User talk:Pppery

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Identified as a precious editor.
This user has template editor rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has redirect autopatrolled pseudo-rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has page mover rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has interface administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Welcome!

Hello, Pppery, and

welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions
. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

sign your name
on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Fayenatic London 20:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editor experience invitation

Hi Pppery :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on

section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion
, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lavalizard101 (talk) 00:38, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jishnu Raghavan

Thanks for the sock reverts on this one. Just filed this. Been chasing film and television related socks for the last month and they are relentless. CNMall41 (talk) 04:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meatotomy.jpg

Hi Pppery, I was wondering if you could figure out what's going on with File:Meatotomy.jpg. It keeps showing up as a broken redirect, but the local description page does not contain a redirect. I suspect the history merge you performed with File:Open meatotomy.jpg has something to do with it, but this just has me stumped. plicit 15:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. But it's currently struck out from that list, and so not a broken redirect, right now? * Pppery * it has begun... 16:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hello, Pppery,

I regularly review the Move log and tonight I noticed that you moved a lot of articles from weird page titles that included acronyms to more natural page titles that reflect article content. I don't know how you found all of these random articles! But this was a necessary task that probably hadn't occurred to anyone to take care of before now that helps make Wikipedia more user-friendly to readers looking for information so I just wanted to thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 05:06, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I've been using Quarry to run a regular expression on all page titles in the database. I started doing this a year ago and have erroneously declared the task done several times since, only to stumble across a title that evaded my search months later. The trigger for the recent batch was
Low-Frequency Array (LOFAR), which I RM-ed rather than moving myself in order to have a precedent I could use to speedy rename the category. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Misanthropic Wikipedians

FWIW, I was typing a rather long edit summary when Primefac declined it. I agree with his decision as this search shows many Wikipedians self-identify that way. Barkeep49 (talk) 19:31, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay .... * Pppery * it has begun... 19:33, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfD closes

Hello, Pppery. Since I know you like to do it manually, apparently, per {{

Queen of Hearts ❤️ (she/they 🎄 🏳️‍⚧️) 08:18, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Noted. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:41, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removing toolforge links

Hey hey. Is removing toolforge links a good idea? Stuff like Sigma is important enough that it will definitely be migrated by someone, and may even get turned back on in the meantime, at which point the links will work again. I don't think we should go mass deleting these toolforge links quite yet. Thoughts? –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like most of Sigma is now migrated and the Sigma links (except for afdstats) are working again. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not really mass-deleting - I made a total of 10 edits, thinking at the time that the tool would remain down for longer than a day. Anyway I've reverted most of them now. I've kept the changes that replaced Sigma links with Xtools links providing the same function, since it's probably still preferable to link to a better-maintained tool rather than a tool that literally had to be turned off to see who screamed. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello Pppery, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024.
Happy editing,

The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 01:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 01:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A solstice greeting

❄️ Happy holidays! ❄️

Hi Pppery! I'd like to wish you a splendid solstice season as we wrap up the year. Here is an artwork, made individually for you, to celebrate. I always appreciate your technical work at
TfD and elsewhere. Take care, and thanks for all you do to make Wikipedia better!
Cheers,
{{u|Sdkb}}talk
DALL·E 3.
Note: The vibes are winter solsticey. If you're in the southern hemisphere, oops, apologies
.

{{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done. I am in fact in the northern hemisphere, and I've almost finished figuring out why snow isn't being produced properly from floating islands in the sky, so it's nice to see snow. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A joyous Christmas to you!

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Jerium (talk) 16:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas


Christmas postcard featuring Santa Claus using a zeppelin to deliver gifts, by Ellen Clapsaddle, 1909
~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello Pppery: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 15:43, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Four traditions of geography category

Consensus isn't a vote, and I gave extremely valid reasons why that category should not be deleted as well as peer reviewed literature. Those reasons were never addressed. I created a Wikipedia page for the traditions to demonstrate their significance when mentioned by a commenter it needed one, and provided citations. This is a high level category with peer reviewed literature to back it up. This deletion impacts many high level categories in geography, and reorganization without being original research is not easy. Significant conversation is necessary, and that did not happen. Based on that lack of discussion and reply to the material I gave, I argue no consensus was reached, and Wikipedia is not a democracy. The fact some people were not willing to change their opinion, propose a solution, or respond to comments, involving the organization of these pages just demonstrates stubbornness or lack of interest on the part of the editors voting.

