This is an archive of past discussions with User:Maile66. 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.
My apologies for noticing this only now, but on donaldtrumpi in Q5, in the convert template could you add abbr=off so that the parameters in full are convert|10|cm|sigfig=1|abbr=off? (This changes the parenthetical 4 in to 4 inches.) Happy new year. EEng02:17, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
I have pulled this hook for now and reopened the nomination. (See extensive discussion at WT:ERRORS.) Is there another hook that can be substituted, or is it okay to run with one hook fewer than planned? Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
I think this user honestly deserves a hard block rather than a soft one. In addition to having an inappropriate username, their account is only for vandalism. ᴀɴᴏɴʏᴍᴜᴤᴤ ᴜᴤᴇʀ(ᴛᴀʟᴋ)15:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
The botusername block is an automatic indefinite block of the specific user name . He only made 4 edits, and they were silly nonsense stuff. WP:HARDBLOCK would create an autoblock to the IP address, which could have been any public access. Per WP:IBP "IP addresses should almost never be indefinitely blocked." You are certainly welcome to appeal this at WP:ANI. — Maile (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Afong
Can you help me delete User:Chun Afong (bad move)? Also can you review Template:Did you know nominations/Chun Afong? I was holding it until I can get time to work it to a GA article but I don't have the time for that much detail. There is so much detail on this individual's life. There is a lot of common text between Julia and Afong's article so count it for Julia's article first. KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Redirect page deleted. Happy to review the DYK. You're saving me a lot of time. I was going to check out Afong's bio (Merchant Prince of the Sandalwood Mountains) from the library, but you've saved me the time by writing about him. There's a 69-part series on him from 1953 Honolulu Star-Bulletin (which I never finished reading). This guy is fascinating. — Maile (talk) 22:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Queue 6
Hi, I wonder if you could help here. My hook for Esther Farbstein was questioned at ERRORS and Gatoclass offered a new hook which works better. However, he has not been online for the past 9 hours and no one else has changed it. Would you be able to substitute the hook, which is about to go to the main page? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
You mean tomorrow after the next rotation? Doesn't the bot just archive what is already on the main page? How does that work? It never occurred to me to wonder how that magic works. — Maile (talk) 00:28, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
The archives only have semi-protection, so you can probably edit that tomorrow if need be. Contact me if you have problems doing that. — Maile (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I've been working my way through these bios, but today I come to the page and can't even keep track of it. Why did you re-order the names by year of induction rather than alphabetical order? Ooh, I see you did the same at Maine Women's Hall of Fame. Why? Frankly, it looks like a mess to me. We always alphabetize lists in sections of articles, disambiguation pages, etc. Yoninah (talk) 23:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, click the sort button over the name, and it reverts to an alpha listing. I left a message on the talk page. I'm standardizing them for ease of updating from year to year. Quite frankly, I update most of them, because ... because they need it and others don't always concentrate on that. The absolute worst nightmare on these lists was having to interweave names alphabetically in a table. Some of these lists have over 100 names. It's easier for whoever adds new names, and really easy for new editors who want to drop in the new year's inductees. Right now, I'm working on sourcing for Michigan, which had not been gone through in a long time. We have almost 300 names on that list. For new editors, figuring out the table format coding, and then trying to input new names by alpha sort, is a real turn off. We want to make it easier for new editors. I get to say that, because I created many of those old lists as alpha lists, when the sourcing was a chron list. It was a nightmare. — Maile (talk) 23:22, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
It appears that Gerda has objected to the claim that there are sourcing issues in the article. Do you have an idea on how this issue can be addressed? It's holding the nomination back at this point. Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew05:22, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
On T:DYK/Q, why is there a second DYK box next to the first set in the queue? Isn't the box at the top enough? This new box is crowding out the set, too. Yoninah (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, maybe I'm looking at the wrong template. Now that I look at the page that has all the queues, I don't see it anymore. Yoninah (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm trying to update the page stats for OK gesture and would like to know how many hours it ran on February 17. Did it only run 7 1/2 hours because you changed the clock at 19:26? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 12:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, that's true. Apparently, when I changed it to a 12-hour schedule, the bot got confused and ran the updates immediately rather than waiting for the normal time. I corrected it for the next update, but that particular set ran 7 1/2 hours. Sorry. — Maile (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Arlo Guthrie was referring to the darkness of moral or social issues that are the subject matter of folksongs. He used to say that at the beginning of given songs on stage, and was referring to any given situation that led to the writing of a protest song. — Maile (talk) 17:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Oh ... I'm so used to dealing Wikipedians who are not always familiar with a given culture. I used to be obsessed with going to his concerts. Thanks for linking one of my favorites of his. — Maile (talk) 18:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
A very evocative video, too.
