User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 32
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Muboshgu. 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 25 | ← | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We'd like to invite you to participate in a user study closely related to SuggestBot. User:Another Article is seeking to understand more about the workflow and time commitment of contributors to the English Wikipedia. As part of this study you will occasionally be prompted to answer questions about your editing activity, and these questions should never take more than a minute or two to complete. The intended length of the study is two weeks, but your actual time commitment is totally up to you. If you would like to see more details you can read the project proposal at Research:Measuring editor time commitment and workflow (on meta), but if you are feeling bold and would like just like to sign up right now you can add the line importScript("User:Another_Article/workflowstudyclient.js"); to your common.js. Contact User:Another Article if you have any questions about this study!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Pete Frates for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pete Frates is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pete Frates until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 23:34, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Baseball final appearance date
Hi, I noticed a lot of revisions on David Ortiz pertaining to his final MLB appearance date. I spent a lot of time searching through Infobox templates and MoS's, but I couldn't find anything pertaining to the last MLB appearance being regular season (in my opinion, since I can't find anything saying otherwise, final MLB appearance would be just that, the final appearance, regular or postseason included). Do you happen to know where this information is so I can make sure I get it right? Thanks, Garchy (talk) 15:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu: This discussion has commenced - you can comment here - Garchy (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 October 2016
- News and notes: Fundraising, flora and fauna
- Discussion report: Cultivating leadership: Wikimedia Foundation seeks input
- Technology report: Upcoming tech projects for 2017
- Featured content: Variety is the spice of life
- Traffic report: Debates and escapes
- Recent research: A 2011 study resurfaces in a media report
1RR Reminder
Reminder that Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 is under WP:1RR. I was going to revert that editor. Might want to self revert and let me revert it. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:37, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
- Oh poop, totally forgot. 21 more days... – Muboshgu (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
DYK for David Kustoff
On 19 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article David Kustoff, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that as a United States Attorney, David Kustoff prosecuted John Ford following his arrest in Operation Tennessee Waltz? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/David Kustoff. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, David Kustoff), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Veteran Wordsmith Needed. Can you drop in to Rizzo's talk page. This video shows a rare and special moment in Rizzo's early career that deserves mention in his article. Buster Seven Talk 13:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- His conversation with Angel Hernandez? I'm not sure it deserves mention. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I admit I'm biased. Rizzo is my favorite Cub. I just think it shows what a classy professional and person he is. How often do you see a pro apologize to an Ump. Ever? It's a better example to kids then some of the POTUS candidates. His 2016 thread is just so bare.. :~)... Buster Seven Talk 17:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I see. Problem is, apologizing to an ump in and of itself isn't such a big thing, and writing it up would turn into a WP:SYNTH problem, as we'd be interpreting a primary source. It'd be better if you could find an interview or article about Rizzo that goes into his personality. Surely the Chicago Tribune has written such a piece? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I admit I'm biased. Rizzo is my favorite Cub. I just think it shows what a classy professional and person he is. How often do you see a pro apologize to an Ump. Ever? It's a better example to kids then some of the POTUS candidates. His 2016 thread is just so bare.. :~)... Buster Seven Talk 17:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kris Johnson
Why were the comments made by Johnson on winning the Sawamura Award deleted?Cynikles (talk) 02:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Cynikles: His quote struck me as WP:UNDUE. We just stick with the facts, and he didn't say anything particularly noteworthy. I should have said so in my edit summary. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. Appreciate your time. Cynikles (talk) 03:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Muboshgu gets zip recognition
