Jump to content

User talk:PresN/Archive 31

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31


Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), and Frostly (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes

added Clovermoss
readded Dennis Brown
removed

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

User WP:NOTHERE?

Hi, I've just received interaction from the user Alistair McBuffio regarding the page List of political parties in the United Kingdom, and looking at their contributions almost all of them seem to be highly focused on adding content related to the Far-Right British Democratic Party, regardless of notability or triviliaty. Believe this user may fall afoul of Wikipedia:NOTHERE and is only interested in promoting the party, given their stated support of it on their user page.

Could you as an admin take a look (or if not suggest the best avenue to follow as I'm unsure as to whether it's best to report to ANI or vandalism)

Regards, Rambling Rambler (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rambling Rambler:
1) It's common and normal for someone to edit focused on individual topics of interest to them, and not against the rules.
2) Being a supporter of the BDP is not banned on wikipedia, as unpleasant as you may find them.
3) Alistair McBuffio appears to edit sporadically, with most edits being minor cleanups. It's not exactly a giant POV push.
4) What appears to actually be happening is that you are involved in a content dispute at List of political parties in the United Kingdom with another user, and McBuffio jumped in on their side and reverted all your edits. You're now reaching out to a completely random admin to weigh in on "your side". I'm not familiar enough with british politics to weigh in on who was right, but the next step would be to find other editors to weigh in on how the list should be organized. I recommend asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom for other editors interested in the area for their opinion. --PresN 18:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
I was wary of raising the issue precisely because of that potential it may instead be seen as vindictive reporting regarding the "content dispute" (one that was dealt with a week ago and I consider settled quite frankly). The thing is though I wouldn't need to do it even if I were someone of a vindictive nature because the changes I made are well-supported by Wikipedia policy and therefore just reverting back the insertion of unverifiable/OR content resolves it.
The only reason I felt the need to ask an admin for advice was because, looking through their edits (as sporadic as they may be) the overwhelming bulk of them are to add information regarding a singular political party they state to be a supporter of, and was unsure of at what point it becomes NotHere that I specifically thought best to raise via an admin talk page rather than a more definitive disciplinary board that may cause confrontation.
If you think it doesn't cross that line I don't intend to take it further, just wanted some advice on the matter. Rambling Rambler (talk) 18:38, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

TFA

Thank you today for Homeworld, introduced (in 2017): "Claiming the title as the best strategy video game and best computer game of 1999, Homeworld is considered a classic of the genre for a single innovation: it was the first strategy game that was fully 3D, in the sense that units were not restricted to a plane like the ground, but could move anywhere within a sphere of space. Connecting the levels together so that the same plucky fighter ship from level 1 could end up leading a formation against a capital ship 6 levels later was the icing on the cake, and it's no surprise that when the rights came up for auction they were snapped up immediately." -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Asellus (SaGa Frontier)

Hi, I was wondering if you would be interested and free to expand her appearances section. Kung Fu Man and I are doing a B drive on character articles, and I want to improve Asellus, but honestly, I still haven't beaten SaGa Frontier and I don't want to be spoiled, haha. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 15:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cukie Gherkin: Never played it either, haha. --PresN 16:05, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Oh, damn lol. Do you know anyone here who may have? Otherwise I'll just buckle down and finish the game. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
@Cukie Gherkin: You can ask in the discord, but maybe ProtoDrake? --PresN 16:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Oh I'm banned from the Discord for telling a very good joke, but I'll ask ProtoDrake. Thanks! - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

TFL notification for March 2024

Hi, PresN. I'm just posting to let you know that World Fantasy Award—Short Fiction – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 1. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 22:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • 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.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Video games assessment problem