In the late '60s I was a college student, and I clearly remember Alice's Restaurant being played at demonstrations. Returning to yesteryear this morning, I came across another artifact of that era. Sca (talk) 18:32, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I have that album, either on an old LP, or a cassette tape, somewhere in my storage. I didn't personally get to Woodstock, but the person I was with when I saw the movie saw it in a different perspective than I did. My companion kept saying, "Would you look at all those pretty colors. Do you see all those colors?" My memory says they started seeing all those colors during Joe Cocker's performance, and kept being a commentary for the rest of the movie. — Maile (talk) 18:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
PS: Re your comment on the Rachel Dübendorfer DYK: Did you know that John Denver's real name was H.J. Deutschendorf? – Sca (talk) 22:48, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, since we're trying to fill up more prep sets, would you mind lengthening the Local update times chart to include some prep sets as well? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Are you talking about DYK LocalUpdateTimes? I've never dealt with that, and it looks like coding that I don't understand. I prefer not to edit something which I have no experience on. Interesting enough, it's not edit protected. The majority of the edits have been made by Shubinator and BlueMoonset. Of the two, BlueMoonset's edits just seem to revert others. I think you might start with Shubinator. — Maile (talk) 23:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, thanks.
Here's something that you can do: Please move the MLS 2007 hook to Prep 5 per a request by the nominator on my talk page. Anyway, the hook is not verified by the source and needs to be revamped. Since I moved the 2003 Melbourne runaway train hook out of Queue 6, I'll add now another non-bio hook to Prep 5 that you can swap it with. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:11, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Although ... I checked MLS 2007 hook against sourcing before it went to queue. Just re-reading the source, I think it's one of those things where you have to be familiar with soccer, and I'm not, to understand why the source doesn't match. The devil is in the details.— Maile (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe) for October to December 2018 reviews. MilHistBot (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space
Talk to us about talking
The Wikimedia Foundation is planning a global consultation about communication. The goal is to bring Wikimedians and wiki-minded people together to improve tools for communication.
We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis, whatever their experience, their skills or their devices.
We are looking for input from as many different parts of the Wikimedia community as possible. It will come from multiple projects, in multiple languages, and with multiple perspectives.
We are currently planning the consultation. We need your help.
We need volunteers to help talk to their communities or user groups.
You can help by hosting a discussion at your wiki. Here's what to do:
Next, create a page (or a section on a Village pump, or an e-mail thread – whatever is natural for your group) to collect information from other people in your group. This is not a vote or decision-making discussion: we are just collecting feedback.
Then ask people what they think about communication processes. We want to hear stories and other information about how people communicate with each other on and off wiki. Please consider asking these five questions:
When you want to discuss a topic with your community, what tools work for you, and what problems block you?
What about talk pages works for newcomers, and what blocks them?
What do others struggle with in your community about talk pages?
What do you wish you could do on talk pages, but can't due to the technical limitations?
What are the important aspects of a "wiki discussion"?
You can also help build the list of the many different ways people talk to each other.
Not all groups active on wikis or around wikis use the same way to discuss things: it can happen on wiki, on social networks, through external tools... Tell us how your group communicates.
Hi, I just read many interesting articles about Dr. Thomas Dent Mütter and I created a page about him. Is there any way for me to submit this as a draft, even though his page has been previously deleted? He accomplished a lot of amazing things according to what I read.
Thank you.FairlyFlatFoot (talk) 10:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
I don't deal with drafts as a rule, but I see that I'm the one who protected Thomas Dent Mütter from being repeatedly created. That would mean another editor requested the protection. In looking into the history of this, the basic problem is that it was not sourced, and recreated enough that someone believed it to be a hoax. And I see by the existing article Mütter Museum, that he was a real person. To keep your draft from being deleted, I would advise three things. (1) Ask at WP:ANI how to create your draft without it being deleted. There are people at ANI with experience on this issue. (2) At the top of the page, note that it is about the creator of the museum, and link Mütter Museum on your draft. (3) Make sure the article is sourced, preferably at least one source per paragraph. Good luck. — Maile (talk) 12:53, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
@Just Chilling: I'm not sure at how adept I was in using the UTRS reply fill-in blank. But, basically, I think it's OK to give this editor a second chance. They were reported by the AIV bot, and I responded. It's a toss-up. Unblock if you like. — Maile (talk) 21:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
The Easter image
Thank you for your thoughtful comment to the Easter nom. I spoke enough there, so excuse me coming here. The problem is that the ressurection of Jesus is something painters can only imagine, and I think we should have good reasons to present one of their imaginations on our Main page. Any single image limits the imagination of the reader. The one in the nom not only has nothing to do with the article, but borders on kitsch, for me, and where it comes from is unclear, - the website cited is a Christian promotional site. - Better no image than that one, - also the hook flows better without a "pictured"-clause. ALT1 without image that is, and that's approved. - I did browse the resurrection images we have on commons, and found no other suitable one, btw. We had one once, remember? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Gerda, but also have an even more fundamental objection to the image, which I've outlined on the nomination page. Fut.Perf.☼07:49, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
No. Please excuse if I'm telling you something you already know, but I only figured this out recently. Have you ever clicked on one of the queues waiting in line?