I'm unfamiliar with policy, how do I go about requesting this be undone? GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 04:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see plenty of conversation there, in which you exhausted everyone else's willingness to reply without convincing them. You seem to think this reflects badly on them, but it anything it reflects badly on you for
WP:BLUDGEONing. Anyway the process you are looking for is WP:Deletion review. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
If people maintain their opinions and fail to reply to an argument based on peer reviewed outside sources, or consider the need to organize categories that satisfies both Wikipedia consistency and outside literature, I don't know what else to do. I don't believe most of the editors are particularly familiar with the content area. I strongly disagree with the sentiment of the explanatory essay you linked, as it encourages submission and silence to the mob majority, and silences dissenting opinions. If 1,000 editors express an opinion that is counter to the outside peer reviewed literature, they are still wrong, which is something I've experienced in a separate talk page recently. In that case, almost a century of peer reviewed papers were ignored based on the personal opinions of editors. In this case, this is one of the most well established methods of subdividing the field of geography that is taught to undergraduates and part of the required reading for many graduate programs (on Google Scholar, the main paper for the Four Traditions of Geography is cited over 600 times). Reorganizing the geography categories without this needs considerable work to avoid being original research, and no one addressed this. The other categories have an even weaker claim to legitimacy then the four traditions, and are certainly less consistent/verifiable within the literature, as I pointed out but was not addressed by others. Wikipedia is not a democracy, and if you have a strong reason for disagreeing with a topic based on outside sources, it is your ethical responsibility to argue the point. If this seems tedious, it is mostly out of frustration as a geographer trying to explain to others something extremely elementary to my discipline, like a biologist trying to explain that RNA and DNA should have different categories under Category:Nucleic acids. I believe that at the very least, after being reposted twice for continued input without receiving any feedback besides mine, requests for more outside opinions were necessary before deletion. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 06:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I refuse to engage further with your continued repetition of the same points - I feel there was a consensus to delete here, you don't, and it's becoming increasingly clear that neither of us is going to convince the other one of their position. So take it to WP:Deletion review if you really insist. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:02, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is the problem, you feel there was a consensus. People are not looking at any sources, arguments, or discussion and are entirely acting on their feelings and first thought alone. The internet is famous for people digging in on positions and being inflexible, and if people will claim that attempts to change minds or argue a point are bludgeoning, I don't understand how it is even possible. Three or four people, likely deletionists if they hang out on that page, are not a broad consensus of something established outside Wikipedia. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:26, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Four Traditions of Geography. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 20:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you!

Thank you for deleting the redirect 2025-2026. I never intended on making it, but when I moved the page from there, it made a redirect. - The Master of Hedgehogs (always up for a conversation!) 16:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coldplay/doc and Template:Coldplay songs/doc

Hello! Which categories of deletion do these two pages fit into? I want to delete them because the documentation is very small and already included on the original templates. GustavoCza (talkcontribs) 06:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they fit into any speedy deletion criterion. If you really insist, take them to
WP:TFD * Pppery * it has begun... 15:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Salaar - Cease Fire page is being manipulated

Salaar Cease fire page is being manipulated by an editor Tousif.15 because that editor is biased towards another movie which released same day and so he is literally decreasing the box office numbers of Salaar and upon many requests to state actual figures and providing many credible sources he is deliberately creating issues whereas on the other movie Wikipedia page he is increasing the BO numbers without providing a single source. Is that how editors misuse their power here? You recently edited that page so i am posting this here. We have decided to take action against him and if you aren't involved in all of this then go through that main edit request and update the Box office numbers. VarunKumar35 (talk) 16:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made one edit to correct an obviously missing word, but have no further interest in involving myself in this dispute. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well then you are involved anyway since you have rejected the other requests by making duplicate request excuse and deliberately ignoring the main request that lead to all that. We're done talking here and I'll make sure biased editors are banned. On a mission now. Take care. VarunKumar35 (talk) 16:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Frat rock disambig