Muboshgu lacks recognition from google scholar or from any national or regional scholarly organization., so don't comnpare yourself to establized scholars with many highly praised books. Rjensen (talk) 00:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- My real name brings up hits in Google Scholar, and that has nothing to do with notability of a subject. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- your real name is your little secret that no one is allowed to mention or speculate about [outing rule] --so you are a zero here and should not be making such claims about yourself to evaluate actual professors wro sign their books with a real name. Rjensen (talk) 06:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- That is so ridiculous I don't know where to start, other than to say that you should know that it's the community of mostly anonymous users here who determine issues like notability via consensus. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- You can start by looking at your own edit summary: 23:34, 26 October 2016 (diff | hist) . . (+69) . . Junius P. Rodriguez (Undid revision 746362617 by Rjensen (talk) Google Scholar hits do not provide notability, otherwise I might have a page. That's the sort of ridiculous false boasting that claims your decisions are based on your own secret idenity. Rjensen (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- Nope, it's based on WP:GNG and WP:NACADEMIC, which offers cautions about Google Scholar hits. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- You can start by looking at your own edit summary: 23:34, 26 October 2016 (diff | hist) . . (+69) . . Junius P. Rodriguez (Undid revision 746362617 by Rjensen (talk) Google Scholar hits do not provide notability, otherwise I might have a page. That's the sort of ridiculous false boasting that claims your decisions are based on your own secret idenity. Rjensen (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- That is so ridiculous I don't know where to start, other than to say that you should know that it's the community of mostly anonymous users here who determine issues like notability via consensus. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- your real name is your little secret that no one is allowed to mention or speculate about [outing rule] --so you are a zero here and should not be making such claims about yourself to evaluate actual professors wro sign their books with a real name. Rjensen (talk) 06:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Game 4
I'm not very good at scorekeeping, I just noticed no one was at first, if you don't mind taking over 
- Mlpearc (open channel) 00:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup 2016 November newsletter: Final results
The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:
- First Place -
Cas Liber (submissions) - Second Place -
MPJ-DK (submissions) - Third Place -
Adam Cuerden (submissions)
In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:
- Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a three-way tie with themselves for two FAs in each of R2, R3, and R5).
- Good Article – MPJ-DK had 14 GAs promoted in R3.
- Featured List –
Calvin999 (submissions) produced 2 FLs in R2 - Featured Pictures – Adam Cuerden restored 18 images to FP status in R4.
- Featured Portal –
SSTflyer (submissions) produced the only FPO of the Cup in R2. - Featured Topic –
Cyclonebiskit (submissions) and Calvin were each responsible for one FT in R3 and R2, respectively. - Good Topic – MPJ-DK created a GT with 9 GAs in R5.
- Did You Know – MPJ-DK put 53 DYKs on the main page in R4.
- In The News –
Dharmadhyaksha (submissions) and 
Muboshgu (submissions), each with 5 ITN, both in R4. - Good Article Review – MPJ-DK completed 61 GARs in R2.
Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email)
WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
 Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time. The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:38, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time. The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Kim Foxx
I was wondering why you redirected the Kim Foxx article to that of the opponent she defeated over six months ago. I think its better to delete the article rather than redirect it to her former opponent. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 04:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
- It's a reasonable place to find information on Foxx, until a page can be created. That would be the best option, as long as sourcing merits it. She'll meet WP:POLITICIAN after November 8. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:20, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 November 2016
- In the media: Washington Post continues in-depth Wikipedia coverage
- Wikicup: WikiCup winners
- Discussion report: What's on your tech wishlist for the coming year?
- Technology report: New guideline for technical collaboration; citation templates now flag open access content
- Featured content: Cream of the crop
- Traffic report: Un-presidential politics
- Arbitration report: Recapping October's activities
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 6 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Vicente González (politician) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks
The World Series may not have went my way, but Andrew Miller has been a joy to watch play, so thanks for letting us have him. Yeah we gave up a lot, but I'm entirely fine with it. Wizardman 00:24, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- Miller is fun to watch. I was sad to see him traded, but I can't say no to Frazier, Sheffield, and the two relief pitchers. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
|
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Thread header on Talk:Hillary Clinton
Regarding this, WP:TPO says Because threads are shared by multiple editors (regardless how many have posted so far), no one, including the original poster, "owns" a talk page discussion or its heading. It is generally acceptable to change headings when a better heading is appropriate, e.g., one more descriptive of the content of the discussion or the issue discussed, less one-sided, more appropriate for accessibility reasons, etc.