Open the edit window on Queue 5.
Then "Show Preview" below
Below the hooks edit window: "See how this template appears on both today's Main Page"
Scroll to "... and tomorrow's Main Page"
Under the latter, click on Queue 5.
Purge this page
Yes.
It should then bring up a visual of what the Queue will look like on the main page. As far as I know, that's the only place to know if the DYK set looks too short or too long. So, when people are complaining that the upcoming set is too long or too short, that's probably where they're looking. And there's no real way to know in advance, just after 8 hooks are already in place. Hope I haven't confused you. — Maile (talk) 20:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
No, you're not confusing me; I already know how to see it on the main page. But other sets that seem short to me because most of the hooks are short, like Queue 6 and Prep 1, look all right in the main page view. I just hope that whoever is adding that ninth hook is aware of the bio/non-bio and U.S./non-U.S. balance that we try to maintain.
Well, you were ahead of me on that one. The thing is - and just guessing here - is that there is no way to predict, because the other sections of the main page change their content and either shorten or lengthen theirs. — Maile (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Re the red Irish lord, I think it's best to make the suggested pull on the existing WT:DYK thread about it. Keep it altogether for the documentation. Personally, I don't mind leaving it, as it has more than 24 hours to sit there. Thanks. — Maile (talk) 21:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Queue 6: Fay Biles
Hi, could you do something about fixing this vague and unencyclopedic hook? This has been suggested at WP:TRM:
... that college field hockey and lacrosse coach Fay Biles was the most successful coach in Kent State University history?
Hi, you commented on AIV that the above user has been indef blocked since 2010, but why isn't there a red notice to show the block here? JACKINTHEBOX • TALK13:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't know. The notices are manually inserted by the blocking admin, and sometimes admins forget to do it. FYI for you, since I believe you could see this user's last edit was 2010. AIV doesn't block users if they haven't edited in a few weeks, certainly not after no activity for years. Blocks are preventive only, and an old abandoned account has nothing to prevent.— Maile (talk) 15:23, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Understood. But for me the user's contribution page shows no edits; it says No changes were found matching these criteria.. Under their block log it says No matching items in log., which made me believe the user has not been blocked; and their user creation log also states No matching items in log, so I couldn't even see when their account was created. I only came across this account when I typed User talk:Zzuuzz into the search bar. JACKINTHEBOX • TALK04:19, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Maile, I remember you saying that you are interested doing the GA review for Valentina Tereshkova. The article is not completely ready but I think we are getting there. If I start the GAN now, would you be willing to start on the review concurrently. There are a few gaps that need to be filled but it would be helpful to have a third opinion on where the worst of these gaps are. I am sure you noticed at Mae Jemison that I go above and beyond, perhaps too far for a GA. --- Coffeeandcrumbs21:42, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Done Give me till after the weekend to finish up the later sections. Everything up to her parachuting back to Earth should be ready. --- Coffeeandcrumbs23:04, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
I am sorry. My newspapers.com subscription chose the worst time to expire. I have requested renewal at WP:LIBRARY. I need it to do the post-flight section. I will start working on the later political career section instead and come back to it. Hopefully I can get everything done this week. --- Coffeeandcrumbs11:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
@Coffeeandcrumbs: more of a note to myself here, to remember what I've looked at thus far. I've read through (a couple of times) everything up to her return to earth, and the prose-spelling-grammar seems to pass scrutiny thus far in the article. Suggested a couple of places wikilinks needed. — Maile (talk) 15:16, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience! I think we are at a point that if you completed you review, I could easily address any remaining issues and get this page promoted. --- Coffeeandcrumbs13:28, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Do you remember any sources refuting the claim that Kalakaua stood at or over six foot tall? I am seeing some argument that he was 5'7KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Not specific sources, but the idea that he was over six foot tall is familiar. This could be my own enhanced/selective memory, but it seems I recall either sources or individuals in accounts of the 1874–75 state visit that he was a rather tall individual. In that sketch of him at the White House dinner, he seems taller than all but one individual standing behind him. — Maile (talk) 00:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, an editor has unilaterally moved the page and renamed the Mamilla Mall as Mamilla Center based on one source, the architect's website. This site is commonly referred to as Mamilla Mall in every other source. Could you undo the move and I will open a discussion on the page name on the talk page? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 18:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah help me out with the history on this page. I see that you submitted it to GA as Mamilla Center. When, how and why was it moved to Manilla Mall? Strangely enough, there are no page logs of any kind that I can find about any of this. There's not even a page log on the recent move, but I did find the Redirect it created. — Maile (talk) 18:46, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Not true. When the other editor did the page move, he also moved the GA name and the name in the DYK box also changed to Mamilla Center. Earlier today I saw the move log line in the history, but it has disappeared. Here is the record of the editor who moved the page on July 14. According to this history page, he moved it because it's the name the architect uses. Yoninah (talk) 20:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your comment at WT:DYK. We really do have to update the rules. I think Gatoclass was going to propose something, but we all know it's going to take so much effort and be such a battle for consensus, with editors coming out of the woodwork to vote things down, that it feels like a losing proposition. But something has to be done; the rules are pretty outdated. Yoninah (talk) 23:56, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Uh, yeah ... the Yada Yada factor comes to mind every time. I could handle one of those scenarios where something is proposed, and only one or two people respond. And if only the current regulars bothered to voice an opinion. But as you say, anybody and everybody, from regulars to people we never saw before, would show up with an opinion. And likely nothing would be accomplished. — Maile (talk) 00:03, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Right. But something needs to be done. Could we start with just one rule change? One RfC with new proposed wording of WP:DYKSG#J3? Only one mountain to climb ... Yoninah (talk) 00:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
J3 would be a good start. We could find a way to state that subject matter should be evenly distributed. Sometimes we are receiving numerous good nominations from a singular geographic area, or topic area. We need to find a way to say "mix it up". Why don't you see how it would look better? — Maile (talk) 01:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi. I have no idea why you reverted the work I did on the article regarding the sources for this article. I was going through each source in the Bibliography to check its availability online, and to improve the online link to the source if possible. I have followed advice given to me when produce GAs, e.g. not including oclc refs if isbn refs are available, not including Google Books urls if the page is unavailable online, adding templates if subscriptions are required or if the book is freely accessible, making the titles exactly as stated in the books and not an approximation, adding authorlinks where I found them, making ISBN numbers consistent in style. I was doing this work prior to agreeing to review the article.
If I hear no response from you to explain your edit, i will assume you simply didn't look carefully at what I did, and will restore it. Thanks. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Maile, Just a heads up I've closed your thread at ANI,
I'm certainly interested in it and giving my 2c on it however as I said there it's more suited to VP/T or AN than ANI,
If you do get a discussion going then I'll add a link to it :),
Many thanks, –Dave | Davey2010Talk19:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Prep promotions
Hi, wikignome. I see you're cleaning up the DYK talk page. Could you promote 2 more prep sets to queues please? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:06, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Inasmuch as we have one Queue loaded for the next rotation, I'll worry about the others tomorrow. No time to do it this evening. Maybe we'll get lucky, and some of the other admins will load a Queue or two ... or three ... or four. — Maile (talk) 00:41, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
By following tips at wp:NRHPHELPTX just now, I found my way to the NRHP document for Wilson Block, available from the Texas Historical Commission. In the current Wilson Block article there is a link to an NRHP document which is no good, should be replaced by this link. There is also a Historical Marker for "Wilson Block". --Doncram (talk) 17:15, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Hey, Maile. You don't ever have to worry about wheelwarring with me; I would literally never wheelwar, and I don't think you ever would either. Have I done something to offend you? --valereee (talk) 02:19, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee: No, you did nothing. In order for me to reword Gerda's hook, since you put it back to whatever it was, it could have been considered wheelwarring to others. I don't want to ever give that impression. — Maile (talk) 02:29, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Maile66, if I ever do something you think is counterproductive, just revert. An explanation is always welcome just so I know what your thinking is and hopefully can learn from it, but I'll always assume you had a plan. I switched Gerda's two hooks because I thought Rebecca had a very good point about which hook was better with the image. I didn't change the hooks. I just switched them between sets. --valereee (talk) 02:33, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Can I ask you to review this? I’d like it to appear September 28. (A surprise for the memorial celebration, so please don’t mention on the article’s talk page.) EEng23:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
"... that Hiram M. Chittenden sent a telegraph assuring the dying Captain Joseph LaBarge that he would finish his biography, which reached him an hour and a half before he died?". The second part, "that he would finish his biography, which reached him an hour and a half before he died" has 4 occurrences of "he/him/his" and is difficult to unparse. Presumably the first "he" refers to Chittenden and the next "his/him/he" refers to LaBarge. I am still not sure if "which" refers to the telegram or the biography (probably the former but it's unclear). Something like "that he would finish LaBarge's biography, and the message reached LaBarge an hour and a half before he died" would be better. Nsk92 (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
ALT "... that an hour and a half before fur trader Captain Joseph LaBarge died, he received a telegram from historian Hiram M. Chittenden assuring LaBarge of the completion of his biography?
