Jump to content

User talk:Wbm1058/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10→Archive 12

De-prodding Saagar Enjeti

Hello. Regarding your de-prodding of the subject, if WP:ANYBIO isn't met, then which criteria would you say the subject meets? Ifnord (talk) 01:13, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Disclosure: I'm a regular viewer of Rising, and curious to know more about him, I clicked on the link to read his bio, where I was a bit put off after seeing the PROD tag.
Outside sources have written about him, e.g. Saagar Enjeti deserves better than Jim Acosta's scorn
Here's another source recently writing about his tweets
I suppose not as notable as his co-host Krystal Ball, but he does get mentioned in such articles.
FWIW, I'll bet that this is his father, Prasad Enjeti. Power electronics engineers don't get much notice from Wikipedians
Might wait to see whether there are any reviews of his upcoming book. wbm1058 (talk) 03:37, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

History merge question

Hi wbm1058. I'm trying to learn the ropes of WP:WikiProject History Merge and wanted to ask a question about the pages Islamic Federation of Canarias, Islamic Federation of Canary Islands, and Islamic Federation of the Canary Islands. The first two are identical to each other, and are identical to the text that was copy-pasted into the final destination. The text is all by the same author with no intermediate edits. Does a history merge need to occur or can I just remove these entries from the log? — Wug·a·po·des​ 07:45, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

I know you weren't asking me, but no history merge needs to occur here. There isn't any useful edit history for these purposes at the titles that are redirects. Best, Dekimasuよ! 08:58, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
@Wugapodes: Thanks for asking. This is a common scenario that I've seen many cases of. An editor starts an article by making a single edit, and then minutes later changes the title by starting another article with either an identical or nearly identical edit. That one is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject History Merge/45. Technically Dekimasu is correct, but unfortunately the bot that generated the report isn't quite smart enough to realize that, so I feel that something needs to be done so that this item won't appear on the next version of the report. There are three ways to solve that. (1) You can just merge the single edit anyway; no harm in doing that. (2) If they blanked the first page, and then a redirect edit was subsequently made by the same or another editor, you can delete the first page under G7 – one author who has requested deletion or blanked the page, then restore only the redirect and any edits made after that, or (3) As stated at Wikipedia:WikiProject History Merge#How can I help?, if you see an item that cannot be considered a cut-and-paste move, please remove it from the list, and tag the redirect with {{nahmc|<destination page>}}. This will instruct the bot to disregard this page on future runs. I rarely do that, as I've found the bot to be quite accurate – it doesn't make mistakes that I've seen, other than flagging these annoying edge cases. Also, as the instructions also say, Please note: If you see an item in the report that appears to be a cut-and-paste move, please fix it, even if the source page only had one revision before being turned into a redirect! This will allow AarghBot to find additional related cut-and-paste moves on future runs.
What is unusual here is to see two titles where this was done: Islamic Federation of Canarias created at 15:05, and Islamic Federation of Canary Islands created at 15:08. I'm inclined to just merge both, in reverse chronological order, but I don't particularly care what's done to get them permanently off the list, as long as something is done. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:00, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Please reply.

...to my replies to your edit. (By the way, it looks like you missed or forgot that I suggested this specific edit: s/{{mergefrom|SOURCEPAGE|discuss=Talk:DESTINATION PAGE#Merger proposal}}/{{merge from|SOURCEPAGE}}/) Is that right? --50.201.195.170 (talk) 05:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Belated followup discussions ongoing at:
– wbm1058 (talk) 21:50, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Still an open discussion at Talk:Total dissolved solids#Merge? but I'm going to stop following this. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:26, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Loango, Alabama

Hi Wbm1058, the article Loango, Alabama appears to be 95% bullshit. I have no idea what to do about it, but thought you might. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Looks like this edit took care of it. wbm1058 (talk) 19:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
And this edit further improved it. Interesting stuff. Now the obvious question is how Loango, Republic of Congo got its name. Loango (disambiguation) may give some clues. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Stop making rules up

Redirects are created all the time and there's no need to discuss them, but I've nominated the article for a PROD. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:09, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Please have some patience, and let me finish. I am not making rules up. wbm1058 (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
We found our way to the right place. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

"Talk:49 (disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Talk:49 (disambiguation). Since you had some involvement with the Talk:49 (disambiguation) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

See also Speedy deletion for redirect talk pages – wbm1058 (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Fixing Klik

Since the material now at Klik was primarily an (undocumented) copy-paste from Klik (candy) (with a few new edits by the now-blocked editor), you can basically restore sanity by

  1. Deleting Klik
  2. Moving Klik (disambiguation) to Klik
  3. Undoing the change of Klik (candy) to a redirect

...I would think. (Note to onlookers: this is me trying to show Wbm how to achieve the goals he stated at EWN; it is not me trying to use him as a meatpuppet.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:21, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I may WP:History merge some of the cut-pastes. Please be patient. wbm1058 (talk) 20:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I am mellow. Thank you for looking into this! --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is RMCD bot. Interstellarity (talk) 14:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Hatnote

Regarding the comment in your revert of a hatnote, there was a typo in the first parameter, which should instead be "William Stearns". It seemed plausible to me that someone could either mishear, misremember or misspell "Stearn" or "Stern" as "Stearns". Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 17:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Higher Education

Thanks for the close at Template:WikiProject Higher Education.

