One way to contact me is to edit this page and add a section at the bottom (click here to do that). If your topic concerns a particular Wikipedia article, please mention the article name. If you are commenting about a particular edit of mine, please try to clearly indicate which edit.Including a link to that edit, like this, works well for that.
To cause your edit to be signed and timestamped when you save it, please sign it with four tilde characters (like this: ~~~~). If you don't do any of this I'll probably be able to figure it out anyhow, but I would appreciate your trying to avoid making responding to you difficult for me.
I will generally respond on this page inside the section which has been added unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you leave me a message.
The following is not to be edited by others. It is a convenience for myself to track items I need to pay some attention to without being prompted by my watchlist.
22:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC) follow up on this and this-- possibly create article anout the "Natural Park"
Done 23:36, 5 December 2024 (UTC) Follow up on this
No action 00:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC) see ongoing discussion at [1]. Perhaps later, follow up on hu:Hősök temetője (Sopronbánfalva), mentioning [2]. Also perhaps follow up on disambig page Heroes' Cemetery re article naming and re sparseness there.
Done 10:45, 4 October 2023 (UTC) Follow up on proposal here.
Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.
Thanks for uploading File:Stardance Trilogy cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.
Following a request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria (P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.
Technical news
Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.
Arbitration
The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.
Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
Miscellaneous
Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
An article you recently created, Wilkins Coffee, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. PICKLEDICAE🥒 17:28, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.
Miscellaneous
The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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.
Following a talk page discussion, the Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.
Arbitration
Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
What error? I moved the article "Full Metal Jacket" to "Full Metal Jacket (movie)" so that page name can be redirected to the disambiguation page full metal jacket, which covers both spellings. Previously the movie article sat at "Full Metal Jacket" with "full metal jacket" redirecting to it. That is erronous since the name can refer to several things, especially the ammunition from which the movie got its name. Blockhaj (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this needs to be worked out by editorial consensus. I took a quick look at how the articles are currently disambiguated and it looks OK to me except that I would add
Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Checked. I just ref-ized a source citation already present, assuming good faith. It may or may not be verifiable, but I am not able to check that. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:44, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spanish-American War
Hi, I'm Hannahlouise5678 (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC). In the article - The Spanish-American War, you marked a citation as FV in the section - 'aftermath in acquired territories.' I've just double-checked the reference and quote, and it is referenced correctly.[reply]
Also, in your comment you mentioned POV OR, would you be able to comment further on which aspects of the edit that refers to, I would like to alter the section if it doesn't have neutrality. Thank you! Hannahlouise5678 (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thanks for pointing that out. Placing the fv tag was a clear error on my part; I've removed it. I had checked the source and I don't know how I missed seeing that the snippet quoted is in there. That quote states a 2008 characterization by the author of the source cited, Sam Erman. I don't recognize that name, but I'm not an academic. In any case, I don't know if his characterization is reliable enough to support framing it as fact that those words marked the legislation mentioned. That sort of thing is common in WP, but it seems POVish and ORish to me. I didn't do any research on this, but I suspect that there might be other published sources of comparable reliability and significance but with with differing viewpoints. Perhaps a bit of research is in order in the interests of WP:DUE. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.
Technical news
Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)
Arbitration
Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.
A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)
Arbitration
An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
Miscellaneous
Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited CIA activities in Laos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Air America.
Hi Wtmichell, see if you agree with my edit here. I believe your wording here was clear and corresponds to the intent of the statement. It was changed here, now it makes no sense as legality is a state of. Wjereas laws make provision for penalties, the legality of an act can at most make references to such attendant penalties.
[FWIIW, the account that made the change is blocked for disruptive editing]Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
As you can see in my edits, the "clarifying quotation" was retained in both cites as seen hereThe sovereignty of a State is co-extensive with its territorial limits — and here (quotation retained). What you did was introduce a citation error back into the article seen here (that I had fixed}, and duplicated the same ref again as seen here - ref 19 and here - ref 108 (that I had fixed} (with the same quotation you claimed I removed). In the future, please be more careful when reverting valid edits. Thanks.Isaidnoway(talk)23:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I walked thru the versions.
