User talk:Tavix/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tavix. 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.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

A rarity

I have no clue if this is the sort of thing that interests you, but I found it pretty nifty: You are the first person in RfD history (Log/ era · Redirect_Archives/ era) to use "harden" as a boldfaced proposed outcome. I guess it's not often that it would come up, but still, not every day you see a new proposed outcome at RfD. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 19:30, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not at all surprised given the fact that soft redirects aren't supposed to be used in mainspace, and they're fairly niche to begin with, but that is a nice little nugget of knowledge. To be fair, it's not that rare for a soft redirect to a sister project (usually Wiktionary) to be hardened as a redirect to a local page, but in that situation you would just use the word "retarget". To use "harden" as the action, you'd have to like the current target, but not like the softness. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:40, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

"🙏" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 🙏. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 3#🙏 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 142.161.113.242 (talk) 04:06, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Persian Sea Rfd

Just for your information since you closed out the long-winded and complicated Persian Sea Rfd. I had my vote ready after reading through it 3 or 4 times. But was a bit late. However I added the comments at the bottom of the Rfd. Jay ^(Talk) 17:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I will back out and relist it with your !vote. I do think disambiguation is an intriguing option, I just didn't quite see enough support to justify it. Maybe more discussion will make things clearer... -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

2031 Atlantic hurricane season

See also: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 19 § 2031 Atlantic hurricane season

Hi Tavix, I got your message in my talk page and I do support you guys to delete the redirects for the 2027 through 2031 Atlantic hurricane seasons and I added my response on the talk page about it, I was not thinking at the time and I should've known it was too soon to create those I'm sorry, also I support you guys to delete the 2027 through 2031 Pacific hurricane season redirects also that was the main reason why I created the Atlantic redirects because someone else created redirects to those once again I'm sorry. Wikihelp7586 (Talk) 01:03, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

It seems you saw the other redirects and assumed that because they existed they were desirable redirects, instead of asking yourself if those other redirects actually should exist in the first place. It's easy to take what one comes across on Wikipedia at face value, but it seems you have found out that isn't always the case. There's no need to be sorry about it, it's impossible for everything one creates to stick in one way or another! Just pick yourself up and keep on improving Wikipedia for the better. Happy editing! -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:26, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	I feel like a thank would not give adequate credit to the wit of this edit summary. A once-a-year-opportunity, and you got it, even if it required closing my mess of an RfD. (I also chuckled at the "-1 votes" observation in that close.) -- Tamzin^[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:46, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Well it was just enough wit for TheresNoTime then... 😜 As Ivanvector says, RfD is a silly place (yes, I still have my RFA memorized 5 years later), and the best way to diffuse a tough call is with a little bit of humor, so I'm glad you liked it. That's probably going to be the highlight of my wiki-standup routine though. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Bullet points

Very well. It's your post, so be different. GoodDay (talk) 19:12, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Nominations at RfD are always not bullet pointed. There is nothing "different" about that. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:14, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

You didn't have to delete my post, though. GoodDay (talk) 19:15, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

It gives you an opportunity to contribute without disrupting my nomination, which I see you took advantage of. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:17, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Revert notifications

I'm not complaining about your edits re the State of Takasago RfD, but you reverted/undid three of my edits (22 October, 22 November and Log) however I only got a notification for the first of these. I was wondering whether you had any idea why that was? Thryduulf (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

I only hit the undo button once. There were intervening edits for the other two so the revert was done manually. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:25, 22 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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Nominating for deletion

Hi Tavix, can you nominate these needless redirects similar to Maiorano (surname) for deletion please? As I'm an IP:

• Maiorana (surname)+talk
  Majorana (disambiguation)
  Majorana (surname)+talk
  Talk:Maiorana
  Talk:Maiorano -- 2A02:C7F:38FC:A300:B451:5FD5:AC52:29A3 (talk) 09:23, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

IPs are allowed to nominate redirects, see WP:RFDHOWTO for instructions. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:36, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

10 gauge

Sorry about that. Somehow I didn't notice that your proposal was the same as the nom's. Would it be safe to revert the relist and close the discussion? CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:33, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Sure, it would be safe to do that, but I don't think it will matter too much either way so I'll leave it up to you. I just didn't want credit for that idea, which was why I left the comment. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Yep, I guess it would be best. Considering that a third relist really doesn't make any sense, especially after re-reading the nom's proposal; and I honestly should've double-checked before relisting. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Darul Huda Islamic University