Please can you move Template:WikiProject Higher Education to Template:WikiProject Higher education? I have done the changes to the page, but it needs an admin to move it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Heh,  Done just a moment before you pinged ;o) wbm1058 (talk) 12:38, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:33, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Annoying edits

Some of your edits on the List of animated series with LGBT characters: 1990s page were fine, but removing the links at the top and the mention of Spongebob as LGBTQ is uncalled for. I reversed that edit, and put the links to other pages BACK on the top. If those links aren't there, then how will people get to the other relevant pages? Adding them to the "see also section" is for other relevant information. I just have to differ with you on that one.--Historyday01 (talk) 03:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Also, it literally says that Hilenberg considered Spongebob asexual, its the first part of the article's controversy section. You could argue about that all you want but HE SAID IT. Here are some sources:
  1. "The creator of one of the most popular new cartoon characters for years, SpongeBob SquarePants, has rejected claims that his cheerful creation is gay...SpongeBob may be "kind of special", but he was not designed to be a gay character, his creator Stephen Hillenburg has told the Wall Street Journal. The gay community likes the show because it has a tolerant attitude, Mr Hillenburg said. "Everybody is different, and the show embraces that. The character SpongeBob is an oddball. He's kind of weird, but he's kind of special," he said. "I always think of them as being somewhat asexual.""- BBC News, "Camp cartoon star 'is not gay'," Oct 9, 2002.
  1. "Tossing water on the controversy as to whether he’s straight or gay, SpongeBob SquarePants is … neither, insists his creator. Addressing issues raised last week after at least two conservative Christian activist groups said the hugely popular TV cartoon character and his best friend, Patrick Starfish, are being exploited to promote a homosexual lifestyle, SpongeBob SquarePants creator Stephen Hillenburg, 43, scoffed. He said the allegations are far-fetched, and that his agenda does not go beyond entertainment. “It doesn’t have anything to do with what we’re trying to do,” Hillenburg tells Reuters. “We never intended them to be gay. I consider them to be almost asexual. We’re just trying to be funny and this has got nothing to do with the show.”"- People magazine, "SpongeBob Asexual, Not Gay: Creator," January 28, 2005
  1. "SpongeBob SquarePants, the wacky cartoon character who sparked a gay alert warning by US Christian conservative groups, is neither gay nor straight, says his creator. He is asexual. SpongeBob's creator, Stephen Hillenburg, 43, said the allegations were far-fetched and his agenda did not go beyond fun and entertainment. "It doesn't have anything to do with what we're trying to do," Hillenburg said in an interview on Friday, two days before the Asian premiere of The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie in Singapore. "We never intended them to be gay. I consider them to be almost asexual. We're just trying to be funny and this has got nothing to do with the show."...Hillenburg, a marine science teacher turned animator, who lives in Hollywood and is married with a six-year-old son, says he thinks there are "more important issues to worry about". "I really don't pay much attention to this." Such allegations were common in the history of cartoon and children's entertainment, he said. "Just think of Laurel and Hardy or Ernie and Bert," he said, referring to two popular American comic icons - the former from the 1930s and the latter from the children's TV series Sesame Street."- Reuters, "SpongeBob isn't gay or straight, creator says," January 28, 2005

And ALL of those sources come from the article. So buzz off, please.--Historyday01 (talk) 03:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

French tarot or Tarot

Hi Wbm, thank you for your edits on Wikipedia. I notice that you've been changing the name of the game "French Tarot" to "French tarot". Please be aware that it is common for card game books and histories to use title case for the names of card games. For example, the leading authority on Tarot games, Sir Michael Dummett, always uses title case e.g. Four-handed Chambéry Tarot and, specifically, French Tarot. So it's not a spelling mistake it's one of two perfectly correct spellings and, in fact, the more common one. Hope that helps. Bermicourt (talk) 20:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bermicourt: See the redirect French Tarot was tagged as a miscapitalization by Paine Ellsworth on 30 November 2018. If you don't think that is right, please revert that back to {{R from other capitalisation}}. Generally, I'm sympathetic with the idea that we shouldn't be tagging title-case usage as flat-out miscapitalizations; this tag should be limited to links that are always miscapitalizations. Such borderline tag placement slows down the gnome (me) who has to start using his judgment instead of mindlessly speedily fixing them with semi-automated bot-like edits. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:48, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
FYI, I'm working the list at Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations, which is based on redirects tagged with {{R from miscapitalization}}. wbm1058 (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I've done that. In due course, it would make sense to create a convention for card games covering this and other areas as there is already for board games. Bermicourt (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
To editor Bermicourt: I don't have any problem with such miscaps/othercaps corrections, because I am far from perfect. I would ask that you don't indiscriminately remove other rcat templates, especially printworthiness ones, when you make these changes. They provide editors with important information about redirect categorization. Your future attention to this is especially appreciated! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 02:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

"Over To You" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Over To You. Since you had some involvement with the Over To You redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Muzilon (talk) 06:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Redirect from Lansing, Michigan protest

Hi, WBM1058! Re 2020 Lansing, Michigan protest: I see that you changed the redirect target from Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic to Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic#Michigan. Would you consider changing it back to the whole article? The reason I suggest this: In addition to the information in the “Michigan” section, there is also a lot of information about the Michigan protest in the “Background” section; that's where about half of the merged material went. Take a look and see what you think. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. I hadn't looked closely at the background section. Some of that might be included in the lead section, as that's pretty brief. Done. wbm1058 (talk) 17:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! -- MelanieN (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Revert of merge

Rocks in My Bed

I would like to know why you reverted my merge of the one-sentence "article" Rocks in My Bed. Are you suggesting I add unsourced material to an article? Which part of that article would you like to add? Will you do it? If not, why not? What do you propose as alternatives, other than reverting my work?
Vmavanti (talk) 12:51, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, Rocks in My Bed is not mentioned in the Duke Ellington article, so redirecting there without even merging the title "Rocks in My Bed" to somewhere in the article is about as unhelpful as redirecting Rocks in My Head there would be. A better target would probably be the Duke Ellington discography, which doesn't mention the song either. All you'ld need to add there is a single bulleted line. A simple search confirms that this exists, so I can't delete it as a {{db-hoax}}. Surely this was covered by contemporary sources, so reliable citations could be found if one were to put in the effort (I realize that task is more difficult for older songs). There are a lot of links to this by virtue of its being included in Template:Duke Ellington so the song should be removed from that template if it is not a notable song. If you want to propose this for deletion, which is what it seems you really want to do rather than "merge" it, I will not revert you addition of the {{subst:Proposed deletion}} template. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Why do you assume I haven't put in the effort? How does one arrive at such a conclusion? Might there be a way for you to gauge to a small degree how much work I have done for Wikipedia? Don't confuse me with self-centered Wikipedians. What do I really want? You have no idea what I want because you have never met me. It's not about me. I'm older than these Facebook Twitter Google punks. Merge, delete, keep, I really don't care. It's not life or death to me. I don't "rescue" articles. You know why? Because I don't "kill" them either. We're talking about inert data on a computer screen. I have no agenda or abstract causes or movements for whom I try to bend or Ignore All Rules. I'm trying to help. I feel sorry for the people who lack the wits to see that.
Vmavanti (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
OK, let's try to dial down the tension a few notches. I see from your edit history that jazz is a topic you spend a significant amount of time on. I did not know that; I'm not really familiar with you (until now). Google Books search wbm1058 (talk) 01:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