I've been quite busy and away from Wikipedia for a while, so I missed out on the discussion about the deletion of the Frat rock disambiguation. For a long time it automatically was linked to Garage rock. It is generally regarded as not only a subgenre of Garage rock, but also the perhaps the earliest tangible form of Garage rock. It was certainly not orphaned. The Garage rock article carefully discusses its significance in the history of the larger genre. I cannot understand why the disambiguation was removed. Now it will be harder for people to make the necessary connection. Is there any way the disambiguation can be reinstated? GloryRoad66 (talk) 02:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the page Frat rock (disambiguation) because it was a disambiguation page with only one valid entry. The entire content of the page at the time I deleted it was:
{{db-disambig|help=off}}
{{One other topic|date=November 2023}}
*[[Garage rock]]:  Frat rock is one of the earliest forms of garage rock and was popular in the 1960s, particularly in the first half of the decade.  The music tended to be "fun" and "upbeat" and was often played at parties and college [[fraternity]] events.
{{disambiguation}}
. This wasn't a valid disambiguation page because it contains only one entry, and hence met the speedy deletion criterion
Frat rock continues to exist as a redirect to garage rock#Frat rock and initial commercial success which already explains the relationship between the two genres, appearing to make the disambiguation page redundant. I'm not following your logic as to why that deletion makes the relationship harder to understand. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm glad to know that it still redirects--that was my main concern. Otherwise I'm fine with the delete. Thanks. Have a Happy New Year! GloryRoad66 (talk) 21:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the recent talk page history

Is there any reason why we might choose to leave BHG's talk such a mess? People keep doing what they must do, which is notify an involved party. We keep reverting those changes. Perhaps an editing notice/warning. Perhaps full protection. It's nothing to me personally, but it feels wrong. BusterD (talk) 04:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The best technical solution is probably just to pblock Mason from the talk page. No social solutions will work because it's done via Twinkle which can't read. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:05, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather avoid any kind of block because this account is linked to me professionally. Mason (talk) 04:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I see nothing overtly wrong with Mason's edits and can't justify even a selective block. This issue is an extension of BHG's incredible pace as a category editor. Anytime we lose an editor with a million edits a year, there will be consequences when that editor becomes inactive for any reason. Mason, would you mind removing (in batches, perhaps) your own automated notices to her talk page after your edits have created them? You might link to this discussion when questioned about it. Pppery, do you think this would be a reasonable solution? As an alternative, are we required to remove such automatically created threads? It's possible this needs a more centrally located discussion. I'm open to solutions from you folks (or any helpful page stalker). Even as a retired editor, BHG's talk page sees more activity than almost anybody else's on the pedia. BusterD (talk) 13:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It might be possible to add a check to twinkle to skip adding the notice. In the meantime, I can try my best to uncheck the notice, as I think it's technically not mandatory to notify the page creator. Mason (talk) 16:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Photo of desk with rocking chair and bed.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Photo of desk with rocking chair and bed.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 11:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Celebration!
Thank you for fixing! ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:51, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hello, Pppery,

Thank you for drawing my attention to the broken redirect situation about the animals in the Bible article after it was moved without leaving a redirect. I saw those broken redirects not from the AnomieBOT's list but from a Quarry query I run so I didn't see the scope of the situation. Thank you for restoring some, I've taken care of the rest of them. I try to urge page movers to leave a redirect behind when they move an article so that the bots can fix the incorrect redirects but, in this case, it was my oversight as well. I appreciate your careful eyes. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. And this message interrupted me cleaning up another mess caused by careless page moving. Oh, well, that's Wikipedia. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Awards for 2023

The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award

For over 360 article reviews during 2023. Well done! Keep up the good work and thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Visa policy of Russia

Please return the editorial before you return. It was fine. Please review the article carefully. There's nothing criminal in it. Thank you. Hurfon (talk) 11:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. You're probably just another sock stirring trouble. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for helping with my edit requests! -- DannyS712 (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. User:G.W. Schulz created the article, and is currently blocked for a COI. The article is also a duplicate of Glynn Simmons. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You requested speedy deletion under
WP:G5. That criterion only applies if someone is blocked, and then creates a sockpuppet and uses it to create pages in violation of the block, not if someone creates an article and is later blocked. A draft duplicating an article is not a reason for speedy deletion - feel free to redirect it to the article instead. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Nadwi/Nadvi