Hi again, PresN. Further to your alert on my talk in regard to the need for individual quality assessment of Video games articles, while reviewing future DYKs I came across Jessica Mak. Although there was no individual assessment on the talk page listing of Video games, the article did not appear as unassessed; indeed, if you look at the history of the talk page, you will see that despite the lack of assessment, the article acquired Category:C-Class video game articles on 26 January when Robo37 introduced the new Banner shell display. I expect many more Video games articles have been updated by bot in this way. If you think it is important, you should perhaps undertake further action. Just to be safe, I added a C class myself. (MSGJ)--Ipigott (talk) 11:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ipigott: Ok, excellent, never mind then- it definitely used to not inherit from banner shell/supposedly wouldn't, but it appears that it's now inheriting from banner shell with the exception of A-class, which is exactly what it should do. I didn't know that changed, since Qwerfjkl (bot)'s and Cewbot's runs have been leaving it as-is. Feel free to disregard what I said, then! --PresN 16:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. That should make things easier. I don't know if you saw the messages I pinged to you on my talk page but I suggested that with your experience and interests you might perhaps be able to help us along with developing WP:Elit in its initial stages.--Ipigott (talk) 06:38, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Semi-related, the only way in which the VG quality scale differs is that we have no defined "A" class, right? With PIQA, shouldn't we drop this constraint and just go with the new default? IceWelder [✉] 10:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
@IceWelder: It's been a long time since we dropped it; feel free to start a discussion at WTVG about reinstating it to see if we still want to stay that way. --PresN 12:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

FF8 Good Topic

Just letting you know that "Eyes on Me" got merged by @Kung Fu Man:, so it should be good to go as a Good Topic (in which case, should the Characters of FF8 GT be removed in place of it?). - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cukie Gherkin: Thanks for letting me know; I'll hold off for a while to make sure it sticks, since that particular merge has a history of being undone. I'll think about if we should merge the characters subtopic into it as well... --PresN 13:14, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes sense. Just so you know, it'll probably get recreated because I'm working on the draft, but I'll split it out only once it's GA quality. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

GA Notice

GA Notice
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Microchess that you recently 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.

Remsense诉 08:36, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
· · ·

Your GA nomination of Microchess

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Microchess 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Remsense -- Remsense (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of List of primates

Congratulations, PresN! The list you nominated, List of primates, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
You know I've never really looked into these types of lists you do. Let me say that this is absolutely nuts! Incredible work, man! Panini! • 🥪 05:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

New message from 25 Cents FC

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of state presidents of the Indian National Congress/archive1 § List of state presidents of the Indian National Congress. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 13:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Microchess

The article Microchess you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Microchess for comments about the article, and Talk:Microchess/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Remsense -- Remsense (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive:
  • On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

FAC

Hey, is there any chance you'd be interested in doing a review for my first FAC? I was just looking around for an editor with video game interest since one of the current reviewers may not be able to complete their review due to off Wiki things. I don't know if you even do FAC reviews, but I figured I'd ask. If you have no time or interest in doing it, no problem. -- ZooBlazer 03:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Source reviews needed

Hey PresN, hope you're well and thanks again for all that you do. I was wondering, if the only thing holding up my FLC nominations (1 and 2) is a source review, am I allowed to list it under source reviews needed myself? Hey man im josh (talk) 20:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh: Yes, absolutely, feel free. (And the Bills list, at minimum, will get checked in my next pass). --PresN 03:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
No worries, I recognize you've got a lot on your plate and I'm in no way trying to pressure you! Just wanted to check if I was okay to do that, which I very much appreciate your answer on :) Hey man im josh (talk) 20:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Outer Wilds

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Outer Wilds 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of A412 -- A412 (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Outer Wilds

The article Outer Wilds you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Outer Wilds and Talk:Outer Wilds/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A412 -- A412 (talk) 05:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Outer Wilds

The article Outer Wilds you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Outer Wilds for comments about the article, and Talk:Outer Wilds/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A412 -- A412 (talk) 20:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Super Mario Maker

Hey PresN! I saw that you did a copyedit of the lead, and wanted to let you know that I do plan on overhauling this article soon; just in case if you planned on going any further. Panini! • 🥪 00:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@Panini!: Nah, I just checked it out from your discord comments and was briefly annoyed by the "3 years ago Nintendo announced something that happened that same year" writing, and then got confused about whether the DS version was also being shut down. Don't intend on editing it further. --PresN 00:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

By the way

Re [1], I was going off the main article on the subject, Primate, which says "Primates are a diverse". You may want to change that as well then (and I would highly recommend adding a hidden note with your explanation to the main article, or another editor will probably change it back).