Linguist If you reply here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to your message 18:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Your input requested on Washington state cannabis article
Please see here: Talk:Washington_Initiative_502#Rename_to_Cannabis_in_Washington_.28state.29_or_split_off.2C_or_what.3F
Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:03, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Governors-elect, etc.
I'm not in the mood to edit war with you. Therefore, I'll let others deal with your determination to have it your way. GoodDay (talk) 03:14, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- My way? It's the accurate way. Just like it's "President-elect of the United States" and not "President of the United States elect", it's "Governor-elect of Whatever State". – Muboshgu (talk) 03:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- Then why didn't you make those changes for all the infoboxes of the incoming state governors & lieutenant governors? GoodDay (talk) 03:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- There are others that aren't fixed? I will. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:51, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- Then why didn't you make those changes for all the infoboxes of the incoming state governors & lieutenant governors? GoodDay (talk) 03:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Omar Vizquel edit
I made a recent edit to Omar Vizquel as a result of an OTRS email. I have asked for permission to share more details, if necessary.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:37, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
- Can I get any more information on this? Like, for instance, the request? I'm concerned by your edit because it seems to remove too much information that is valid and reliably sourced. I get the privacy concerns, but he's a public figure. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
- I sent an email with more details.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:18, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Stephanie Murphy
Hello! Your submission of Stephanie Murphy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Didn't he change his number to 72 [1]? Cynko (talk)
- I looked at it after and self-reverted. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Dateret
Hi there,
I pointed to the talk page [archive] in my Khizr and Ghazala Khan revert edit summary, but it's probably simpler to just leave a message since it's not like there was an RfC or somesuch. Basically, my position is that living in the United States (or even being born in the United States) doesn't equate to the "strong national ties" mentioned in WP:DATERET. My own preference, especially for references, is dmy (aside: I'm an American who prefers dmy for its efficiency, less one comma, and the aesthetics of two numbers separated by a word), hence why the article started with dmy. The question of what constitutes "strong national ties" is not one that has clear answers, as far as I can tell, but it's true that with the subject's involvement in the U.S. political process, there's a decent case to be made. So I've become a bit more sympathetic to thet argument since the last time it came up (likely in part due to the article becoming less heated). Perhaps there's a compromise to be made whereby the citations use dmy but the text uses mdy? That seems like it may be contrary to the MOS emphasis on consistency, but meh. What are your thoughts on the "strong national ties" question? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Rhododendrites: My thought on the "strong national ties" for the Khans is that they came to relevance in the U.S. presidential election, their son died in service of the U.S. Army, meaning their ties for notability purposes is clearly U.S. I understand why many use dmy over mdy, though. Having the text and refs use different formats would indeed violate MOS, it has to be one or the other. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah.. I was sort of talking myself out of it while leaving the message above. Starting to feel like I'm calling WP:DATERET based solely on my own preference in the face of reasonable arguments, so I've gone ahead and reverted myself. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:12, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 19 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:
- On the Minnesota Twins minor league players page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
- On the Kansas City Royals minor league players page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Muboshgu. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Hope Hicks for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hope Hicks is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hope Hicks until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tataral (talk) 05:06, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Josh Reddick HOUSTON ASTROS
Can you restore my edits now, please? I will be waiting and watching. If you can take them down, you can put them back up. And, I fully expect you to do so. Thank you, kindly. Loose Cannon57 (talk) 16:23, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Loose Cannon57: Sure, since the deal has only now become official. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:42, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 November 2016
- News and notes: Arbitration Committee elections commence
- Featured content: Featured mix
- Special report: Taking stock of the Good Article backlog
- Traffic report: President-elect Trump
Your GA nomination of José Fernández (pitcher)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article José Fernández (pitcher) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 14:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of José Fernández (pitcher)
The article José Fernández (pitcher) you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:José Fernández (pitcher) for comments about the article. Well done! 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. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 18:21, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
NRI in Navbox
Never say "Never". NRIs were in the Blue Jays roster navbox in February. Personally, I wondered if it was a change in the rules.Cpfan776 (talk) 21:47, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Cpfan776: I should rephrase then, to say we have never done it on the other 29 roster navboxes. I'd have to look for the discussion in the archives, but I believe it came down to "they aren't on the roster, so they shouldn't have the roster navbox on their page". – Muboshgu (talk) 22:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Template editor granted
Your account has been granted the "templateeditor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit editnotices. Before you use this user right, please read Wikipedia:Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation.