Hello, Hope you’re fine! The Nadvi and Nadwi are the same page, is it possible to have two surname pages with just a spell difference? Kindly help me on this. Thank You — Quadrimobile(T · C 05:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You requested a
Wikipedia:History merge, which doesn't make sense here. What you want to do is instead redirect one page to the other, assuming they are in fact duplicative (which isn't clear to me). * Pppery * it has begun... 05:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@Pppery The surname is used by associates of an Institution in India, and with both spellings some used Nadvi and some Nadwi, just a difference of (v or w). So i can make anyone of them a redirect to another? — Quadrimobile(T · C 05:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no interest in the content issue here: do whichever you feel makes sense to you. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this page, which you speedily deleted, has resurfaced as DaLi (singer). — Biruitorul Talk 15:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Papa2004#22 January 2024 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting edits by sockpuppet of LOCK177

Mr. @Pppery, can you revert a edits by a sockpuppet of LOCK177 on article page RCTI like in Special:Diff/1185395353...???? Thanks. 36.78.196.11 (talk) 22:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? The linked edit is by LOCK177 before they started socking, so there's no grounds to per-se revert it. And I have no idea why I specifically was asked this. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024

Do you often ping regulars over inadvertant isolated mistakes? Piece of friendly advice: Don't do that. Fix the mistake and move on. —ShelfSkewed Talk 05:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I've been pinged myself for similar mistakes before so thought that was expected. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Article Creation

Hi @Pppery,

I hope this message finds you well. Recently, there was an interesting Wikipedia article about Dutch Indonesians that caught my attention. Unfortunately, it was created by a user involved in sockpuppetry, leading to its reversion.

I'm considering recreating the article under the article creation clause for a proper review. I believe it could be a valuable addition, given its relevance. What are your thoughts on this, and do you have any advice or insights?

Cheers, Kaliper1 (talk) 03:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No particular insights to share. I have no opinion on whether this could be a valid topic for an article, just noticed the trouble stirring while doing some NPP. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I see. Thanks for the reply! Kaliper1 (talk) 03:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Rollback Barnster

The Rollback Barnster
Thanks for the continuous effort to rollback edits, especially on User talk:BrownHairedGirl and keeping that talk page neat and tidy. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:34, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I hope that you like cookies ...

Cookies!

GhostInTheMachine has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Thanks for all of the page wrangling.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!


What paradigm?

Hi, re this - what paradigm is that? I watch all of the RfC listing pages plus both of Lego's user talk pages, and am not aware of any process to sort unsorted RfCs before Legobot sees them. Indeed, it's usually me that fixes unsorted RfCs, but I'm not online 24/7. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#FRS bot speed, assuming that whoever migrates Yapperbot to K8S also changes the speed to once a day, and then that you check the list once any day. Anyway, AFAICT yapperbot was never using that section anyway since it parses the RfC tag for categories itself, so unless someone says {{rfc|unsorted}} it will never think of the RfC as unsorted. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Christian
redirect request

You recently closed a request at

Christina Christian as Not done to change the redirect and to wait for the AfD to finish. That AfD was closed as Keep and the redirect should be targeted to Christina Cewe. Thank you, Aspects (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

 Done and I've also unprotected it. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]


All the Joe Sanderses

Hi there Pppery - thanks for fixing

Joe Sanders (double bassist) page. Sorry to be a pest but if you know how to remove the Wikidata page link to "Joe Sanders" the film tv and video game music composer from IMdB from the bassist's Wikidata page, would be awesome. No pressure of course. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhdshoes2 (talkcontribs) 16:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

 Done, but I'm curious: who is https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5298457/ referring to? Joe Sanders has his own IMDB page at https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0761595/. Are there three Joe Sanderses? * Pppery * it has begun... 17:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template edit request on Template talk:Designation