This one had a maint/error reading harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBautista2009.
In this one, you cleaned that up by re-using another cite.
I: clearly missed seeing that the quote at issue was present in the re-used cite. My error. However, on taking this fresh look at this, I question the appropriateness of that quotation in a citation asserting (in the other ref to that cite) that the date of the latest territorial change of the Philippines was 2012. Offhand, I think not -- but that is an entirely separate issue. I may bring that up separately on the article talk page. Thank you for your cleanup work, and I apologize for havig gotten in the way of that with a ham-handed edit. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any other articles are involved. I introduced all this complication long ago in an attempt to avoid having two separately-maintained tables that could bbe counted on to get out of sync. It's been a headache ever since. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
there are different ways to transclude sections, and they appear all the time on soccer tournament articles to maintain information to be in sync. Transclusion is my friend ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 05:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)
Open membership in this project to users who are at least 60 years of age and have made at least 50 edits in the past year.[b]
Open supporting membership in this project to users who are less than 60 years old but have made at least 50 edits in the past year and support the goals of this project.[c]
Suggested goals for this project:
To support collaboration and communication among members for the advancement and improvement of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement.
To encourage older people, retired people, and soon-to-be-retired people to participate in Wikipedia both for the advancement of the encyclopedia and for their own personal enjoyment.
To encourage older people to share their experience and expertise for the improvement of Wikipedia.
To encourage older users to use their experience and expertise to help younger and less experienced users.
To encourage participation in local and regional Wikimedia events.
To sponsor Wikipedia meetings and classes at places where older people gather.
To advocate for the elimination of ageism and sexism in Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement.
^This current minimum age limit of this project is 70 years. A minimum age limit of 60 years should permit the participation of most retired users. The minimum activity level of 50 edits per year is arbitrary. A minimum activity level indicates continued interest. Members who do not meet the minimum activity level shall be moved to inactive status. Members who have died shall be moved to memorial status.
^A new class of Supporting Members allows those users under 60 years to support the goals of the project. Users approaching the age of 60 years may wish to become supporting members in anticipation of reaching the minimum age limit for members.
Re: the text "granted independence on July 4, 1946 by the Treaty of Manila", MOS:YEAR shows that for mdy-formatted dates like involved here, "A comma follows the year unless other punctuation obviates it." AWB typos correct this accordingly, and anyone using AWB to fix typos will come across this and fix it again. To be clear, I'm not blaming AWB - I'm saying AWB is correct per guidelines and I take responsibility for the correct typo fix I made with it. This is not a big deal for the time-being, but I hope you will revert the revert. Stefen Towers among the rest!Gab • Gruntwerk16:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! I noticed that you've been active in editing some Philippine history related articles. I'm currently trying to gauge interest in reviving the old PH history taskforce and would like to invite you if you're interested. What do you think? Cheers NyanThousand (talk) 08:31, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. That is a major topical interest area for me, with focus on the 1896-1946 time period. I'm not currently interested in the mechanics of administrating or managing a task force, but please keep me in the loop. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
reference style
Just noted your recent clean up of Paracel Islands references into Havard style. Are you using the Havardb template rather than the more concise sfnp template (which I have never used myself but does same thing) because article style started using ref entities ? Just asking as someone more interest in geology than history and I know how to use sfn and efn correctly in a new article which most do not, and do not want to use sfn template shorthand wrongly. ChaseKiwi (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question directly -- yes; harv style shortened footnotes predate rp and sfnp in this article
WP generally tries to make life easy for users who use it as a resource. As a WP editor, I try to keep that in mind. Inconsistency in citation styles within an article introduces needless difficulties for users. I should probably have replaced the {{sfnp}}s with {{sfn}}s using the optional p= parameter, but I'm comfortable with {{harvnb}} and used that by habit. See here -- please do take a look at it.