Also re [2] — this is done manually by the coordinators, so you can save it for us! In any case, congratulations! Aza24 (talk) 04:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Best Game or Interactive Work

Will you be making a page for the category now that the 2024 nominations have been announced? Also, what do you think of my suggestion regarding the Best Video Game run? (I was going off the example of Best Related Work, though I admit that Best Non-Fiction Work was given for more than one year). You have more experience fleshing out the Hugo category pages than I, but please let me know if I can assist in any way. FreeChurros (talk) 04:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

@FreeChurros: Yeah, I plan on making the new list once I get through updating the others; I agree with you about putting the best video game one-off year there too. --PresN 13:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

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.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Awards accessibility

I'm reverting your reversion of my colour changes. #B0C4DE is AAA compliant against black foreground text, but almost all rows have #36c links, instead of black unlinked text. If you look at the WebAIM contrast checker, #36c on #b0c4de fails WCAG AA for colour contrast. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 17:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@OwenBlacker: You're right, I checked against black, not blue. Thanks for updating them. --PresN 18:23, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
No problem; easily done. I only noticed in the first place because my eyesight struggled with the contrast 😅 OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 18:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Atraincover.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Atraincover.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Ireland women's cricket team record by opponent/archive1

Hi. Can you please close this FLC as you're the director? I believe it has gained substantial support now and the nomination is quite old. Please don't mind that I've personally sent you a request. Actually, I'll go for a wiki-break after 16 April. So, it will be difficult for me to reply to your concerns (for ex- source review/table review). Thank you. RoboCric Let's chat 17:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of List of erinaceids

Congratulations, PresN! The list you nominated, List of erinaceids, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 April newsletter

We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Laya's Horizon

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Laya's Horizon 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Vrxces -- Vrxces (talk) 01:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Laya's Horizon

The article Laya's Horizon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Laya's Horizon for comments about the article, and Talk:Laya's Horizon/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vrxces -- Vrxces (talk) 08:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 May newsletter

The second round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 April. This round was particularly competitive: each of the 32 contestants who advanced to Round 3 scored at least 141 points. This is the highest number of points required to advance to Round 3 since 2014.

The following scorers in Round 2 all scored more than 500 points:

The full scores for Round 2 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 18 featured articles, 22 featured lists, and 186 good articles, 76 in the news credits and at least 200 did you know credits. They have conducted 165 featured article reviews, as well as 399 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 21 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed during Round 3, which starts on 1 May at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • 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

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Martin O'Donnell § Infobox discussion

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Martin O'Donnell § Infobox discussion. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of List of talpids

Congratulations, PresN! The list you nominated, List of talpids, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Giants2008 (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lucky Luna

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lucky Luna 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of The Night Watch -- The Night Watch (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Football Academic All-America Team Members of the Year/archive1

What would be suggested to further pursue Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Football Academic All-America Team Members of the Year/archive1.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger: Honestly, it was just missing people actually supporting, there weren't major issues remaining or unaddressed concerns (little things like ® signs in references, nothing big). I think the color discussion just derailed the whole nomination and reviewers just stopped looking at it. I closed it due to the recent unofficial RfC where people expressed a desire to not leave nominations open forever. I'd recommend just renominating it as a clean slate. --PresN 17:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
User:PresN is there any mandatory waiting period before renomination?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
@TonyTheTiger: Nope, we don't have the two-week thing that FAC does, so go right ahead. --PresN 03:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Starwing Paradox for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Starwing Paradox, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Starwing Paradox until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