Hi Pppery,

I requested an edit to the designation template to add a designation for Major cultural heritage sites under national-level protection (China). Can you please review it and add it to the list? It is quite a major designation considering the amount of cultural heritage sites in China. Thank you! Hi (talk) 12:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

The Template Barnstar
For your great work on the historic sites infobox, adding designations for months on end. Keep it up! Contributing to this encyclopaedia might get boring, but it is meaningful. Daftation (talk) 16:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

recently deleted "Gumn" page

Hi I saw that you deleted a page recently, Pakistani drama Gumn's, because the account that created wasn't legitimate of sort.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gumn

I was wondering if there was a way to review that decision from your part, considering that the page was itself quite well written and it was a project with some credibility (directed by one of the country's best known filmmakers, millions of YouTube views, etc)

Thanks.

Metamentalist (talk) 21:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've undeleted it. To be clear, per
WP:PROXYING, editors who reinstate edits made by a banned or blocked editor take complete responsibility for the content, which would now be you. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
No problem, thanks for your understansing. ~~~~ Metamentalist (talk) 18:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

G6 decline on template documentation

Hey Pppery, you

WP:!G6. Could you elaborate on why you did so? SWinxy (talk) 04:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Because I don't see it as meeting any of the subcriteria listed under G6. Your personal assertion that a page is no longer necessary is not a reason for speedy deletion. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it to be, for uncontroversial maintenance, i.e. documentation housekeeping. This situation sits between the suggested reasons for using G6 and the explicit no-no's (Things that do not qualify for G6) in the not-G6 essay. G6 is expansive in its wording. Would you rather it go to TfD, which seems like too much bureaucracy for this? SWinxy (talk) 05:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that that term can be interpreted to mean anything, rendering the entire concept of enumerated speedy deletion criteria meaningless, hence I interpret it to mean (almost) nothing instead, and (almost) never G6 delete pages except for ones that fall under specific bullet points. So you have to take it to TfD, and I've done Special:Diff/1205677943 to make my thinking clearer for the future. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:47, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for your work on Wikipedia! Don't forget that there is no deadline and that Wikipedia can wait. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Iowa

hey! should i avoid using the Template:WikiProject Iowa? i wanted to update the various articles without the template since they're related to the wikiproject. thanks in advance! 🐦DrWho42👻 03:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're fine to use it, but you should
substitute it as the documentation says, otherwise a bot has to clean up after you and was whining because you gave it too much work to do. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Jonathon T. Reeves
, etc.

Hi There! I was just trying to clean these up, so my apologies for not choosing the right reasons. In this particular case, however, I must be missing something because the edit history only shows 4 edits, although the page was also moved once or twice. BCorr|Брайен 17:10, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page was created in 2011 as "Jonathon T. Reeves" (incorrectly spelled) by The Country Girl. Eastern but not so middle moved the redirect to "Jonathan T. Reeves" (correctly spelled), thus putting the history of that 2011 creation there. In my opinion "Jonathon T. Reeves" would be speedyable as implausible but it's not recently created, and "Jonathan T. Reeves" is recently created but not implausible and hence neither could be validly speedy deleted. On the others, you tagged
is still being discussed so I'm not willing to delete them under that reason yet, forcing me to ignore the creator and assess their plausibility from a clean slate, and I consider neither to be over the R3 line. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for your patience in explaining all this, Pppery! I've been around long enough that I try to balance being bold with being careful -- and I definitely am not on top of all the debates and developments in policy. -- Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 18:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dab pages

I was wandering around doing gnomish stuff and tripped over this edit. What is the if statement for? It looks to me like — if nothing then do nothing else insert the standard DAB SD i.e. just insert the standard DAB SD — which seems a bit evil anyway – it being a secret sub-template. Why the need for the if? Help please — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 14:26, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to subst {{disambiguation cleanup}}, intending to get an auto-dated version, which produced that markup which wasn't wanted. I've fixed the underlying issue now in Special:Diff/1207322395. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Thanks — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 15:38, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_6#Category:African-American_women_lawyers

Hi, could you explain how you got a merge consensus here? There were only 3 participants and I don't see a consensus at all. I provided sources which demonstrate that it passed