If the result of WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 17#Darul Huda Islamic University and DHIU is keep, doesn't it mean Darul Huda Islamic University should be kept redirected to Darul Huda Islamic Academy, because the keep votes were for that? But the state of closure is that Darul Huda Islamic University has become an article with Darul Huda Islamic Academy targetting it. Jay (talk) 05:48, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

That is due to a name change of the article during the course of the discussion. Given the !votes were that "University" is the official/common name of the institution, I did not see the RfD in conflict with that move. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:41, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and added an explanation to my closure to note the page moves. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:32, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Couple of redirects

Hello, Tavix! Can you undelete Turňa & Turna (disambiguation)? They are supposed to rdr. to Turna (not Turnaa) but the bot had not yet had time to fix the double rdr. after I reverted a bad move. Rgds. --Bison X (talk) 23:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

....Never mind! Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 23:03, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I noticed they were misdeleted but I had gotten caught up in replying to a couple talk page messages first. Thanks for your diligence! -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Tavix!

Happy New Year!

Tavix,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 14:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A token of thanks Hi Tavix! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Hello Tavix: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Sulla's civil wars

While you did not favour deletion of redirects of Sulla's civil wars at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 9#Sulla's First Civil War, you also did not agree or disagree with the nom's response where they refuted your broad definition angle, and said that twelve years need not be a factor when it comes to uncovering a mistake. I bring this up because the nom has contested my close of No consensus, and it is your vote that has come in between the Delete and No consensus outcome. Jay (talk) 08:56, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I still do not support deletion of those redirects, and I have no interest in relitigating the matter. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete a redirect page

Hi, Tavix!

How can I delete or removed a redirect page without replacing with a new article on wikipedia? I just wanna trying but they can't remove that redirect page that some of users have already created or changed target redirect page itself.

I hope that you'll helped for this message. Thanks and God bless you! Jemzkie95 (talk) 11:39, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jemzkie95: it looks like you are referring to DYMX-FM. You tried to use the WP:PROD process, which does not apply to redirects. Additionally, it seems that deleting that redirect would be controversial because IAmChaos has stated that it seems to be appropriate redirect. So now your only avenue to get that page deleted would be to nominate it at WP:RFD. I don't understand why you would want to delete that page though. DYMX-FM looks like a valid alternative name for DYMX. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:50, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Isso, Itlay

hi, is there a more correct template to purpose a deletion of this redirect? the main page is 'Isso, Lombardy' and there are no links to 'Isso, Itlay' so this redirect is pointless. 151.21.81.213 (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you may do so by filing a request at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. See WP:RFDHOWTO for instructions on how to do so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Live PD map

Template:Live PD map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 21:48, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Live PD timeline

Template:Live PD timeline has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 21:48, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Southern League teams

Template:Southern League teams has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 14:18, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

User:RomanceLove88

• I don't want to say it on RL88's page, lest I add insult to injury, but was wondering if you were aware of all these, which are from farther back than the Special:Nuke threshold. -- Tamzin^[cetacean needed] (she/they) 20:52, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

No, I hadn't gotten that far yet. I guess I can put together a d-batch for the rest. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:01, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Hello, Tavix,

I'm just wondering why you did a mass delete when this editor is not blocked and has never been blocked before. What prompted this drastic action? Liz ^Read! Talk! 22:36, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I've explained at RomanceLove88's talk page. In short, RomanceLove88 was warned several times about their redirect creations, but they continued creating them anyway. I do not think a block would be necessary given a promise "to never doing that again". Furthermore, a mass delete may be the wake up call that everyone has been trying to convey so blocking them on top of that seems to be a bit too much. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:43, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I am not editing redirect to MCU and Mii. RomanceLove88 (talk) 07:58, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

And as well you deleted my correct redirect why did you do that? RomanceLove88 (talk) 07:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

You see this edit summary when recreated right now, if the redirect pages are correct. RomanceLove88 (talk) 07:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

But i was wrong doing redirect previously, just give me a chance. RomanceLove88 (talk) 08:33, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• It looks like this has been taken care of. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:48, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Priorxfd