On a Little Street in Singapore

You reverted my edit with the accusation that I was being disingenuous. Really? Let's put aside the personal attacks, OK? Did you notice that the proposal for merger has existed since July 2019? That means I have allowed almost nine months for discussion to take place. You think that is disingenuous? How many more months do you suggest I wait to give people a chance to comment or do something about an article that is five sentences long and unsourced since 2008? Are you suggesting I am being rash? Twelve years of inaction isn't enough? What you suggestions do you have for alternatives, other than reverting my work? Inertia isn't an alternative.
Vmavanti (talk) 12:57, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

"On a Little Street in Singapore" is linked to from the templates Template:The Manhattan Transfer ‎and Template:Harry James so if you intend to remove all content about the topic you should remove the links from these templates as this isn't a notable song on Wikipedia. Both Billy Hill (songwriter) ‎and Peter DeRose link to this; if you arbitrarily redirect to Peter DeRose (why him and not Billy Hill?) you should remove the circular link. But, if you really just intended to redirect without merging a single byte of content, I think the better option would be to propose it for deletion. Your edit summary Merged content to Peter DeRose. See Talk:Peter DeRose. is inaccurate. You didn't merge a single byte of content. I wasted time searching for the discussion you started, but didn't find it. If you did start a discussion, please post a link to it and I'll apologize. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
I don't do anything arbitrarily, and that's another personal attack. You're on a roll. If you want me to delete that article, I could try. But I hope you will be there for the discussion, because for some people deletion is almost as bad as murder. An odd opinion for an editor to have. I thought I was being generous by merging rather than deleting and by waiting almost a year to do so. But you read between the lines and see only nefarious motives. Every day WP renews my love for humanity.
Vmavanti (talk) 22:39, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Use of sources

Can you tell me if the sources on this page are being used correctly? Thanks.Vmavanti (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Large move

What do you think the large multi-move currently at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests#Technical requests. where 151 is to be moved to AD 151, etc. If a formal RM has to be opened it might clog the system. Is there any easier way? This is part of multi-step program outlined at User talk:Crouch, Swale/Year DAB and at User:Crouch, Swale/Year DAB. My guess is that Crouch, Swale thinks that the discussion on his own sub-pages (where others have participated) since December 2019 might serve in lieu of a formal RM. I'm just trying to get out of the big template struggle involved in copying everything from RMTR over to a full RM. Thanks for any opinion, EdJohnston (talk) 00:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Ed, past moves of this sort have gained consensus via RfC, and after that got consensus admins (including me) made the page moves and many template changes needed to support this transition. Here we have a less-robust process for getting consensus led by a non-administrator, hence the need for these mass technical requests. It would be nice if an admin took charge as that would avoid the need for the time-sink of making all these technical requests. But I'm done with this project as it's just fixing things that aren't broken and I just have too many things needing done that are broken to on my to-do list to want to take time out for this. I replied in the discussion over at RM/TR. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

TNF

Wondering why you changed target for TNF to the superfamily. Tumor necrosis factor alpha has been changed to Tumor necrosis factor which is surely a better target for TNF. Best --Iztwoz (talk) 10:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Iztwoz: I have no prior knowledge of this topic; I arrived there because after you changed the TNF redirect, the hatnote at the top of Tumor necrosis factor superfamily was no longer truthful. Generally I prefer targeting the broader-scoped topic whenever there is any ambiguity. That article tells me that TNFα, TNFβ and TNFγ are all "flavors" of "TNF". It is true that when the redirect was created at 12:25, 7 August 2003 (by Magnus Manske! who claims a PhD in biochemistry) it did target Tumor necrosis factor. But then the target was changed to target Tumor necrosis factors (the superfamily) at 13:07, 13 July 2007, and that stood for over a decade. I'm not closely watching these pages, so while I think a discussion would be helpful if it had sufficient expert participation, I won't revert you again if you want to be bold and don't break anything (i.e., move the hatnote!) – wbm1058 (talk) 13:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks - have moved it again not sure what you meant about hatnote have removed the redirect one.? --Iztwoz (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Have just noticed a Nomenclature section on the page which clarifies things. --Iztwoz (talk) 15:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Iztwoz, you got half the task of moving the hatnote done (removing it from the superfamily page). The other half is adding it to Tumor necrosis factor. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Many thanks --Iztwoz (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

"Galaksi Bima Sakti" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Galaksi Bima Sakti. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 18#Galaksi Bima Sakti until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 13:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Blackfriars massacre

Hi there - could you please move this back to the previous capitalization, given the previous RM on the subject? Thanks. Dohn joe (talk) 19:01, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

New message from Serial Number 54129

Hello, Wbm1058. You have new messages at Talk:Pakistan International Airlines Flight 8303.
Message added 10:09, 23 May 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

——Serial # 10:09, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Bot1058 7

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bot1058 7 has been approved. --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested name change for Inuktitut redirect to Tuugaalik High School

Hi Wbm1058

Thanks for your help looking at my requested page move. Just to clarify, there is no problem with the new page Tuugaalik High School. My mistake arose when I tried to create a redirect to it from the local indigenous name for the school.

I created the redirect page, but unfortunately I got the last letter of the name wrong (ᑲ should be ᒃ).

To correct my error, I tried to move the wrongly spelt redirect page "ᑑᒑᓕᒃ ᑎᓪᓕᕐᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑲ" to the correct spelling "ᑑᒑᓕᒃ ᑎᓪᓕᕐᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ" but I received the error message:

"ᑑᒑᓕᒃ ᑎᓪᓕᕐᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑲ" cannot be moved to "ᑑᒑᓕᒃ ᑎᓪᓕᕐᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ", because the title "ᑑᒑᓕᒃ ᑎᓪᓕᕐᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ" is on the title blacklist. If you feel that this move is valid, please consider requesting the move first.

