manually type it in to make it easier. Best, Interstellarity (talk) 18:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind messages Interstellarity! I've enjoyed working with you on the Vital Articles WikiProject and wish you all the best during the holidays and in 2021. Gizza(talk • voy)01:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Interstellarity - thanks for the festive poem on my talk, I'm afraid I don't have anything half so creative to give you in return! I hope you have a peaceful holiday season, and a Better New Year. Cheers GirthSummit (blether)13:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Interstellarity/Archives/2020, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia, –Davey2010Talk23:02, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Interstellarity, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 03:35, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
May this Christmas fill your life with new hope, positivity, joy and bliss. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and your dear ones! RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 03:35, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Interstellarity/Archives/2020, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia this past year, like this tree, you are a light shining in the darkness. Onel5969TT me12:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
.jpg)