You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edinotices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established. If you are willing to process edit requests on templates and modules, keep in mind that you are taking responsibility to ensure the edits have consensus and are technically sound.
This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.
If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
- Useful links
- All template-protected pages
- User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable – outstanding template-protected edit requests (bot-generated)
- Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection
Happy template editing! — xaosflux Talk 23:22, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Muboshgu, I don't see any point in calling for a reviewer while the QPQ review is still outstanding over three weeks after nomination. I'm happy to add it to the list of old, unreviewed nominations once you've supplied the QPQ. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:02, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: I totally forgot about that. I need to get better at doing the QPQs when I submit a nomination. I'll try to do that from now on. QPQ is done. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Muboshgu, please don't forget to mention all the criteria; in particular, neutrality and copyvio/close paraphrasing need to be checked and commented on. (There's currently an enormous controversy on the DYK talk page about giving credit to a review that omitted the copyvio check.) Just because it's a GA does not mean that the GA reviewer did a proper copyvio check; as recently as late last month, a DYK that had become a GA was found to have significant copyvio, and the GA is being reassessed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:55, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:41, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
4th Annual GA Cup - Round 1
Greetings, GA Cup competitors! November 28, 2016 was supposed to mark the end of the first round. However, we needed 16 competitors to move on, and currently only 10 have completed articles. Thus, the judges have come together to let the participants decide what we shall do. Please complete this quick survey to let us know whether you would like a holiday break. There will be two options for what we will do next in terms of Round 2 depending on the results of this poll.
We apologize for sending out this newsletter late. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase! To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Infobox
I recommend you open up a discussion concerning all Governors-elect, Lieutenant Governors-elect & Senators-elect infoboxes. Otherwise, these disputes will likely continue for another 4-6 weeks. GoodDay (talk) 21:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Infobox
We may have to keep an eye on Bill Walker (American politician), as an editor keeps removing the 11th per argument that Walker is the 13th governor. The person is apparently not realizing that Alaska numbers its governors via individual only & thus doesn't multiple number governors who serve non-consecutive terms. GoodDay (talk) 02:28, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- @GoodDay: I will keep a closer eye on it. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:03, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- @GoodDay: Um, no, but nice try. This article published by a reliable, third-party source, which was referenced in each edit summary, contends otherwise and expressly calls out the credibility of the specific claim GoodDay and other editors are making more than once. KTVA's news department is not a blog, they employ news editors just like anything else we deem an RS. It should stand to reason that if these editors felt that there were factual accuracy issues or if Wikipedia were unnecessarily disparaged in stating this, it would have never seen the light of day. The fact that this claim is called into question twice within such a short span of text should also be given weight. The reason this was published was due to other media outlets in Alaska calling Walker the 13th governor in the month between his election and his swearing-in to office. Furthermore, the last two editions of the Alaska Blue Book (which was published by the Alaska State Library for twenty years and discontinued when the state launched its website) and both editions of Alaska A to Z (a short-lived spinoff of The Alaska Almanac, which has had roughly three dozen editions published over the past forty years), all published under editorial control, list Wally Hickel as the second and eighth governor. So what are you going to believe, these reliable, third-party sources, or the now-unverifiable primary source that Golbez added to List of Governors of Alaska six years ago, which essentially amounted to Sean Parnell calling himself the 10th governor regardless of what other sources may have had to say? See WP:NPOV/N#Byron Mallott for comparison. Why would anyone think it appropriate to promulgate WP:OR such as this, based on such blatant cherry-picking of particular facts or particular sources, regarding topics where an abundance of sources exist? Golbez has revealed themselves to be very fond of this tactic over the years. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Stephanie Murphy