I'm puzzled by the blacklist classification but suspect it may be a false positive. If you are unable to rename the redirect page to "ᑑᒑᓕᒃ ᑎᓪᓕᕐᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ", please could you simply delete the redirect page for me? as I suspect the redirect will rarely be used by anyone, as typing this kind of text is not straightforward.

Best regards, —Hebrides (talk) 12:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I think we've got it sorted out. I don't know what was up with the blacklisting. I was able to create the redirect for the correct spelling, and I deleted the bad one. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks – that's fine now. Sorry about the mistake – I must be more careful. Cheers — Hebrides (talk) 13:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Jan Wierix

Please don't do undiscussed and apparently unresearched moves like this. Johnbod (talk) 22:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Johnbod:I didn't move the article. Apparently you just noticed after I synced the talk page with the article, but ArteGod moved it on 10 February 2016, four years ago! I guess there's no need to discuss it with them. as they've since been blocked as a sockpuppet. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:56, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Ok thanks, but there was a long discussion on this issue on that talk page, so a move the other way would have been ideal. Obviously I didn't realize they'd got out of sync. Johnbod (talk) 02:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

CICAR

Hello, I noticed that you had simplified the disambiguation page CICAR. It's a good job. But in the 3 pages where the internal links leads you have deleted the "{{Redirect | CICAR}}" . It has therefore become impossible to go to the CICAR disambiguation page, and, more seriously, it is impossible to guess that this disambiguation page exists.
But that may be how English-speaking Wikipedia works. It is not so in the French pages. Thank you for answer. Cordially. Gerardgiraud (talk) 17:17, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

It is not impossible to go to the "CICAR" page. Anyone typing "CICAR" directly into the "Search Wikipedia" box will be taken directly there, where hopefully they will find what they were looking for – one of the three items on that disambiguation page. Now, I'm not sure how many readers of one of the three articles, for example Cooperative Institute for Climate Applications and Research, will want to know the names of other organizations also calling themselves "CICAR", but if you feel there's a need for that, you could place the hatnote
For other uses of CICAR, see CICAR (disambiguation).
but note the guidance at Template:Other uses#When not to use this template. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
It is not the names themself which are ambiguous but the fact they all have the same acronym CICAR. When you come to a page, whatever it is, it is interesting to know that there are other pages with the same name or a similar name. It is precisely the role of the disambiguation page to know this. And if, on the page where you are, we are warned by a link that there is such a disambiguation page, we can click to consult the list of all these pages.
I read "Template: Other uses # When not to use this template". The example given, Paris Virginia, is itself ambiguous. Imagine looking in Paris (France) for a famous woman named "Virginia"; you will find yourself in Paris (Virginia, USA) and it is not what you wanted. Finally, as you said, using the hatnote {{Other uses|CICAR}} in the three pages seems to me a good solution here, what do you think? Gerardgiraud (talk) 19:00, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
OK, done. wbm1058 (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Ugh

I screwed up...forgot to uncheck move subpages so will you please delete the following:

Thanks in advance... Atsme Talk 📧 12:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Category:Districts of Mongolia

Hi, a lot of the districts seem to be inappropriately dabbed and there no redirects. Khan khongor, Ömnögovi for instance should really be simply Khankhongor (the official name on the government site in a translation). Now there's a fair amount of districts with the same name which are quite rightly dabbed. Can you or somebody you know move the pages which aren't dabbed? Thanks.† Encyclopædius 11:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Please start a discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mongols and point to any relevant naming conventions for Mongolia. If there is a consensus naming convention, please link to it. Assemble a list of the districts you think should be moved to new names and submit them as a multi-move request at WP:Requested moves. Sorry I can't take more time to help right now; I have a number of other tasks already on my plate. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Folk-rap/Rap-folk

The term "Folk rap" or "Rap folk" does not wikilink directly to the Wikipedia article, rather than a redirect to the article. I've found some sources:

  • Discovering Folk Music , page 8: "But one can also point to centuries-old oral tradition of West African griots, traveling singers and poets, from whom rap or hip-hop artists are believed to trace their roots and influence. Rap can be viewed as a kind of "street folk," "
  • Rhythm and Blues, Rap, and Hip-hop, page 85: "After surviving open heart surgery needed to correct a birth defect, he recorded Whitey Ford Sings the Blues (Tommy Boy, 1998) which ran the stylistic gamut, from folk-rap and jazz to industrial metal."
  • Transactions, Transgressions, Transformation, page 174: "American rap-influenced musicians who were not black fared well, but only in other genres. For example, in the category “rock (America)” one writer described the top three albums as “mixture rap” (Beastie Boys), “folk rap” (Beck), and “blues rap” (G. Love and Special Sauce), all of which were produced by white musicians."

115.164.217.47 (talk) 16:51, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I don't understand why you chose to post this message on my talk page, nor do I understand what you want me to do. If you want to make a second edit to clarify, feel free. Clear requests generally will receive prompter responses. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Target of

Module:Target of has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:Reflist" listed at Redirects for discussion

Information icon A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:Reflist. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 13#Wikipedia:Reflist until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AdventHealthlogo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AdventHealthlogo.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) 02:43, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Replaced by File:AdventHealth Logo.svg. wbm1058 (talk) 02:47, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for your great effort in the reassessment of Joe Biden. Cheers! starship.paint (talk) 15:38, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

+1 - thx for covering all the bases. I highly recommend formally closing the discussion since it is transcluded and has long since ended - not unlike a typical RfC close. It also needs to be noted in "Article milestones" in the article's TP header. Atsme Talk 📧 15:49, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you and sorry I was a bit lax in following the closing instructions:
8. To close the discussion, edit the community reassessment page of the article and locate {{GAR/current}}. Replace it with {{subst:GAR/result|result=outcome}} ~~~~.