I personally didn’t find it confusing so I’m surprised about where the surprise comes from. I read it exactly as it was meant. If LaBarge was already dying and a telegram was sent which stated that the biography would be completed, why would someone assume that the biography was already completed? SL93 (talk) 15:07, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
This was the hook when it hit the front page —— ...that an hour and a half before fur trader Captain Joseph LaBarge died, he received a telegram from historian Hiram M. Chittenden assuring LaBarge of the completion of his biography?
Chittenden, the subject of the article, was not mentioned first, and LaBarge is mentioned twice. And you're right, LaBarge is described in some detail i.e. "fur trader captain"?? On top of that the writing is sloppy and the hook doesn't have the same punch. This was not of my doing. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
I defended the hook as not confusing. Complaint - "... that Hiram M. Chittenden sent a telegraph assuring the dying Captain Joseph LaBarge that he would finish his biography, which reached him an hour and a half before he died?". The second part, "that he would finish his biography, which reached him an hour and a half before he died" has 4 occurrences of "he/him/his" and is difficult to unparse. Presumably the first "he" refers to Chittenden and the next "his/him/he" refers to LaBarge. I am still not sure if "which" refers to the telegram or the biography (probably the former but it's unclear). Something like "that he would finish LaBarge's biography, and the message reached LaBarge an hour and a half before he died" would be better." Please pardon my earlier edits. I blame it on the Mountain Dew (joking, sort of). SL93 (talk) 02:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Appreciate your words after the fact. I suppose at this point it's all moot. In any event, 'he', 'his' and 'him' all follow LaBarge, at the end of the hook. i.e.Not spelling out 'LaBarge' more than once. Oh well. What's done is done. It would have been nice if 'modifications' to the proposed hook were discussed before it hit the front page. Imo, the original hook was fine, wasn't confusing, and had punch. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 04:19, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Sigh ... damned if you do, and damned if you don't ... sigh ... pass the headache tablets, please. So we are clear who said what, and what happened when, here 1 is the full discussion on WP:ERRORS. And I have added above all this, the FULL complaint at WP:ERRORS, the one I responded to. It wasn't like I just willy-nilly decided to make a change on my own. The complaint did not come from me. I was only responding to a complaint. — Maile (talk) 11:30, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for taking the time to evaluate my candidacy at RfA. A further thank you for taking the time to offer advice and share your own experience. I hope my actions as an administrator reward your faith. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:57, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Have you ever done a DYK queue to main page update?
Maile, the DYKUpdateBot is still down, so the promotion from queue to the main page didn't happen at 00:00 (it's 00:37 as I type this).
The 12:00 update was done, about two hours late, by Gatoclass, but I don't see them around at the moment. Similarly, others who I usually try are not around. I wouldn't expect to see Shubinator, the bot owner, around for another couple of hours at least, assuming that he looks in tonight—he doesn't always.
All this is preliminary to asking whether, if you are around, you'd be willing to do a manual update. The instructions are on any queue page at the Posting the new update section. I imagine it would be helpful to see what the DYKUpdateBot did in its last update (just take a look at its contributions) as an aid to memory. Thanks for anything you can do (though I may have missed you, since you tend to stop editing around now or a bit earlier); if it isn't feasible, then we'll cross our fingers and hope Shubinator shows up soon, or maybe you can think of another admin who might want to take a crack. Since this would normally be an automated task, I don't think there's any conflict for an admin who has worked earlier on the set to do the final promotion. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:44, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: I missed this one. I don't know where Shubinator's bot is parked, but the Krinkle bot that protects main page images was down for about the same time. There's a message over at Commons that Krinkle.bot was, :...stuck again in the Toolforge scheduler system." — Maile (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
Template:DYK archive header
I apologise for adding the noeditsection magic word into the template without prior discussion; thanks for reverting it. However, I note that, in the process, you had also rollbacked a harmless copyedit to the template that I made more than three months prior. Would you mind reinstating that edit? Thanks. — RAVENPVFF·talk·16:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a little surprised that you didn't hold this nomination for an image slot. We worked very hard on the licensing, and it really is a great hook. At the very least it deserves a quirky slot. Yoninah (talk) 20:48, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah: I originally had it in the image slot. Then I noticed that just two preps up, we already have an image slot of someone in military uniform. The Nehru nom was approved, somewhat perfect for an image slot, and I believe in the Prep that will be in the right time frame on the main page. I moved Klass down in the set so as not to have to revert the promotion. My thinking, is wait until another Prep or two opens up, and then you can move it to one of them in the image slot. I just didn't want to lose Klass, to just shove it somewhere else. We can correct this for an image slot, but I think we need more preps to empty up first. Which future Prep do you think it would work for? — Maile (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Klass now has the image slot in Prep 3. So if you want to move him around to a later prep, go ahead. No objections here. Sorry for the confusion. — Maile (talk) 21:30, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Maile, do you do history merges? Something very odd happened to this nomination, and while this is the actual page that needs to be retained, it needs to have a history merge with Template:Did you know nominations/7 Championship, after which the latter can be deleted.