List of forest-inventory conifers in the United States

Replying here: I prefer this to List of conifers in the United States because forestry is a different discipline than botany ... it has its own rules and sources and ways of doing things. If I give the article a botanical-sounding title, people will expect the wrong things (such as a complete taxonomic list, which this isn't). - Dank (push to talk) 01:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Dank: Well, I know nothing about forestry, which is why I didn't complain in the first FLC, and no one else did either so I promoted it. Your explanation makes sense, though. I've realized that my real issue is that Forest inventory (nor these lists) doesn't really clearly define what makes a type of tree/conifer be in the inventory or not. Like, it sounds dumb, but my assumption is that "forest inventory" conifers are ones that are actually growing in forests in the country taking the inventory (as opposed to non-native tree farms or whatever), but Forest inventory doesn't actually say that, it just launches into the process of taking an inventory. So it bugs me that the term is in the title without me being 100% on what it defines. --PresN 02:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Does the first note at Talk:List of forest-inventory conifers in the United States#Notes help? I'm not seeing the difference between forestry and every other academic discipline ... academics come up with rules for inclusion and exclusion, they argue about it, and eventually there either is or isn't a consensus. I'm not the expert, but I'm pretty sure that there's only one possible winner here, the 1991 inventory. If someone wants to claim that there's another inventory that's had enough buy-in that it deserves to be included, then I have no objection to including it, but I'd be very surprised if any other inventory could be defended from the record in secondary sources. - Dank (push to talk) 15:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
@Dank: Eh, I'm willing to let it go. Seems like the only reason behind using "forest-inventory conifers in the United States" instead of "conifers in the United States" is that forestry people call it a forest inventory, which is a good enough reason. Not sure if you'll get pushback on dividing the distribution column between west and east, but after consideration I think it does make it easier to read through the pile of 2-letter state acronyms. Went down a rabbit hole after that on how the heck the California Redwood is in New York, but sure enough it is, our article on Abies magnifica just doesn't mention it at all. --PresN 19:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
What about List of conifers in the United States forest inventory? I just don't see "forest-inventory conifer" as a term in use that a reader would be looking for, making for a less concise and accessible title. I want more context around this. What conifers are in the US that aren't in Silvics of North America? Would they just be non-native ones used only ornamentally and hybrids? Using this as the definitive source may be fine, but the title doesn't have to call it out, especially if there are other inventories that could potentially also fit the title. Reywas92Talk 16:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
It's not the US's, or even the USFS's, official forest inventory. Their position now is: we're not going to get into arguments about what is or isn't in the inventory (and I can see how that might be a smart choice). Instead, they have a database of trees; you input parameters (such as the minimum diameter of the trunk), and you get a list that matches your parameters. This makes the 1991 inventory even more significant, in the sense that there probably won't be another USFS inventory, but the general concept of a "forest inventory" is still alive, around the world (and other countries ... including Canada ... do publish inventories, and in most cases I'll use them if and when I do those countries). - Dank (push to talk) 17:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
That suggests the actual title should be List of conifers in Silvics of North America. I just don't understand, why include "forest-inventory" as a qualifier in the title if there are still other "forest-inventory conifers" that happen to be in different inventories? Again, I think it's fine to use this inventory, but this title is less reader-friendly and it's less useful not to give details about what it actually means that this particular one is used here. I'm not arguing that other trees should be included here, but it should be clear what readers should expect. Reywas92Talk 01:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
@Reywas92 and PresN: Just saw this (I generally take user talk pages off my watchlist after a few days). Two points: I do get that "forest-inventory conifers" is not ideal in several respects. I initially discarded saying "inventoried conifers" because lots of people do inventories, and I didn't want interference from lists that have nothing to do with forestry ... but now that I've poked around a bit, the risk that "inventoried conifers" will be misunderstood is probably small ... I don't have a strong preference, but if that would at least partially deal with the objection, then sure, I'm fine with that (and thanks for prodding me to think harder about this). 2. I'm not positive this answers your objection, Reywas, but here's my point: if you're going to say that I'm being ambiguous because I'm not telling people which inventory I'm referring to, then I have to ask: which other notable forest inventory could anyone possibly think is meant? "Inventories" these days tend to be the one-day result of database queries ... pretty much the opposite of "notable". And since this is Wikipedia, I'm assuming people want me to stick to the notable sources. - Dank (push to talk) 00:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of List of crocidurines

Congratulations, PresN! The list you nominated, List of crocidurines, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Giants2008 (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Outer Wilds

Congratulations, PresN! The article you nominated, Outer Wilds, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Figured I should let you know I bought Outer Wilds on Steam the day you opened the FAC, based on your pitch. I figured I'd review the FAC once I finished the game. Still not finished. Cannot tell you how many times I've slingshotted around the core of Brittle Hollow just to either slam into a rocky outcropping or teleport to the godforsaken white hole (often both). My new pasttime is attempting to land on the solar base and instead plummeting into the sun. Haven't read the article yet because I don't want any spoilers. Glad to see it got the shiny star. Anyway thanks for the intro, and best of luck with your other endeavors. Ajpolino (talk) 01:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
@Ajpolino: Thank you, and I'm glad you're enjoying it! --PresN 04:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
@PresN: Gog has this on the working draft for August TFAs. Do you feel like doing a rough draft of the blurb (925 to 1025 characters)? - Dank (push to talk) 02:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
@Dank: Sure, where should I write it? --PresN 02:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. WT:Featured article candidates/Outer Wilds/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 02:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
@Dank: Done. --PresN 04:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lucky Luna

The article Lucky Luna you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lucky Luna for comments about the article, and Talk:Lucky Luna/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Night Watch -- The Night Watch (talk) 02:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Potential sockpuppet