On 6 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stephanie Murphy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that U.S. Representative-elect Stephanie Murphy and her family left Vietnam when she was six months old, and were rescued by the U.S. Navy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stephanie Murphy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stephanie Murphy), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thanks for creating Unsuccessful nominations to the Cabinet of the United States! MB298 (talk) 03:20, 6 December 2016 (UTC) |
barnstar
|
WikiProject North America Barnstar | |
| for the incredibly thorough and important article Unsuccessful nominations to the Cabinet of the United States "Bulletproof" LavaBaron (Survivor of 4 DYK TBAN Attempts) (talk) 10:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC) |
ITN recognition for Joe McKnight
On 6 December 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Joe McKnight, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Mark Melancon
Why did you previously undo my edits on Mark Melancon's page with no explanation? Jordandlee (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2016 (UTC) Jordandlee (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Jordandlee: The explanation was right on the top of the page. At the time, information on Melancon's signing was based on anonymous sources, unconfirmed by him or the team, and these initial reports can be unreliable. In this case, it was accurate, but we didn't know that at the time. Please see WP:CRYSTAL. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@Muboshgu: I did not change his page until the MLB had announced that he was "officially signed".
- @Jordandlee: I'm not sure that you're right about that, but I may be wrong. Anyway, you didn't provide a source with your edit indicating that the deal was officially completed. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Edit War on Mitch Moreland
He was signed onto the Boston Red Sox a few hours before the edit war. Please don't revert it again, I'm adding better sources than the last few edits. Adotchar| reply here 22:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Adotchar: No, he's still not signed. The Red Sox have a full 40-man roster and have to remove someone before he can be signed. Plus, there's no word that he's passed a physical. It's not an "edit war" when it's removing incorrect information. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Adotchar: Actually I take that back, because it turns out the deal was just finalized an hour ago. It wasn't a deal before an hour ago. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:20, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking. I added the reliable information into his page, in the form of references in the first paragraph. Adotchar| reply here 22:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Adotchar: I moved the references down into the body and made the page a bit more uniform with other baseball player pages. Thank you for providing the references. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:28, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking. I added the reliable information into his page, in the form of references in the first paragraph. Adotchar| reply here 22:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Nl5836
Hi, Muboshgu! Yes, I see your referral to AIV. I have been keeping an eye on this user and my opinion has been that this is not deliberate vandalism on their part, just failure to understand what they are doing wrong. In fact it has not been obvious to an outside observer what the problem is. I was just in the process of composing a note to you, saying it would be helpful to patrolling admins if you would use edit summaries when you revert someone like this, where it is not obvious vandalism - as you did with your most recent summary, "copyrighted image". That was what inspired me to post my warning, and I see that since then they have self-reverted a few of their additions. It may be that they just needed a little more education. Of course, their failure to respond to all those talk page warnings, including your specific one a day two ago, hasn't helped. --MelanieN (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- @MelanieN: That's why I made sure to add edit summaries my last reversions. I agree this is likely more a case of someone causing harm without knowing what they're doing than outright trying to make things worse, but the effect is the same, and there seems to be no communication coming back to us. A problematic user like this probably needs to be blocked before they actually reach out to ask what they're doing wrong. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- That was certainly going to be my next move, if they didn't respond to a clear order as to what they were to stop doing. Sometimes it takes a block to get their attention. --MelanieN (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- @MelanieN: Definitely a WikiMule. And then there's these weird edit series where nothing changes. I have no idea what this user is doing, and they may not either. They've been blocked on Commons twice for uploading copyvio images. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well, that didn't take long. Maybe they thought if they used a photo that wasn't copy vio, it would be OK to edit war? Gave them 24 hours to think about it. --MelanieN (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC), putting down my 2x4 but keeping it handy
- @MelanieN: Thanks for the block. I bet we hear back from the user now. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well, that didn't take long. Maybe they thought if they used a photo that wasn't copy vio, it would be OK to edit war? Gave them 24 hours to think about it. --MelanieN (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC), putting down my 2x4 but keeping it handy