What happened is this: when Template:Did you know nominations/WWE 24/7 Championship was created, the nompage parameter was only "7 Championship" rather than "WWE 24/7 Championship"—the software has trouble dealing with the slash character in an article name, because of the way it parses things.
So, when LLcentury went to review the nomination, it went to (and created?) a "7 Championship" page including a transclusion of the original page and placed the review there, plus all subsequent edits by LLcentury went there, a test edit (removed shortly thereafter) by Aoba47, and then Cwmhiraeth's post noting issues.
In parallel to that, ONUnicorn did a test edit (also removed) on the original "WWE 24/7 Championship". A couple of days ago, Teratix noticed that the review was in the wrong place and copied it over to the WWE 24/7 Championship page, but didn't fix that template. I've just fixed it so all the review is in one place; we just need the parallel edit histories to be combined on said Template:Did you know nominations/WWE 24/7 Championship nomination template. When that's done, Template:Did you know nominations/7 Championship can go away.
Please let me know whether you have any questions. If this isn't something you're prepared to do, can you recruit another admin for the task? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:13, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Was I supposed to see a notice that the film's DYK was on mainspace? I didn't get a notice, nor did I see anything show up in article talk. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:41, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, this nomination was rejected as ineligible for DYK per WP:DYK#Eligibility criteria1. d. The nominator has rightly requested that a bolded appearance on "On This Day" be added to the GA review notification template, which currently says: If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Would you be able to update that template? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:42, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
What are you asking me to update? If you are asking me to update a GA template, I've never edited those. I think there might be more than one type in use, but not sure. I pulled up one and saw this at the top of the edit page, "Please note: there is already a TemplateData block on the related page "Template:GANotice/doc" - and I have no idea what that means. There's nothing under "Page Protection Log" that indicates it's a protected template. @BlueMoonset: guidance needed on this function, please. And which templates should I be editing? Thanks. — Maile (talk) 22:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, Maile, this message is generated by Legobot when it runs (every 20 minutes, to regenerate the WP:GAN page if anything has changed on it)—it's triggered by the successful conclusion to a GA review, which it knows about because a GA nominee template on the article's talk page has been replaced by a GA template, indicating that the article is now a Good Article. Based on the text generated, I think it is indeed Template:GANotice that would need to be modified. (I'm hoping Legobot invokes the template rather than generates its own post text.) The question is, how should this section of text be revised? We should probably mention the bold links with regard to ITN, but for OTD, unfortunately, they're also bolding the links under the birth and death anniversaries (currently including John Hancock), which I don't believe is supposed to count any more than the Recent deaths section counts for ITN. Perhaps this rewording section should go to the DYK talk page? What we're looking to do is replace If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, with something that includes OTD, perhaps something like If the article has not already been on the main page as a "Did you know" item or an "In the news" or "On this day" item in a bold link (but not only a simple OTD bolded name and year of birth/death),. (There's probably a less involved way of specifying this.) And, of course, any change to Template:GANotice needs to be reflected in a change to Template:GANotice/doc to show the updated output from the template. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset:@Yoninah: Wording on this feels like the old Twister (game). No wonder people get confused. Does this cover it? If the article has not already been on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or a bold link "In the news" or "On this day" prose section bold link, it is eligible for DYK. OTD bolded names at the bottom of the list, bolding only name and year of birth/death count as eligible for DYK.— Maile (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi again, thanks for your work. Personally, I feel the new text is wordy, and also cluttered with bold font which might be confusing to the reader. What about simplifying it like this:
If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, it is eligible for DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column also count as eligible for DYK.Yoninah (talk) 17:32, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Okey dokey You sure you don't want to be an admin? Think of all the fun you could have. I'm sure there's fun in it somewhere. Any day now. Don't think about the other side of being an admin. We need more DYK admins. — Maile (talk) 20:09, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for this block. I wonder if you'd consider WP:REVDELing some of that user's edits, since most of them are grossly offensive BLP violations - in particular, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Again, thanks for your help. WJ94 (talk) 22:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Mind if I add a few more I just found? 1, 2, 3. It looks like some of the vandalism slipped through and stayed on the page because multiple IPs were being reverted. Thanks again for your help. WJ94 (talk) 22:20, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
That's a different IP, but I did revert for you. Looks like it might be part of a range. If more occur, you might consider asking for a range block at WP:AIV. I don't do range blocks. — Maile (talk) 22:27, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Yeah, I think what happened is that a couple of different IPs were vandalising the page, which meant that some of reverts still contained BLP vandalism (such as this). I guess when people are using rollback things can get missed if there is more than one IP involved, which is why I reverted to an older version. WJ94 (talk) 22:38, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
I was interested in your statement at the GRuban RfA. I would have liked to send you an email, but as you indicated in your post, that is not possible. You could send an email to me and I could reply, or if you prefer, you could do nothing, and we could both just get on with our normal wiki-activities! :) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:05, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: I prefer not to take the email route, on the heels of the RFA. But I'm aware already in your case. My page has 131 warchers, and I think you, also, are savvy on that one. Sometimes we walk on egg shells, you and I, and even that is not enough. The case I referred to, was a prolific sockmaster on more than one wiki. — Maile (talk) 19:21, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Having experienced it, there's no difference between somebody wikihounding you on all your edits, and a smiling stranger who always seems to be watching you, showing up everywhere you go. And instead of people believing you, they just say you've misunderstood, apologists who excuse everything. — Maile (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I believe you. In my experience the more likely locus of misunderstanding is on the other side. I think the person on the giving end often has a hard time understanding what the experience feels like on the receiving end. The intent may not be to make someone feel that way, but the minute someone says that's how it feels, we have to believe them. You get to define your own feelings. --valereee (talk) 20:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee: I wish I could put my brain on the exact title of this, but many decades ago on MTV, or one of those similar music video channels, there was a documentary titled something like, "It's OK, I'm Your Fan". It documented from the celebrity point of view what it's like to be on the receiving end of enthusiastic fans who don't know when to fall back. — Maile (talk) 21:18, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
During a 1900 Congressional deadlock, she departed for Honolulu with her Washington, D.C., Doctor Charles H. English (sometimes referred to as John H. English). Newspapers speculated that the Queen, having been diagnosed with cancer, was going home to die.
Is there something missing in the sentence after DC?
Oh, I see. It's the Liliuokalani article. I think if you make the word "doctor" lower case, it makes the sentence flow as it should. — Maile (talk) 03:02, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I vaguely remember inserting the info about Charles H. English. He was a bit of a fortune hunter, and she fired him. — Maile (talk) 03:30, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Maile, can I ask you to please archive the second section on the DYK talk page, "Oldest nominations needing DYK reviewers"? The regular archiver isn't getting rid of it because of some later timestamps on the page, but it is obsolete: the newer version of that section, "Older nominations needing DYK reviewers", has been up for a few days, and people should be using that one, not the obsolete one. Besides, a shorter DYK talk page is always a good thing. (I've never used OneClickArchiver; I generally prefer to let the bot take care of things.) I'm only asking because I saw you use this app on the page in late August. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:24, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for closing the “Whistle Blower” thread in the Donald Trump impeachment inquiry. Is it okay if I remove my violation template so it won’t show up in the violations category?