Replace outcome with the outcome of the discussion (whether there was consensus and what action was taken) and explain how the consensus and action was determined from the comments. checkYdone

A bot will remove the assessment from the GA reassessment page and will add it to the current archive. checkYdone

9. The article either meets or does not meet the good article criteria:

  • If the article still does not meet the criteria, you can delist it. To do this, remove the article from the relevant list at good articles, remove the {{good article}} template from the article page, – this was done after the earlier individual review

remove the {{GAR/link}} template from the article talk page, checkYdone

update the {{Article history}} template on the article talk page (see example), checkYdone

and restore any project assessment values on the article talk page (check history to see what they were). – I generally leave this to others (diff, diff)

A bot will remove and archive the assessment from the GA reassessment page. checkYdone.
As with Arbitration Committee rulings, some post-close comments are generally accepted, but I think it best if you would wait to start a new discussion about a potential relisting until after the identified issues have been resolved. Best, wbm1058 (talk) 19:43, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Bypassing redirects

Why are you making edits like this? It isn't necessary to bypass redirects and doing this on a large scale clutters watchlists. It's especially not necessary to do on closed review pages. In principle, a closed discussion should never be edited again unless there is a real problem with it. SpinningSpark 11:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Spinningspark: See Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Nuts and bolts, and the preceding discussion at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#List of Wikipedians by number of Good articles? Sorry for the inconvenience. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:45, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Wbm1058. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. - RichT|C|E-Mail 17:49, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Nigeria Federation Cup (Women)

Hello,

Kindly change the redirect from AITEO Cup to Aiteo Cup (women). Thanks. HandsomeBoy (talk) 21:30, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. – wbm1058 (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Ruff

When you turned Ruff into a DAB page, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS. The change broke 304 links, which will have to be checked and fixed manually. The active DABfixers cannot keep up with the links created by editors who don't bother with WP:TESTLINK, let alone mass dumps like this one; see WP:TDD#Table1. Narky Blert (talk) 10:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done – I didn't overlook that. Admins need to take sleep breaks too, and I appreciate that someone helped out while I was sleeping. wbm1058 (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Luckily, it was mostly pages like 'List of birds of (...)'. That's an easy call then! Thanks for your help on fixing the remaining dablinks! Pyrite Pro (talk) 14:27, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
I got the dozen that needed linked to ruff (clothing) and the one for Ruff (horse) before I went to bed. wbm1058 (talk) 14:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Flags of the World

See User talk:Baseball Bugs/Archive024#Ref desks edits... AnonMoos (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

edits by user:Saberking321

Hi. I recently undid special:diff/971605501 by user:Saberking321, in which they ProD'ed Hallucinogenic mushroom. I was on the way to their talkpage, but I checked their contribs, which include a few similar edits, including a revert of your edit. I believe they are acting in goof faith, but I dont know how to approach them. Would you please take a look? Thanks a lot in advance, —usernamekiran (talk) 09:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: you might be interested in the discussion I started at Talk:Psilocybin mushroom#Requested move 7 August 2020. See also edits to Template:Psilocybin mushroom, Legal status of psychoactive Amanita mushrooms, Amanita#Psychoactive species, Hallucinogenic mushroom, and Magic mushroom (disambiguation). – wbm1058 (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Requested move template in "User talk:" name since? Will it work?

Hello Wbm1058. You probably already received my ping at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#User:MusikAnimal/confirmationRollback-mobile ... a gadget? regarding my indirect question about if RMCD bot would function correctly with posting the move request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions if the {{Requested move}} template was substituted in the "User talk:" namespace ... but I figured I'd mention it again here since I totally botched the edit summary. Steel1943 (talk) 23:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I consider this out-of-scope for requested moves, and it's already hard enough to manage the stuff that's in-scope for me to be keen on the idea of expanding the scope some more. More trouble than it's worth. wbm1058 (talk) 00:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Josh Daniels

Sorry, unsure what you've tried to do here, separate out the history from the deleted musician and the current footballer? If so, why is no page currently located at Josh Daniels, and why does the Josh Daniels (musician) article, deleted at AFD, now restored? Or do you intend to expand/improve that article on the basis it is actually notable, and turn Josh Daniels into a disambig? If you'd at least used edit summaries that would have half helped... GiantSnowman 15:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, this is an awkward scenario. My objective was to make the error message on the PROD go away. Josh Daniels (musician) is deleted again. Unfortunately tools do not exist for moving deleted edits without restoring them first. wbm1058 (talk) 16:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for clarifying/cleaning up. FYI there are 15 deleted edits still... GiantSnowman 16:17, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I know. For yet two more people – a pro wrestler and a pro baseball general manager. But at least there were no deletion discussions about them. Eventually there will be a notable "Josh Daniels", the name is common enough. It's a shame that all this clutter accumulates on the title. wbm1058 (talk) 16:24, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

WP:DISINFO

"Don't hijack" is the sort of bad faith comment that makes clear you disagree and are upset that this redirect created by a sock account used on less than 40 pages in 12 years, is best. Nevertheless it was not a "hijack" as both were included in a dab page, and why not. Nevertheless, if you believe we can only have a redirect, and nothing but, the word "disinformation" is a more logical understanding. However it would be much easier and nicer to make it a dab page. -- GreenC 19:29, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

@GreenC: Sorry for my use of the inflammatory term. I suppose the correct terminology is "changing" shortcuts: "Above all check the shortcut backlinks with "what links here"; changing a shortcut used elsewhere can be highly disruptive." There are 45 links to Wikipedia:DISINFO; these links would need to be disambiguated. If you need to go through a disambiguation page then that kind of defeats the idea that the link is a "shortcut". And speaking of assuming bad faith, the creator of that shortcut redirect is an editor in good standing whose block for sockpuppetry lasted all of 10 minutes. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:58, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Ok no problem then. I have a user script that shows they are "blocked infinity" by Slakr 4128 days ago (11yrs 113days) which is about April 2009. Which coincides when they last made an edit. Suspect the block log is incomplete or not publicly visible and they really are infinite. If you don't mind I'd like to change DISINFO->Disinformation and DISINFOBOX->Disinforboxes .. or possibly call it DISINFOX. -- GreenC 20:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
GreenC, no the sockpuppet Nrswanson remains blocked of course but the sockmaster 4meter4 has edited as recently as June. Note the redirect: User:Nrswanson. Thankfully a sock-puppetry violation is not always a death sentence; at least it wasn't back then.
You could check in at Wikipedia talk:Disinfoboxes with your proposal to see whether anyone will object to your change. Given how much time passed before anybody noticed, due to failure to properly tag as a disambiguation until someone else did on August 4, chances are nobody will object. You could fix the ~45 links by changing them to the even shorter shortcut WP:DIB. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Apologies in advance if I've stepped on anyone's toes, but I boldly already did this (coming from another angle) and only noticing this recent thread after I was finished. (Most of the uses I saw of the shortcut were from 8-10 years ago) –xenotalk 12:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship from the Birthday Committee

Wishing Wbm1058 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!