- @MelanieN: Definitely a WikiMule. And then there's these weird edit series where nothing changes. I have no idea what this user is doing, and they may not either. They've been blocked on Commons twice for uploading copyvio images. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- That was certainly going to be my next move, if they didn't respond to a clear order as to what they were to stop doing. Sometimes it takes a block to get their attention. --MelanieN (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Raja Krishnamoorthi
On 10 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Raja Krishnamoorthi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when he was growing up, U.S. Representative-elect Raja Krishnamoorthi lived in public housing and received food stamps? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Raja Krishnamoorthi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Raja Krishnamoorthi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Clay Higgins Picture
Thank you for correcting my image. I have found a picture released by Clay Higgins.com and is allowed to be used for all XXTheQuietXx (talk) 04:37, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- @XXTheQuietXx: No, we can't use an image from his campaign site either, unless we have explicit permission to use it. Please read through Help:Menu/Images and media to learn more. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Minor league players
Hey -- my understanding of the informal rule for baseball players is that if they haven't made it to the major leagues, they belong on a minor league page if they're noteworthy enough to have anything written up about them at all. I don't think it's contingent upon the number of references; Derek Eitel, Bryan Harper, and Andrew Stevenson all have a similar number of references to Kyle McGowin. Of course we would break out a separate page if he reaches the major league level, but for now, I think it makes far more sense to keep him on the list with other notable Nationals minor leaguers. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Kudzu1: The idea of those pages is for people who people would reasonably want to know about (like some prospects and guys on the 40-man rosters) but don't meet WP:BASE/N and don't meet GNG, but there's expectation they will. Maybe some of those guys should be split off, I haven't looked at them yet. – Muboshgu (talk) 07:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- You can make a case for someone like Moniak who is a #1 overall draft pick, but I really don't think a guy who was ranked #20 in one of the weakest farm systems in baseball, hasn't reached the major leagues or even cracked a 40-man roster, and doesn't seem to have anything particularly outstanding in his biography merits his own article -- any more than I think Eitel, Harper, or Stevenson do, unless/until they reach the major leagues or something remarkable happens that makes them independently notable. As for the "expectation they will", respectfully, I think that's WP:CRYSTAL. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Kudzu1: It's got nothing to do with where they rank on prospect lists. We're not a prospect site. What matters here is independent coverage of the subject in reliable sources. And for the "expectation" thing, too many players get added to some of these minor league pages. Players who are notable for their own pages should get their own pages. And even if you don't agree, I created the page, you can open a merge discussion if you don't agree it should be one and let consensus decide. – Muboshgu (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- It would take me less than an hour to find at least 10 sources for each person on Washington Nationals minor league players. Maybe I should do that and break each of them out into separate articles. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Kudzu1: If you think it's that easy. It isn't always. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:31, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- It would take me less than an hour to find at least 10 sources for each person on Washington Nationals minor league players. Maybe I should do that and break each of them out into separate articles. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Kudzu1: It's got nothing to do with where they rank on prospect lists. We're not a prospect site. What matters here is independent coverage of the subject in reliable sources. And for the "expectation" thing, too many players get added to some of these minor league pages. Players who are notable for their own pages should get their own pages. And even if you don't agree, I created the page, you can open a merge discussion if you don't agree it should be one and let consensus decide. – Muboshgu (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- You can make a case for someone like Moniak who is a #1 overall draft pick, but I really don't think a guy who was ranked #20 in one of the weakest farm systems in baseball, hasn't reached the major leagues or even cracked a 40-man roster, and doesn't seem to have anything particularly outstanding in his biography merits his own article -- any more than I think Eitel, Harper, or Stevenson do, unless/until they reach the major leagues or something remarkable happens that makes them independently notable. As for the "expectation they will", respectfully, I think that's WP:CRYSTAL. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Yorman Landa, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!