Template:Priorxfd has been nominated for merging with Template:Old RfD list. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 2pou (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Wandlore (Harry Potter)

Hey Tavix. Seen you've been around lately so ... if you got a sec, think you could respond to the edit request on Talk:Wandlore (Harry Potter)? If not, that's cool ... one of those situations with a fully protected redirect has been tagged for RFD, so the challenge is getting the redirect itself tagged. 😅 Steel1943 (talk) 14:40, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 15:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
  • You're welcome! I went ahead and removed the protection, whatever reason this needed protecting back in 2007 is no longer relevant. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Backlinks after deletion

Hi, I noticed you deleted CAT:WANIE etc but did not remove red links to the deleted redirects from the target page Category:Articles with topics of unclear notability. If you normally check and follow up links but just overlooked it on this occasion, please forgive my interruption. Otherwise, I hope this is a helpful reminder. – Fayenatic London 10:07, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Hmm, I must have just missed it because I remember noticing User:Thryduulf/3 character prefixes as one of the links. I was curious about that list and clicked into it and I guess I got distracted and forgot to go back and finish the check. On a related note, I'm shocked those shortcuts were still being advertised so many years after the page was renamed! -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Dunes of the United Arab Emirates

A tag has been placed on Category:Dunes of the United Arab Emirates indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^Read! Talk! 04:28, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

• This category is empty due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bani Fasan (2nd nomination). -- Tavix ^(talk) 11:36, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hmm...

I wonder who read whose mind. 😂 Steel1943 (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

• I guess RfD etiquette tingles both of our spidey senses the same way! -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:50, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Communist holocaust (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Communist holocaust (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know. I went ahead and G7'd it, we decided to go a different route with that one. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:45, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 April 8

Hello, Tavix,

Thank you for closing that deletion review case. It was a painful experience. Even though my deletion decision was overturned, I learned something from the review that will assist me with my admin tasks in the future. I don't think I have encountered any similar situations to those two, where an editor created a page through a page move and someone then turned the redirect into an article that the page mover later on, came back to and tagged for CSD G7 deletion. That's not a typical scenario one comes across when patrolling CSD categories. But should I encounter this situation again, I will act differently. Thanks again. Liz ^Read! Talk! 23:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I did see that you got more than your fair share of "talking to" about it. Perhaps a good way of looking at redirects like these: it's important to not consider the page mover as the "author" of the redirect. The author was whoever titled the article that way previously! It could be the same editor, but not usually. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arthur_Harley_(2nd_nomination)#Arthur_Harley

Hello. You suggested in the talk that I had somehow conflicted with WP:DABMENTION. I haven't ever seen this article and my username doesn't appear in the page's edit history. May I ask how I had accidentally conflicted with DABMENTION? Sorry I was too late to the discussion to help. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 15:09, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I think I found it. Yikes, that was a long time ago!!! I had completely forgotten that I had changed that Wikipedia policy. I was much more active in Wikipedia at that time. I had removed a thousand disambiguation page redlinks such as this one, where every student who suddenly had Internet access in class and was going to grow up to change the world, preemptively added themselves to the disambiguation page while still in eighth grade. I added that to the policy manual so I had something to point to when people did that, and I believed it to be a relatively uncontroversial change. I don't believe it's a conflict with DABMENTION at all; if for example a competitor in the Olympics is mentioned in the article about the 2064 Summer Games but isn't notable enough to have their own article, I absolutely agree that they should be in the DAB page. But the DAB page still shouldn't attempt to mention every Thomas Jones in the world. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 15:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Replying to myself again. I discovered that the language that I added to the page is still there.

My text:

Likewise, disambiguation pages (such as John Smith) are not intended to be complete listings of every person in the world named John Smith — just the notable ones.

From the current page:

Disambiguation pages (such as John Smith) are not intended to be complete listings of every person named John Smith—just the notable ones.

So the text that I added in 2014 is (mostly) still there and intact. Seems like that policy statement has survived quite a while, and I think it's for good reason.

Do you need any further clarification from me? Does this seem to be a conflict with WP:DABMENTION to you? Please let me know, I'm genuinely trying to assist here. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 01:19, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I'm having a conversation all by myself here and I realize that's not good form. Apologies in advance, perhaps I should have researched better before saying anything.