-- 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 09:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Wishing Wbm1058 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! ~SS49~ {talk} 10:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Maths redirects

Hey, Template:Maths rating hasn't been updated in a long time, and it doesn't know how to parse "class=redirect", so I've resorted to the "wrong" template to get those articles out of the "Unassessed" maintenance category to make it easier for me to maintain the assessments. I don't like it either, but I don't know enough about how the template code works to fix the real article rating template so that it can understand redirects, disambigs, and so forth. Sorry about the ugly error message on the talk page! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 04:43, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thanks I finally noticed that and figured out the problem last night (when I reverted myself). I started looking into making the fix and expect to finish that today. wbm1058 (talk) 11:55, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Bryanrutherford0:  Done new version of {{Maths banner}} doesn't show an error when it's on the talk page of a redirect. wbm1058 (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
No way! Wow, how very helpful of you! Haha thank you so much! Er, since you know how to do these things, I'll just mention that it would also be very nice if either Template:Maths banner or the main Template:Maths rating understood disambiguation pages so that I could correctly sort those, too, but either way you've already been a great help! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 13:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Bryanrutherford0: Just cleaning off my back burners, sorry for the long delay in responding. I looked at Category:Disambig-Class articles and was having trouble finding anything related to mathematics. Can you point me to any ambiguous titles? Or elaborate on what the issue is? I might be able to help if I understand the problem. Also, FYI, I looked at "What links here" (transclusions) to Template:WikiProject Mathematics and fixed a bunch in the template namespace. I just left eight articles that need to be rated. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for taking a look! Unless any new articles get tagged between me writing this and you reading it, all mainspace pages currently in Category:Unassessed_mathematics_articles are there because they're disambiguation pages, and the maths rating template doesn't know what to do with them. I'll look at those pages you linked; thanks for your help! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 21:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hmm, I see Category:Mathematics disambiguation pages which has 424 members. That's populated by the mainspace template {{Mathematical disambiguation}}. Most of these just have {{WikiProject Disambiguation}} on their talk pages but no {{Maths banner}}. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
OK, I see the problem. {{Maths banner}} puts out the message Please do not use this template on article talk pages. Use Template:Maths rating instead, being sure to fill in the rating information. just like it used to on talk pages of redirects. So those unassessed articles have {{Maths rating|class=dab|importance=NA}} even though dab pages aren't rated. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:45, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Someone asked for the module I need to solve this last November and voila, I found Module:Disambiguation which looks like it will do the trick. – wbm1058 (talk) 04:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
@Bryanrutherford0: New version of {{Maths banner}} doesn't show an error when it's on the talk page of a disambiguation page. Now regarding the "path" to handling the talk pages of mathematics disambiguation pages. I fixed Talk:Path space (diff) by changing {{Maths rating}} to {{Maths banner}}. Talk:Path space is now the first article populating Category:Disambig-Class mathematics pages, a category which hasn't formally been created yet. {{Maths banner}} is what's populating the category. Actually {{WPBannerMeta}}, which {{Maths banner}} transcludes, is populating the category. Now theoretically |category=no is supposed to suppress categorization but that isn't working here and I haven't done a deep dive yet to figure out why. Also, {{Maths banner}} is populating Category:WikiProject banners with non-standard names. I don't know the background on why that category was created, or if that's a "problem". I found a May 2008 discussion relating to this at User talk:GregManninLB#Maths rating template and another May 2008 discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive 37#Proposal - List of mathematics disambiguation pages, which seems to have been redundantly archived at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive2008##Proposal - List of mathematics disambiguation pages. (sigh. Wikipedia editors are good at creating complexity, not so good at reducing complexity and redundancy and simplifying systems. I continue finding things needing fixed at a faster rate than I'm able to fix them all) – wbm1058 (talk) 14:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Actually, |category=no did stop Talk:Path space from populating Category:Disambig-Class mathematics pages, but that page still links to the category. Now I see Talk:Path space populating Category:WikiProject banners with formatting errors. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
More background: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 31 § Template:WikiProject Mathematics. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, {{Maths banner}} was merged on 2 November 2020 into Maths rating. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:54, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

CNN and MSNBC

Wbm, I have drafted language for my RFCs on CNN and MSNBC, but would appreciate a quick review and any comments regarding format and neutrality of language. See: User:Blueboar/drafts. Blueboar (talk) 17:14, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I owe you an apology

I just ranted further about draftification at User talk:Iridescent, including a backswipe at the unnameable site for not properly considering that aspect of the AfD backlog; then I saw your post on the issue. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

No need to apologize for making me laugh. Thanks for letting me know about the fork in the discussion about Doc's fork. – No Ledge :) 02:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
When you come to a fork in a discussion, take it. – Yogi 02:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

From the Administrators' newsletter: Guideline and policy news

The RfC closed on 13 September 2020. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:12, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I highly recommend {{ISBN|978-1-59448-745-3}}

{{ISBN|978-1-59448-745-3}} links to :

Oko5ekmi5 (talk) 09:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia peaked in 2008? Oh, wow! Google has updated data to 2019! The answer is NO! Check back in 10 years to see whether Wikipedia peaked in 2019; its growth curve does seem to be flattening.
I'm not sure what your problem is, all of the searches still work for me, including the one you say "does not work".
Anyways, this is the book. Uncharted: Big Data as a Lens on Human Culture, a 2013 book by Erez Aiden and Jean-Baptiste Michel. It's been six years since I read Uncharted; I could use a refresher. Alas, my local library seems to have disposed of its copy (I missed my chance to pick it up for a buck). But can still borrow it as an e-book or buy a hard copy from Amazon's marketplace for $8 or $9. – wbm1058 (talk) 13:41, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Steve Bannon