I decided to do this because there recently has been new information added to the page for "Yorman Landa" since your proposal for its deletion. I felt that it was a sufficient amount of information to negate the page's deletion. Please let me know If you believe this not to be the case. GriegMachine8 (talk) 23:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Re: Bandy/Maldonado trade
Sorry about that. I try to leave the sourcing up the people who know their stuff better than I, which is rarely why I write anything significant and just update templates. It is a lot easier than determining which site is an RS or not. You guys write encyclopedic baseball, I write baseball as a blog analyst, so I try to keep my focus down. For the record, I've usually waited for the official tweet from the team. Mitch32(The ripest peach is highest on the tree.) 00:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Trump cabinet
Hey, I just saw you being very patient with those edit requests at the cabinet template and wanted to let you know that your efforts are appreciated. Samsara 12:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup December newsletter: WikiCup 2017
On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.
For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):
- First place – $200
- Second & Third place – $50 each
- Category prizes – $25 per category (which will be limited to FA, FL, FP, GA, and DYK for 2017). Winning a category prize does not require making it to the final round.
Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address.
After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.
The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email).
Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.
If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 16 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the List of Jewish American politicians page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
DYK
On 17 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ted Budd, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ted Budd. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ted Budd), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 14:08, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Criticism of ESPN
I saw your comment from a few years ago on the talk page for criticism of ESPN, and it seems the fine-toothed comb you were referring to never made its way to the article. Would you be interested in collaborating to clean it up? Hopefully the section I just started on that talk page will attract some editors, but I'm not optimistic, seeing as the article has been in that state for this long. Lizard (talk) 05:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Lizard the Wizard: wow my comments are seven years old, and the page is still a mess. Yes, I'll take a look. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- I'll lay out some stuff on the talk page of what I think should be done. First of all, the dedicated sections for individuals need to go. Definitely undue. If they belong anywhere it's on their own articles. Lizard (talk) 19:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Only the ones where it actually involves the network (like Curt Schilling) should remain. A number of those are criticisms of ESPN employees for things having nothing to do with ESPN. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- I'll lay out some stuff on the talk page of what I think should be done. First of all, the dedicated sections for individuals need to go. Definitely undue. If they belong anywhere it's on their own articles. Lizard (talk) 19:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Talk:Vermont gubernatorial election, 2014. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! User:HopsonRoad 16:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Democratic National Committee chairmanship election, 2005
On 22 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Democratic National Committee chairmanship election, 2005, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 2005, Howard Dean was elected as Chair of the Democratic National Committee, despite both Democratic Congressional leaders endorsing Tim Roemer instead? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Democratic National Committee chairmanship election, 2005. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Democratic National Committee chairmanship election, 2005), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 December 2016
- Year in review: Looking back on 2016
- News and notes: Strategic planning update; English ArbCom election results
- Special report: German ArbCom implodes
- Featured content: The Christmas edition
- Technology report: Labs improvements impact 2016 Tool Labs survey results
- Traffic report: Post-election traffic blues
- Recent research: One study and several abstracts
Lucas Giolito
Hello.
I've never created a Wikipedia account before, but I do regularly donate. Last night, I went to check Lucas Giolito's page for some reason (probably ottoneu-related) and stumbled across the VR-Giolito picture. Thank you for blessing the world with that gem. It makes me really, really happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GraveyardHotel (talk • contribs) 20:34, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Editor of the Week seeking nominations (and a new facilitator)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)