WP:EGRS and neither participant provided a logical reason why it did not.--User:Namiba 15:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Also, Category:Asian-American women psychologists was depopulated and deleted so a merge is impossible now.--User:Namiba 15:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is I had read thru several sources before I made the nomination. My impression from the literature was that there was not a defining intersection between occupation + race + gender for law. My impression was that law was like many other professions where being black and female were both disadvantageous. I did not come away with the impression that their were specific disadvantages at the intersection for the occupation itself. (from Mason's comment), to which you did not respond, not a logical reason? It looks like one to me. Fundamentally you made your case in that discussion but failed to convince either of the other participants, resulting in a consensus to merge. A 2:1 discussion is consensus to merge by default in my view.
Oh, and Category:Asian-American women psychologists was already merged by the bot. It seems, looking at the bot's contributions, that every single article in that category was also in Category:American women psychologists so there was no merging needed, but neither I nor the participants realized that until now. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:56, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I would not call it a logical reason. The sources clearly demonstrate a rather obviously defining intersection. I could have added more sources if necessary. Anyone who does their due-diligence before nominating would have seen the countless books and articles about the intersection: [Rebels in Law: Voices in History of Black Women Lawyers edited by John Clay Smith], [Black Women Lawyers Coping With Dual Discrimination by NINA BURLEIGH, Stephanie Benson Goldberg ABA Journal, Vol. 74, No. 6 (JUNE 1, 1988), pp. 64-68], [You Don't Look Like a Lawyer: Black Women and Systemic Gendered Racism By Tsedale M. Melaku]. I'd ask that you reopen the discussion and allow other users to comment. 2 hardcore deletionists ignoring the sources does not a consensus make.--User:Namiba 16:07, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, I've relisted it. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Namiba if you think it is so obvious, that " [t]he sources clearly demonstrate a rather obviously defining intersection", please explain WHY it is defining. I tried to make it very clear that I was open to having my mind changed. "Can you give specific examples? I am happy to change my mind, but I did not find any that were". I did not ignore the sources; I disagreed with your interpretation. Your argument right now, boils down to sources exist, therefore the intersection is defining. That's not a convincing argument. (Nor is it fair to characterize me as a deletionist, I create a fair number of categories, and oppose deletions often.) Mason (talk) 03:58, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Pppery,

I was coming across a lot of empty categories that were due to the outcome of this CFD discussion (they are mostly no longer empty any longer) and I noticed that this discussion wasn't "archived" properly. I would just do it myself but I'm not sure what tags to use, since I use XFDcloser, or where to put them. Since you know more about templates than anyone else I know here, I'm bringing it to your attention because it's probably a problem you can resolve in less than a minute.

I hope all is well with you and you are having a great weekend. It is cold and drizzly here in the Northwest, just a typical mid-February day with dreary weather! But spring is on the way. Take care, Liz Read! Talk! 02:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the closure format. On the empty categories, yeah, I did things in a weird order that left categories empty for a while, although I wasn't expecting it to take as long as it did and Murphy's law says it had to straddle the empty category report. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template parameters

Hi Pppery, I came to Wikipedia:Template namespace because I was looking for guidance on template parameters, i.e. whether to use named or positional parameters. My understanding is that we have generally moved to named parameters on all but the simplest of templates, but do you know if this is written down as a guideline anywhere? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not aware of any formal guideline stating that. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, okay, me neither. But I think some encouragement not to use positional parameters on complex templates might be sensible. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it depends a lot on context and how you define complex, and hence is not possible to write a generic guideline about. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bertram Fletcher Robinson

 – * Pppery * it has begun... 21:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Aafi hereby grants this Original barnstar to Pppery for their global contributions, and more recently passing an RfA here. I am glad and hope to keep seeing you around. ─
(talk) 03:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tristan Tate
redirect thingy

My mistake. I hadn't noticed that it had extensive history. I will move it into draft position behind the current article, which I have accepted procedurally, in place of the current redirect in the draft position, which is a nothing, and then the nothing can be deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have indirectly tagged the categories by transcluding the template. I'd suggest directly editing the pages to trigger watchlist notifications. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:53, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because I was trying to be efficient and not make several hundred unnecessary edits that were going to be reverted anyway. Is anyone really going to be watching a category tree that was created only last year by one editor (who I did notify) and similarly populated only by editing a template? Unless there's an explicit consensus somewhere that template-transcluded tagging is insufficient, then I will keep doing that when nominating large trees. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's your choice. Just a suggestion. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
For all your template work and admin work, you're one of the best editors we have. SWinxy (talk) 05:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cars (2006)