At BLPN and the main article no specific text was purposed or particularly discussed. More just if there should be something in general. Are you sure you want the closes at both to have specific wording? PackMecEng (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I'll revise my close to address your question. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Cool beans, thanks for the clarifications! PackMecEng (talk) 19:06, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Wbm1058, Since you have closed the discussion at Talk:Steve Bannon and at WP:BLPN, can you also close the request for closure at WP:RFCC at :Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Requests_for_closure#Talk:Steve_Bannon#Addition_of_Aug_2020_arrest_to_lead_combined_with_WP:BLPN#Should_the_arrest_of_a_notable_person_be_in_the_lead_of_their_BLP_->_Steve_Bannon as well. Thanks.  :-) Octoberwoodland (talk) 06:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done – thanks for letting me know about that. wbm1058 (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Brooks

Hi Wbm1058, Many thanks. Tiredness led me to pile one screw up on another. Thanks for the tidying up. Acad Ronin (talk) 23:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Quick note on Talk:Raa Raa (2011 film)

I just forgot that, Thanks. Don’t worry I have fixed the links and created the Dab page as discussed. Best regards Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 12:25, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Possible work-around for phabricator:T166946

Please see my protected edit request in Template talk:Last edited by.

I'm asking you to look at it because I assume you control User:*wbm1058 and can use that account to test the change.

Similar changes may need to be made to other templates that call the REVISIONUSER magic word. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:14, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. I had forgotten about this account but fortunately I didn't forget where I wrote down the password. – *wbm1058 (talk) (contributions) 19:23, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Template cats

Mr Wbm1058 - I just created the template [hyperbole] but I'm not sure if I added the categories correctly because they're not showing up like they do in an article. If you get time, would you be so kind as to take a look at it? Atsme Talk 📧 14:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Atsme: it looks to me like you just created an unintentional fork of Template:Intentional hyperbole... and that's not hyperbole! LOL – wbm1058 (talk) 15:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
That one is for copy editing, mine is for humor. Is that a problem? Atsme Talk 📧 15:14, 3 October 2020 (UTC) See Template:Hyper
Template:Hyperbole redirects to Template:Peacock term, which is used on articles in main space.
Template:Hyper and Template:Intentional hyperbole both seem to be intended for indicating humor. The latter includes Template:Humor disclosure templates in its documentation. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:21, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Ok, so I added some templates, and now there's a category that says it's Template needing substitution which is explained Category_talk:Templates_needing_substitution_checking#Why? in language that you may understand because it is foreign to me. I just want to add [hyperbole] to the collapsable Humor disclosure templates and don't know how. Atsme Talk 📧 16:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Re: "Templates needing substitution checking": Took me some trial & error edits to hunt it down. Template:April fools is the culprit (it's in the template documentation). That template does indeed transclude {{Fix}}. – wbm1058 (talk) 18:37, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
I fixed that issue with this edit to Template:April fools. – wbm1058 (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
@Atsme: I just made {{hyper}} a template shortcut. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much!!! (not [hyperbole], not ???, and not [stretch]) Atsme Talk 📧 13:06, 4 October 2020 (UTC) <-- Noticed in preview that the close parenthesis following the stretch template is sent to the next line. ??? Did I screw-up code somewhere in that template? It doesn't move to next line if closed after hyper, but does after What if? and stretch. Atsme Talk 📧 13:06, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

2601:601:0:4a20:5477:8a43:b0f5:1be3

Please block user:2601:601:0:4a20:5477:8a43:b0f5:1be3 ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 22:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Checking contributions.  Done wbm1058 (talk) 22:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Restoring to page

Hello Wbm1058, would it be OK to restore at least some of the content to the Maiorana surname page? --2A02:C7F:3846:4500:DC4F:5FA4:1BA6:A16B (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

What do you want to restore to Maiorana? wbm1058 (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Mainly the origin of the name and appropriate categories, --2A02:C7F:3846:4500:9054:35AB:9C27:6E3A (talk) 04:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

It appears that this was removed based on the opinion of just one editor, so I see no problem with restoring that content based on WP:BRD. – wbm1058 (talk) 00:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

M-16 motorway (Pakistan)

M-16 motorway (Pakistan)

It was formerly "Swat Expressway" but now under construction "Swat Motorway". In fact Swat Expressway is being upgraded to Swat Motorway.

https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/10/21/swat-motorway-phase-ii-to-be-completed-under-public-private-partnership-kp-cm/

I believe it will be better to merge "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swat_Expressway" into "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=M-16_motorway_(Pakistan)&redirect=no". And delete "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Swat_Motorway&redirect=no". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karachi Kings Dr (talk • contribs) 19:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Karachi Kings Dr: Please do not move pages by cut & paste. From the editing and page moving history and the discussion on Talk:Swat Expressway, this is clearly a contested move. The majority of the cited sources still call it Swat Expressway. I am not familiar with the distinction between the terms "expressway" and "motorway" as used in Pakistan. To me, these words are more-or-less synonyms. You were already advised in the edit summary here to start a discussion to gain a consensus to change the title of this article. Please follow the instructions at WP:Requested moves. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 01:24, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

https://www.askdifference.com/motorway-vs-expressway/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_expressways_of_Pakistan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karachi Kings Dr (talk • contribs) 07:33, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

https://diffsense.com/diff/expressway/motorway — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karachi Kings Dr (talk • contribs) 08:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Karachi Kings Dr: Thanks for the links. In the future, please sign your talk page edits in compliance with the Wikipedia:Signatures guideline. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 12:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Help to create an article for protected name

@Wbm1058: Hello sir, I need your help for creating an article on a celebrity. The name has been protected due to multiple attempts by some banned user in 2018. Please check here. I request you to release the name. The celebrity is not having page in her name because of the action of some banned user back in 2018. Rickyurs (talk)
Please create the article at Draft:Swastika Dutta. When it's ready for publishing, I or another administrator can move it over the protected page. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 05:10, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
@Wbm1058: Sir, I have created the article at Draft:Swastika Dutta. It's ready for publishing as I have completed it, please move it over the protected page. Thanks, Rickyurs (talk)
@Wbm1058: Thank you. Rickyurs (talk)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:22, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks. It's been six years since I was a candidate in the 2014 Arbitration Committee elections. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:36, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

