User talk:Serial Number 54129/Archive 22

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

~~~ 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:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers Wikaviani, you're very kind. I hope the season brings you all you wish of it! ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Chris Troutman (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanking you, Chris troutman, and all the best to you and yours! ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Looking forward to a bit of that, Ealgdyth, many thanks and festive greetings to you also! ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
May 2020 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls, vandals or visits from Krampus! All the best Gavin / SchroCat (talk) 07:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Up yours too, old man  ;) (!!!) ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 23:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanking you Lightburst, all the best to you and yours! ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at works on aspects of the Second World War and Cold War

It’s that time of year!

	Time To Spread A Little Happy Holiday Cheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: *it doesn't need water *won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas – Happy Hanukkah‼️ and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

@Atsme: Goody! Worms for Christmas  :) And many happy returns to you and yours also! ——SN54129 17:22, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
534		Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick (talk)	Add sources
46		Mount Carmel School (talk)	Add sources
3,606		Edward IV of England (talk )	Add sources
3,306		Wars of the Roses (talk)	Add sources
129		Edmund Blackadder (talk)	Add sources
171		Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra (talk)	Add sources
32		Heather Marsh (talk)	Cleanup
39		David Leigh (journalist) (talk)	Cleanup
29		Operation Leakspin (talk )	Cleanup
856		Vox (political party) (talk)	Expand
2,085		WikiLeaks (talk)	Expand
81		Meraas (talk)	Expand
536		La Femme Nikita (film) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
29		Tim Buck (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
2,671		Trinity (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
25		Dubai Marina Mall (talk)	Merge
3		DAMAC Maison-Paramount Tower 3 (talk )	Merge
3		DAMAC Maison-Paramount Tower 1 (talk )	Merge
35		Johann Heinrich Richartz (talk)	Wikify
1,385		Monster Energy (talk)	Wikify
373		Commutation (law) (talk)	Wikify
20		Warrior Dog Foundation (talk)	Orphan
12		Sigurdur Thordarson (talk)	Orphan
128		Medieval female sexuality (talk)	Orphan
9		Explaining Hitler (talk)	Stub
16		Underground (Dreyfus book) (talk)	Stub
11		D 94 road (United Arab Emirates) (talk)	Stub
17		InCablenet (talk)	Stub
18		Vinod Narayan Jha (talk)	Stub
11		Rachel Douglas-Home, 27th Baroness Dacre (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:40, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

If this sounds interesting to you, I'd be most grateful for any comments you may care to make at the peer review. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Please

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on OpIndia; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's

Hi, hope all is well with you. There's a discussion on the talk page you may wish to add to. After all the hard work you put into the article and getting it to FA status, I'd hate for it to suffer because a relative newcomer wants to make it politically correct. Cheers, John. --John B123 (talk) 18:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
13		O'Doherty's rebellion (talk)	Add sources
187		Retinue (talk)	Add sources
14		Burning of Derry (talk)	Add sources
1,816		Royal Library of the Netherlands (talk)	Add sources
466		Henry Percy, 2nd Earl of Northumberland (talk)	Add sources
51		O'Doherty family (talk)	Add sources
7		Siege of Ypres (1383) (talk)	Cleanup
37		talk )	Cleanup
196		Jane Eyre (character) (talk)	Cleanup
1,292		Brad Wilk (talk)	Expand
77		Developments in Dubai (talk)	Expand
10,525		Republican Party (United States) (talk)	Expand
207		Dubai Holding (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
246		Climate crisis (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
9		Colcombe Castle (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
234		DAMAC Properties (talk)	Merge
10		talk )	Merge
7		Coverham Abbey (talk)	Merge
82		Japanese newspapers (talk)	Wikify
1,627		Tim Commerford (talk)	Wikify
24		Masatane Kanda (talk)	Wikify
1		Guingemaro (talk)	Orphan
25		Emaar Developments (talk)	Orphan
6		Kempinski Residences Palm Jumeirah (talk)	Orphan
9		A. J. Pollard (talk)	Stub
3		Gerard O'Halloran (talk)	Stub
16		Tokyo (novel) (talk)	Stub
46		Ralph Neville, 2nd Baron Neville (talk)	Stub
68		My Name Is Lenny (talk)	Stub
5		Arthur O'Neill (soldier) (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Willbb234 on Allied pilots, Hawkeye7 on the defence of Australia and logistics in Indochina, Nick-D on Australian commandos Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports back on a high-profile history symposium

Whack!