Hi. Fairly minor issue, but I happened to notice this recent redirect change of yours,[1] and I wouldn't think "Cars (2006)" should point to anything other than the 2006 film Cars. Just curious about the rationale behind the change. --DB1729talk 00:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's ambiguous with Cars (video game), which was also released in 2006. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey thanks. I actually bought and still own that game!:) I had a feeling I was missing something. DB1729talk 00:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Teaching Editing

Greetings Pppery Thank you for your response! I am new to Wikipedia editing (if you haven't parsed that yet, lol) and am trying to teach my students about editing so that we can improve pages on North American Indigenous people and culture. I have student tribal members interested in participating & I want to help them to assist them to learn to edit their tribal pages to correct incorrect assumptions, histories, etc. so I am learning how to Wiki-edit. XD If we drive you crazy on the Indigenous science page, just let me know and I will intervene. Thank you for all the work you clearly have done on Wikipedia! We need more folks like you. Best Lady3Eye, Sarah (Professor of Anthropology and Biology) Lady3Eye (talk) 20:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

Hi, can you please remove "20 upper" and me on Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPageJSON, as I've changed my username. Thanks. Wolverine XI (den🐾) 05:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:35, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"it would have been preferable to realize you weren't supposed to link to an unreliable nonsense site, but whatever"

Thanks for helping out with the log entry, but out of curiosity, what are supposed to do for links to 'nonsense sites' in a column that, specifically, discusses and analyzes media coverage of Wikipedia? (it may be noted that it was only added to the blacklist on February 19, so not a thing that had been on-sight for twenty years) jp×g🗯️ 07:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you kind of have a point there. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pppery,

I don't know what's going on with the article but since you moved

Neeraj Gupta (sculptor) will be moved to Neeraj Gupta as teh sculptor will be the only article left in that name and I'm concerned there might end up being an article with three edit histories colliding. TarnishedPathtalk 05:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

The reason is that Liz, equally confused, accidentally deleted the article and then undeleted it again, thus undeleting the origial deleted revisions. I didn't do anything about it since the article was about to be deleted, rendering my efforts moot, but unless another admin makes a mistake the two deleted articles will remain comingled in the deleted history and the article on the sculptor will be the only one in the undeleted history. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the clarification. TarnishedPathtalk 03:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've just moved the article after conclusion of the AfD and a whole bunch of history as shown up from before I created it. This is very odd. TarnishedPathtalk 03:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not odd at all. I deliberately history merged the revisions about the sculptor from the original hijacked article to your draft, since its creation was clearly a cut-paste from that version. This was the case before it was mainspaced and moved, too. The edits about the comedian and film producer remain deleted. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. @Pppery, please delete these user pages such as User:Ayig2, User:Symphonium264 Ayam and User:Mi Mi Game because CSD G5. Thanks. 36.78.197.67 (talk) 13:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted the last two. Declined for the first one as there's no evidence they had any accounts prior to Ayig2 and hence the page was not created in violation of any specific block. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help of Administrator needed.

Hello! @Pppery In the article talk page of Matzoon, we are having a trouble over the interpretation of one specific source: [2]

in the source it says: Springer. p. 212 - "Matzoon (En); mazun (Fr, De); matsun, matsoni, maconi. Short Description: "Of Armenian origin; Georgia, Caucasus (USSR); traditional product; the milk of ewes, goats, buffalo, or cows or mixtures thereof; yoghurt like product traditionally made from boiled milk and an undefined starter culture; firm consistency and acidic flavor."

My interpretation of the source is that the author names the countries from where the origins of Matzoon/Matsoni is from, thats why he mentions Georgia, Caucasus(USSR), alongside Armenia.

My oppositions opinion is that because it doesn't say specifically "Of Georgian origin" and says Georgia, Caucasus that it doesn't need to be mentioned in the article that origins of Matsoni are also from Georgia.