#REDIRECT

Is it usual to redirect the talk page to the talk page of a #REDIRECT article? I know I have written on talk pages for redirects, among others to discuss whether they should have their own article. Thanks. Gah4 (talk) 05:01, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Gah4, not all redirects need to have talk pages. If they do, it is often as a result of a page move. When a page is moved, its talk page should be moved with it, and the move usually leaves the {{R from move}} template behind on both the article and its talk page. But feel free to remove the redirect and {{R from move}} if you want to start a discussion on the {{Talk page of redirect}}. Sure if a redirect is tagged with {{R with possibilities}} feel free to use the talk page to discuss the possibilities. Generally if there are discussions on a talk page they shouldn't be replaced with a redirect, unless they are very trivial discussions, though I've seen editors do that. Sometimes there are nothing but WikiProject templates on the talk page of a redirect, some including me don't really see the value in that though I suppose the practice is fairly harmless.
If your query arises from my recent edits, the project I'm currently working on was prompted by reports of problems with my RMCD bot edits. See #Cross-namespace redirects and #Redirects from namespace 1 to namespace 0. – wbm1058 (talk) 13:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. The specific case is talk:ektacolor. Sometimes I write on the talk page the reason for the redirect, if it isn't so obvious. I might not have on this one. Gah4 (talk) 18:59, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Gah4, as I am making hundreds of similar edits, to save time on a lot of them I am just leaving the standard system-generated edit summaries, but on some I use the summary "don't cross-namespace redirect a talk page to an article" which is the underlying reason I made that edit. I removed your signature as standard practice is not to sign redirects; one can look in the edit history to see who created the redirect.
I tagged Vericolor and Ektacolor with the {{R with possibilities}} template. Feel free to replace the redirect at Talk:Ektacolor with a note similar to to the one you posted at Talk:Vericolor. I've not heard of these brands before, but do remember using Ektachrome back in the day. Been years since I last used my film cameras that I still have stored in a drawer. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:34, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I don't know about the cross namespace post. I think it was supposed to be a comment on what I did, but without thinking that it would actually be a redirect. It wasn't intended to be a cross redirect. Ok, thanks for fixing it. Gah4 (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Oh, also, Ektacolor and Vericolor are the professional versions of Kodacolor, color negative film. In the case of Ektachrome there is just Ektachrome professional (well, maybe not any more), but in the negative films they have different names. I don't know why they did that. Gah4 (talk) 20:26, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
OK, so does #REDIRECT only work if it is the absolute first thing on the page? If I put something else before it, even space, it wouldn't actually redirect? Thanks. Gah4 (talk) 20:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, that's right. Has to be first. Then of course there was Kodak's most famous film brand. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Redirect bypass

Hi, I see you are changing links from Natural History Museum to Natural History Museum, London. This practice is deprecated. Please see WP:NOTBROKEN. DuncanHill (talk) 19:46, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@DuncanHill: oh, but it is broken: fixed Sirindhorn, fixed Government Museum and Art Gallery, Chandigarh, fixed Pakistan Museum of Natural History, fixed Museo di Storia Naturale di Venezia, fixed NTNU University Museum, fixed Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, fixed Botanical Garden of the University of Coimbra, fixed Florida Museum of Natural History, fixed Koch family foundations – wbm1058 (talk) 20:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Those are not what I am talking about. You are changing correct uses of the redirect in order to avoid it. "Piping links solely to avoid redirects is generally a time-wasting exercise that can actually be detrimental. It is almost never helpful to replace redirect with redirect". DuncanHill (talk) 20:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Talk:Natural History Museum, London § Requested move moved Natural History Museum → Natural History Museum, London in June 2013 (diff). The sysop who closed that RM then redirected Natural History Museum to Natural History Museum (disambiguation) but that redirect was WP:MALPLACED. So @15:47, 29 June 2013 another sysop moved page Natural History Museum (disambiguation) to Natural History Museum without leaving a redirect (per WP:MALPLACED). Then that disambiguation page was converted to a WP:Broad-concept article (diff). Soon after that, another sysop moved Natural History Museum → Natural history museum (diff) as the article described the generic term. From 1 July 2013 to 12 July 2017 (for 4 years) the proper name Natural History Museum targeted the generic term Natural history museum. During that time none of the nine links I fixed (listed above) would have been broken. But then an IP redirected to Natural History Museum, London (diff) giving the rationale "Users typing in the specific capitalised version are not going to be looking for a generic article, but the museum by that specific name". Within minutes the redirect was changed again, to target List of natural history museums (diff). The name is not unique; there are also Natural History Museum, Berlin and Natural History Museum, Vienna. The redirect has been targeting Natural History Museum, London for the past three years, since it was changed on 20 November 2017 (diff) with the rationale "Natural History Museum is a proper name, not a generic name. The capitialisation is most likely deliberate. The link to list of natural history museums messes up thousands of template links." As seen by some of the fixes I listed above, editors sometimes deliberately use title case in infoboxes when they intend to link to the generic topic and not to a specific museum. Most of those "thousands of template links" were caused by Module:Taxonbar/conf and I made them go away with this edit. Those links had all arisen since that module was created on 28 May 2017. Now there are just 140 links left that will need disambiguation when Natural History Museum no longer targets the London museum. – wbm1058 (talk) 05:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

173.196.2.250

Can user:173.196.2.250 please be blocked ASAP for vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 19:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Checking Special:Contributions/173.196.2.250...  Done – wbm1058 (talk) 19:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Slow as Christmas!!

🔔🎁⛄️🎅🏻 Atsme 💬 📧 05:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Greetings

Yo Ho Ho

GenQuest "scribble" 04:40, 25 December 2020 (UTC) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Merry Christmas, wbm1058!

TheSandDoctor Talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wbm1058/Archive_8&oldid=1054539362"