For the record, I agree with User:BilledMammal where he says, "MOS:DABMENTION (a guideline) and NOTDIRECTORY (a policy) are not in conflict, When a topic doesn't warrant its own article but is notable, as not all notable topics warrant their own article. it can be mentioned in dab pages per DABMENTION, but when it is not notable it can not, per NOTDIRECTORY." I truly think that's the last word on the subject. You can be WP:N enough for mention in an article and inclusion in a DAB page, but not WP:N enough for your own article. Thanks for your time, let me know if there's anything else I can help clarify? J^♯m (talk | contribs) 01:23, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

• I'm terribly sorry that I don't have the time to give this a proper response, but the follow-up discussion is taking place at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Recent correction to Simple Lists. You are more than welcome to contribute there. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

List of constitutions of Spain

Hello, Tavix,

I'm not sure why you deleted this 19 year old article based on one edit of a sockpuppet to it. I only stumbled upon it because its deletion left a lot of broken redirects that I usually clean up after. Those mass deletion tools are powerful so it's best to be careful! Hope you are having a good weekend! Liz ^Read! Talk! 22:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

It looks like List of constitutions of Costa Rica was another casualty but I think I know what happened here. The sockpuppet moved these pages around and when they were returned to their original location, I think it appeared as though the redirects to those pages were created by the sockpuppet. Some of our powerful deletion tools, like Twinkle, delete redirects of deleted articles so if whatever tool you used might have seen the valid articles as redirects of the pages created by the sockpuppet, they might have been deleted as redirects to deleted redirects even though they were articles, not actually redirects. Seem like a plausible explanation? We might mention this glitch to whomever tends to the deletion tools. Liz ^Read! Talk! 22:20, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hmm, that is a really weird glitch. I saw there were some back and forth page moves so I wanted to make sure there weren't any page moves listed in the nuke, and the ones I checked weren't so I went ahead with it. I'm going to go through all the pages I deleted individually now! There shouldn't be anything page move-related in the nuke tool... -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Succession to the non-UK commonwealth thrones

Howdy. Concerning the retargeting from the Succession to the British throne page. Why did you leave out 'two' (Australia & Solomon Islands thrones) of the 14? GoodDay (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Those two were included with keep where no specific section exists. That language was due to Thryduulf's preference to keep unless there were "more detailed articles/sections". Otherwise I could have gone along with Patar knight's suggestion completely due to no opposition, with the one exception where Jay explicitly wanted Solomon Islands kept. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:08, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thing is, it makes Australia & Solomon Islands look as though they don't have their own thrones, when 'now' compared to the other 12 non-UK realms. A redirect to the Monarchy of Australia & Monarchy of the Solomon Islands would help fix that misconception. Succession sections in those pages can be created at a later date, to direct to. GoodDay (talk) 17:11, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I disagree that there would be such a misconception because of two redirects pointing in a different location, but the best thing to do would be to create those sections so the redirects have a proper landing point. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Would you object, if I redirected them to their respective monarchy pages, in the interim? GoodDay (talk) 17:17, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

There was explicit objection in the discussion against doing that. Create the sections first, and then you can retarget there. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:20, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I'll get around to creating those sections. Will wait awhile though, as one (possibly two) editor might object to current & future changes, at the Australian & Canadian monarchy pages. GoodDay (talk) 20:12, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Peter Ormond: beat me to it :) GoodDay (talk) 06:37, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Captain Fate

I don't understand the removal of Captain Fate information. There is zero info about the character on the Captain Britain and MI13 page, just that he appeared in a single storyline. It's it that I hadn't gotten around to adding issue references yet? Nickpheas (talk) 10:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I never removed any information. The only thing I did was retarget the redirect to Captain Britain and MI13 as a result of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 22#Captain Fate. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Closer's Barnstar
		Thanks for the close on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 14#Unnmentioned examples of greetings. It seemed like a lot was going on there, but you captured consensus really nicely in the close. The merge compromise into Greetings was a particularly nice touch. Cheers! TartarTorte 15:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, TartarTorte! Also thanks for your suggestion which gave the content needed to fill in an obvious hole quite nicely at the Greeting article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:43, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}}

Donner60 (talk) 23:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Tavix!

Happy New Year!

Tavix,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See this for background context.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 17:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 17:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)