My opinion is also also agreed by the European Union, Switzerland, United Kingdom through a bi-lateral agreement about Geographical Indications registration[3] who recognizes the patented copyright laws and geographical distribution indication of Matsoni.

"DESCRIPTION OF THE FINISHED PRODUCT AND RAW MATERIAL:

MATSONI is a Georgian traditional cultured milk product, which is prepared from the milk of cow, buffalo, goat, sometimes sheep or their mixing. The cultured milk fermentation gives the product named “Dedo”, which consists of bacterial strains, existed in the local area of Georgia.[4]

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF PRODUCTION:

Obtaining, processing and fermentation of milk for MATSONI production takes place in the whole territory of Georgia. Fermentation for obtaining of cultured milk product occurs by the “Dedo” consisting of local bacteria strains."[5]

Also the opposition, who are allegedly Armenian nationalists refuse to accept other kind of sources which also call Matsoni as "Georgian yoghurt", they delete the any attempt of writing it as "of Armenian and Georgian origins" even tho legally Georgia has more claim over it.

The sources they deleted are following: [6][7][8]

Please help us resolve this issue. Thank you Lemabeta (talk) 15:14, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Admins have no special authority to resolve content disputes and I am not interested in enaging with this. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So what should be done? Lemabeta (talk) 06:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese eras

Hi @

talk) 04:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

It's not. One specific user who likes to edit Chinese eras was blocked from editing Wikipedia a while ago, and has repeatedly evaded that block using
talk) 04:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Thank you for the information. Have a great day.
talk) 04:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Npp

@Pppery Review the page Joshua Mike-Bamiloye Thanks. Jutos222 (talk) 15:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't canvas random people to review your page - someone will get to it in due time. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:06, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shonan Bellmare kit evolution

I don’t want to get into an edit-war here so I’m just letting you know I’ve restored the kit evolution section at Shonan Bellmare. These sections are used for Japanese football clubs, you can check any others to confirm. Strictly speaking, they could be at Wikicommons with a link but I currently don’t have the time to transfer them all so for now if you could leave them there it would be appreciated. They’ve been a part of Japanese football club pages for years. Thanks! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those sections violate
WP:NOTGALLERY. SportingFlyer T·C 13:39, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@SportingFlyer:, instead of just deleting it. Could you at least transfer it to [9], these sections are not to be simply removed. If you aren’t willing to move it, I understand, its rather tiresome, however don’t just remove them from articles, especially considering that there are literally about 100 Japanese football club articles with these sections. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to transfer it, but if lots of Japanese football clubs have this, they all need to be removed. Pictures of kits clearly violate
WP:NOTGALLERY. SportingFlyer T·C 13:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

mfd

Hi, sorry for this, I hadn't time to reply and then forgot about it but noticed now when it was closed, would it be possible to relist the "User talk:37.172.90.185‎" mfd just once so I can at least reply to things like "not an appropriate use of MFD" and express myself better as calling it "inappropriate use of MFD" looks inappropriate imo. Result most likely will not change but I feel bad with the impression it left. Tehonk (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. The consensus was clear enough and relisting discussions for that reason is just not something that's done here. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:30, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Users preventing the update of the Bojana article

Hi @Pppery. Since at some point, you've been following the discussion about the "Requested move" of

WP:NPOV. Krisitor (talk) 14:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

I am not interested in engaging further with this. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SpongeBob disambiguation history

Please restore all deleted revisions of page SpongeBob SquarePants (disambiguation) to complete the page history. 134.199.113.124 (talk) 14:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done * Pppery * it has begun... 16:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to let you know I reverted your last edit to the above as it introduced an error at Wikipedia:About. I know nothing about these things, so maybe there's a way to achieve what you wish without the collateral damage.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed. Taking a look. The edit seemed to me like it couldn't possibly break anything, and it was requested by a template editor who I generally think knows what their doing, so I implemented it without taking as close a look as I should have apparently. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notice

The file File:New Logo CWGC.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

redundant to SVG file

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be

deleted for any of several reasons
.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 185.172.241.184 (talk) 06:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]