Without trying to describe how it came to be this way, I'll note that inline parenthetical referencing was used early on in WP and became deprecated in favor of shortened footnotes. However. the {{rp}} template, which presents pageno information for a footnoted cite inline rather than in the footnote, survived that deprecation. At some point, {{sfn}} appeared. To an editor, sfn looks like harvnb except that it doesn't need to be wrapped in a Ref. Some time later, {{sfnp}} appeared, uses the inline style of rp to present the pageno info.Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As is apparent from my strikeouts above, I misunderstood sfnp -- I thought that I had looked at how one instance was rendered and seen the pageno inline in rp style. Apparently, my deconstructing the snmps into Ref'd harvnbs was not needed. I don't think it's a problem as it is now, so I won't change it back. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.
I have now investigated as far as possible for me lack of doi that you discovered at Territorial disputes in the South China Sea at Agusman article. The paper in the journal website is definite and the author seems to be a lawyer high up in Indonesian Foreign Ministry as well as holding academic posts so its not really an uncontaminated secondary source but could have been written and published with an eye of getting Indonesia's evolving position in print. I found an apparent pre-print of the article as well as the accepted version with minor content changes. I have also identified at least one other recent paper in journal where doi reported and not assigned example. Not sure how long is reasonable to wait for doi to be registered so not sure if best to remove the doi and add access-date to the url instead. ChaseKiwi (talk) 07:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and thanks for your work there. I am not an academic, and I have other personal circumstances that generally limit me to online access. It is not uncommon for me to be unable to access cited sources via doi links -- I don't know why, but I sometime3s add a url link to such cites if I am able to access a copy by online searching, as I did here. In this particular case, I know nothing about the potential intrest conflict indications you describe and have no competence to pursue that. All that aside, the doi link in the article ([10]), for me, navigates to a not-found notice on doi.org. I was able to locate an online-accessible copy of the article by searching, however, so I added a url link to that to the cite. I am also not legally trained, and my understanding of the legal technicalities here are those of an interested layman -- interested because I am a longtime resident of the Philippines. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:22, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.
Miscellaneous
Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
Just checking to see if you recall this edit [11] because it kind of appears that there may have been some unintentional changes. It looks like you edited an earlier version of the article than the current one. Dawnseeker200019:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I vaguely recall that edit but not the details that led to it. Thanks for calling it to my attention -- I'll try to take another look at it later today. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
continuing ... The edit summary of my 06:54, September 1 ecit was confusing and incomplete. I was probably innterrupted in mid-edit and rushed it out. I should not have done that -- my error. The edit inserted a sentence saying, "Dewey cabled Washington that he controlled the bay but would need 5,000 additional men to seize the city.", and that should have been done in a separate edit with a separate summary. The reason I inserted that sentence is a bit complicated and I'll try too explain it briefly here, but first I'll note that it is in the Subsequent action section, and that section is full of unsupported assertions somewhat related to this addition in that they do indicate that maintaining the blockade wasn't dead simple for Dewey. It's beyond this article's scope, but it is covered in other articles that the land forces would not begin arriving until the end of June. Dewey needed to do something to keep the Spanish forces here from focusing on him while he maintained the blockade during that period. What he did was to return Emilio Aguinaldo from exile in Hong Kong This is in scope for the Philippine Revolution article; that says: "Dewey cabled Washington, stating that although he controlled Manila Bay, he needed 5,000 additional men to seize Manila itself. The fleet remained in Manila Bay while reinforcements were sent from the United States.[89][90]" and goes on to describe Dewey bringing Aguinaldo to Manila. Some messy details related to this are in Hong Kong Junta § American involvement in the Philippines. Other articles also contain info about all of this and they all generally mention and wikilink this article, yet this article contains nothing about it. Supported mention of some of this should probably be added to the Subsequent action section, and those expected land forces are probably the only reason that Dewey needsd to hang around to maintain the blockade. There are probably sources that give details about this, but I haven't seen them (I'm limited to what I can find on the internet). Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
My proposal to make extensive changes to WikiProject Wikipedians aged 70 and older was a bust, primarily because many users felt that the term "Senior Wikipedian" implied a higher ranking Wikipedia membership. Therefore, I am making two less ambitious proposals:
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Accepting and following up from your comments about Hanni (singer) and observing a widespread problem in music artist pages and news sources with a multi-national background, I have written a section under Wikipedia:Nationalist editing regarding my understanding of WP:BLP, in particular, about making presumptions about citizenship and ethnicity in biographies. It deserves to be reviewed and refined by those with a long-term interest in Wikipedia policy, in particular someone who understands the legal complexities of citizenship. Travelmite (talk) 07:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
With all due respect to the revert of Natural-born-citizen clause (United States). How do we know that the mentioned December immediately followed the previously mentioned November date, and didn't happen one year later? What if someone took the December sentence and cited it in another article in Wikipedia or elsewhere? Without the year, it could be confusing or, worse yet, inaccurate. WP:DATE recommends always using the year for clarity. Would you please consider reverting your revert. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 01:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking. With equal respect, I disagree with that usage. It is common practice to say or to write something like "in [named month], [specified year[, [...]. In [later month in the same year], [...]." without repeating the year. Re your example, that would be an error and should be corrected by an editor noticing it, probably by specifying or otherwise indicating the differing year. If you disagree, please bring this up on the article talk page and/or the talk page of the relevant MOS page. I think that consensus would be with my view, but I could be wrong. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of the section is the Acquisition of Alaska. The map shows U.S. Territorial Acquisitions, including an inset in the lower left which shows the acquisition of Hawaii via annexation and the acquisition of Alaska via purchase from Russia. Your edit summary reverting my edit says as much: "Lower left shows acquisition of Alaska..." Yet you reverted to your original version that says "...showing the Alaskan acquisition in an inset in the upper right". The upper right inset does indeed show Alaska, and Hawaii, and the whole hemisphere including all of North America, but in a general way without any mention of acquisition.
It seems plain to me that the lower left inset shows the acquisition of Alaska (and Hawaii), whereas the upper right inset does not. What am I missing? Cheers! Captainllama (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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.
Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
Greetings and felicitations. I noticed that you reverted my edit to Spratly Islands with the comment "Reverted good faith edits by DocWatson42 (talk): Note 'islands'. See table in the Geographic and economic overview section." I'm afraid I don't understand your point. I changed the conversion from square kilometers to hectares because the latter are more analogous to acres. The table you mention and the summarizing sentence below it both use hectares, so I am confused, as well as why you stated "Note 'islands'". (BTW, "which edit.Including a link" in the first paragraph on this page is missing a space.) —DocWatson42 (talk) 03:58, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did this hurriedly because of the pressure of work outside of WP. I've taken a second quick look at it after seeing your message above and it still looks to me like there is a problem with your edit. Perhaps I am in too much of a rush and misunderstand; perhaps you misunderstand. I am writing this after having received notification of your comment here and taken a quick look at it. I simply don't have the time now to look and think carefully -- I will ask you to do that.
As I read your edit, it changed the area converted to acres from two square km to just two ha ha. That is a big change in the area being converted. I read your edit as an assertion that the total area of all of the Spratly islands is just 2 ha, not 2 square km -- perhaps I am confused and/or misread it. I have not taken the time to take a look at what the article or supporting sources say is the total area of all of the Spratlys I will try to look back at this when I have more time -- perhaps tomorrow my time here in the Philippines. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize—I was the one who was confused. I was thinking that the first figure was the second—that the conversion was acres to square kilometers, not the reverse. I ask that you change the acres to square miles instead. —DocWatson42 (talk) 00:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No apololgy needed, but I'm not going to do that because most of the world uses the metric system (see here) and the article concerns a part of the world where surrounding countries and countries with an interest are, except for the faraway but somewhat interested U.S., pretty much all metric. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:58, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me—I meant change the acres as it stands to square miles. I.e., square kilometers to square miles, since square miles, not acres are the closest analog to square kilometers. —DocWatson42 (talk) 02:01, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the spirit of my argument above I was about to argue against that and convert to km2 instead of to acres where that's an issue in the article, but I see that {{Infobox islands}} converts from metric to imperial units (ha to acre or km2 to sqmi) behind the scenes. So, the choice seems to be leave it as-is (acres) or change area_ha=200 to area_km2=2 in the infobox and cnange the article conversions from acres to sqmi. I'll defer to your judgement -- do what you think best. Wtmitchell(talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
.svg){kind=link}