Can you help me clip these newspaper articles: https://www.newspapers.com/search/#query=Kerisetemasa ? Just clip the entire page. Thanks. I seem to have lost my Publisher Extra access again. I forgot how I got my access back again last time. Do you know who should I talk to? I submitted another renewal request through the Wikipedia Library but don't remember if that did the trick last time. KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:48, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
@KAVEBEAR: I guess I only partly read your message about renewal. FYI, @Cameron11598: is the person who last assisted me when I renewed. If you see instructions on his user page, he says you can email him. — Maile (talk) 00:27, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Just a reminder that when changing images in main page templates such as DYK, they need to be protected on Commons first, to prevent vandals replacing them with something obscene in the time between the replacement and the Commons protection bot catching up with the new image. Unless I've misread the course of events it looks like you didn't do that with the Gloucester Docks one. The easiest way is to add the image at Wikipedia:Main_Page/Commons_media_protection, then go to the Commons page mentioned there and wait for it to appear. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 21:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. The image is protected at commons. Krinklebot seems to have picked it up within a minute of my swapping it. But I'm saving the link you provided above, in case I do this again. — Maile (talk) 21:43, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Yep, that's right. It isn't always that quick though (sometimes it takes up to five minutes or more, which can be annoying when you're waiting to make a change!). All the best — Amakuru (talk) 21:48, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
OK now? That was kind of incredible, in that the dab page was created in about the same minute, give or take a few seconds, that I was executing the Speedy Delete. — Maile (talk) 20:23, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
@KAVEBEAR: Hmmmm. Something to think about, but it never occurred to me to do that, as this has been a pure quest for knowledge on my part. I wouldn't object if you nominated them, and I would contribute to whatever comes up therein, but I'm not currently inspired to nominate anything at any review process. I might have mentioned that my reason for making these lists, is because the history of these two monarchies is better understood through a picture of who was advising them. Before these get nominated to anything, a little work needs to be done in coordinating the Notes section on individuals between the lists. That is, if an individual appears on both privy council lists, their basic Notes section should be the same, with the only variance (if known) in their role under either monarch. Same with the cabinet minister lists. Does that make sense to you? That's what I've been working on now, coordinating the basic info on individuals. — Maile (talk) 12:28, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I think the cabinet ministers would be most significant ones to nominate when they are more standardized since they are the most significant political advisors to both monarchs. KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:09, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Website return
Hi Maile. Just wanted you to know that the Audie Murphy Website has finally come back up after 6 months of being out of commission. I checked some of the links in the main WP article and they all seem to be fine now. Good things come to those who wait....and wait! Roam41 (talk) 20:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
@KAVEBEAR: I'll have a look and see what needs to be done. You've done pretty good. I may have go through the sources on some of it, because it's been about a year since I did any of the research. — Maile (talk) 16:32, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
q
Hey, Maile -- this isn't relevant to the current discussion, but the admin(s) who ran on helping at dyk then discovered they didn't like it -- were those people who were already experienced at dyk? --valereee (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes, as a nominator of several articles, as I recall. My memory is that, upon exercising their admin tools at DYK, they became subjected to the toxic treatment, and after a few back-and-forths, decided to use their tools elsewhere. — Maile (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
To follow up -- I want to make sure I'm doing what I can to contribute to a solution with that. What do you think we need to be doing? What should I be watching for, and how should I be handling it? --valereee (talk) 14:52, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
I think you need more than my feedback on this, perhaps from whatever admins you work best with over there. Any behavior towards another editor that is Arbcom-worthy, or beyond, should not be allowed. WP:HARRASS should never be allowed, either toward an admin or anyone else. DYK is on a bit of a lull about the drama right now, but we should assume good faith for the work of the admin, not question their motives or abilities. We should do that with all contributors; but for sure, if you don't want admins to quit, we should AGF on their assistance at DYK. And when admins make a mistake ... assume it was nothing more than a well-intentioned error.— Maile (talk) 15:46, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true.
No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well M66. MarnetteD|Talk22:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
I put some miscellaneous administrator tasks in queue and you executed them for me within the hour. Thanks for performing the role of administrator and conducting oversight of sensitive functions. I feel encouraged in Wikipedia when I know that people like you are there to support what I am doing. Blue Rasberry (talk)12:52, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Hope you enjoy the Christmas eve with the ones you love and step into the new year with lots of happiness and good health. Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year!CAPTAIN RAJU(T)11:57, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Maile66: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 06:39, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Hey, happy holidays. Would you mind taking a review of Teriitaria II before the new year? I'm trying to wrap that up for this month. I technically have two supports (one technically without a formal review so IDK if that would count) and waiting on a third. KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:30, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
I noticed your response to my request for protection of LaShawn Daniels' wikipedia page. While I am well aware of the definition of a conflict of interest and do not need to look at the wikipedia page to learn what one is, I do wonder how it applies in this scenario. Wikipedia seems to have the upmost interest in being an encyclopedia that provides accurate information to the public. Part of that is allowing the public to edit different pages to provide their perspective/information. However, as an encyclopedia, the accuracy of information should be a priority. If I, as the executor of his estate, am in the best position to provide this information, while members of the public continue to provide false information, it seems that protecting this page in some capacity to prevent edit warring should be considered - regardless of whether a 'conflict of interest' is actually present. Okramber (talk) 03:13, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
I have noticed that there are certain celebrities and other high-profile individuals that have semi-protection and other sorts of protection levels on their wikipedia pages. Therefore, if restricting it to solely one individual is not possible, can wikipedia at least protect the page so that new members are not able to edit the LaShawn Daniels page to provide inaccurate/false information? Okramber (talk) 03:54, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
There is not enough recent activity to justify any protection on any level. I realize that this is important to you, but statistics indicate that this article is very low profile. The Page Views on LaShawn Daniels show less that 200 views on an average day. That's a very low count by Wikipedia standards. I am but one of many administrators, and you are welcome to take this beyond me, please. WP:ANI might find more explanation for you. — Maile (talk) 12:25, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