Hi there. Ive been editing some Ace Attorney articles and got a strange removal of content when a website suggested the chance of [[Phoenix Wright]] being bisexual. Seems like what happened with Alucard as another more experienced user commented in the talkpage the apparent sockpuppet being obsessed with removing any third party source suggesting a romance between Phoenix and Edgeworth. Sadly, My computer is not working well so I can't see what happened. Could you give it a look? Cheers Tintor2 (talk) 20:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tintor2: As far as I can tell, an IP (75.164.84.24) removed the section back in March, and now a different IP (192.155.107.118), but probably the same person, removed it again. That's annoying, but 2 instances 3 months apart isn't very actionable. If it starts happening more often I can protect the page, or if one IP starts edit warring I can warn/block them, but right now there's nothing I can point to as being a "sock puppet" other than that some person pops up a couple times a year to remove that bit. --PresN 21:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
@PresN: Since you are lacking context, this is not an Alucard situation. Alucard is verifiably incredibly bisexual in the text and the animated series of Castlevania, absolutely canon 100% and loving it. The article being talked about is an overview on the rise of "dadification" in video games, which towards the end goes into Ace Attorney and how its marketing has played into the Narumitsu ship, but intentionally misrepresenting events to support the perspective of the characters already being a couple, mentioning a "cuddly cameo in Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3" which was the lawyers clutching each other in terror before She-Hulk as Galactus enters the courtroom, a "yes daddy" line from the fifth game which was one of the barbs thrown between all attorneys and prosecutors throughout the series, while avoiding any mention of how the Ace Attorney social media pages have played into many of the series' other ships as well: it has ships for centuries (another extremely popular reading is that Miles is asexual). The article then goes into fan speculation on what a relationship between Miles and Phoenix being made canon could be like for the fans and what it would mean for the company, but that is it. Tintor2 eventually conceded that "I couldn't anything online other than random lines or that article" about the relationship or Phoenix being "popularly interpreted as bisexual", because this article is where the claim came from, referencing the fan-shipping communities going back to the days of Kirk/Spock. It should be mentioned on the page, but not misconstrued as already canon (which the previous wording suggested before).
The article has also been used as reference on Miles Edgeworth to claim a "history and closeness" with Trucy Wright, which in the article the writer indicates they would would want to see in a future game, based on the sole interaction of the characters in this cutscene in Spirit of Justice, where Trucy falls asleep on Miles' shoulder while they are sitting next to each other on a plane, the writer describing Miles' response as "discomfort [that] is no doubt familiar to any dad who desperately wants to move, but won’t disrupt his child’s all-important rest" when if you watch the scene you see it is anything but: Edgeworth is literally an unmoving still image in the scene. The wording is fine but it is taking much too much emphasis (a full paragraph) in a sparse reception section. Back to the Phoenix Wright page: Tintor2 called my edit "a strange removal" but they were mistaken: I did not actually remove the reference. I removed the second mention of it because at the time the paragraph accidentally included it twice. The middle of the paragraph mentioning the San Francisco Chronicle and its "dadification" of a character "popularly interpreted as bisexual" before the end mentioned the San Francisco Chronicle again, linking to the same article on the speculation. I had moved the reference to the first mention, and cut the second mention because it was the same article. The current version of the page by Tintor2 (which I agree wholeheartedly with the wording of) now has all the San Francisco Chronicle information mentioned in one place. 192.155.107.118 (talk) 14:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Ok, well, this certainly seems like a content discussion, not a vandalism discussion, so nothing to do with me (I've never played the games). In the future, 192, the best thing to do if you make a change that gets reverted is to take it to the article's talk page (as you have now) to explain your reasoning. Usually, such as in this case, doing so clears up misinterpretations of intent and gets to a resolution people are happy with quicker and with less drama. --PresN 15:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: 192 has been blocked as an open proxy, and their comments on Talk:Phoenix Wright have been removed per WP:BMB. Until it is archived, the SPI report is at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TotalTruthTeller24. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

reverted Bald uakari

I reverted this as IUCN is considering as species what we currently consider as subspecies. We will need to split our article into multiple species articles. In the meantime, I reverted. This is complication may also be true for other of the articles whose status you changed. Please take a deeper look. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Also, you should update the reference when doing this. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PresN/Archive_31&oldid=1259686190"