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Don't take this too hard, I had too :P CodeLyoko^talk 17:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Adam Cuerden (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:

1. Adam Cuerden (submissions) with 964 points
2. Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 899 points
3. Casliber (submissions) with 817 points
4. Kosack (submissions) with 691 points
5. SounderBruce (submissions) with 388 points
6. Enwebb (submissions) with 146 points
7. Usernameunique (submissions) with 145 points
8. HaEr48 (submissions) with 74 points

All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

• Casliber (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for a total of 7 FAs during the course of the competition.
• Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 14 GAs in round 5.
• Yashthepunisher (submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 4 FLs overall.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, for 91 FPs overall.
• MPJ-DK (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 7 articles in good topics in round 2.
• Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 14 did you know articles in round 5.
• Muboshgu (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 7 in the news articles in round 1.
• Ed! (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 56 good article reviews in round 1.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2020 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Serial Number 54129:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – DBigXrayᗙ 15:06, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

You can see a list of all categories at

You can see a list of all categories at

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
146		Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmorland (talk)	Add sources
918		Anthony Fantano (talk)	Add sources
34		Katherine Neville, Baroness Hastings (talk)	Add sources
75		Serverless Framework (talk)	Add sources
14		Baron Bergavenny (talk)	Add sources
20		George Neville, 1st Baron Latimer (talk)	Add sources
47		Homebuilt computer (talk)	Cleanup
4,838		talk )	Cleanup
10		Philippe Rahmy (talk)	Cleanup
1,615		Liberty University (talk)	Expand
12		Timeline of Internet conflicts (talk)	Expand
71		To Hull and Back (talk)	Expand
20		Mouse Systems (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
16		Tandon Corporation (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
39		Poqet PC (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
458		Johnson ministry (talk)	Merge
725		Numerical analysis (talk)	Merge
148		Power behind the throne (talk)	Merge
527		Lady Miss Kier (talk)	Wikify
20		History of the English fiscal system (talk)	Wikify
55		Timeline of virtualization development (talk)	Wikify
11		Joseph Cantalupo (talk)	Orphan
12		Abionic (talk)	Orphan
3		Adrián El Charani (talk)	Orphan
3		Penn State Erie (Behrend), Pennsylvania (talk)	Stub
7		Anne Hastings, Countess of Pembroke (talk)	Stub
3		Jatibarang, Indramayu (talk)	Stub
8		Caput baroniae (talk)	Stub
55		Magnum Concilium (talk)	Stub
10		John Scrope, 4th Baron Scrope of Masham (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Ritchie's talk page comments

Hi Serial Number 54129, I'm sorry that you felt my comments on Ritchie's talk page were unhelpful. I feel it important to voice my own comments and opinions regarding Ritchie333's actions. I would ask that, in future, you ask me first before removing my talk page comments per the guidelines in

talk

) 05:39, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXII, October 2019

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at three works Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on writing a military biography

The Bugle is published by the

this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk

) 12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

WP:ACE2019

Thanks for reverting that. I have no clue what happened there. spryde | talk 12:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@Sp: No problem at all, clearly accidental, not worth maing a song and dance over. In the spirit of "it could've happened to anyone", I nearly blanked the entire lead of TFA earlier and only just caught myself! :o thanks for the message though! ——SerialNumber54129 12:53, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 9

News and updates associated with user scripts from the past two months (August and September, 2019).

Hello everyone and welcome to the 9th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter: Scripts Submit your new/improved script here Enterprisey's links-in-logs Tokenzero's infoboxJournal • SD0001's RFUD-helper • Danski454's code edit window size BrandonXLF: FloatHead • ShowRevisionID • EditorFirst Þjarkur: NeverUseMobileVersion • CleanDiffURLs Galobtter's admin highlighter • ZLEA's Dashboard • Cobaltcigs's DisableDragDrop SD0001's archived section finder Miscellaneous MJL's Archer was used to break a Wikipedia record. See the edit in question & the updated records page for more. Sorry for falling behind a bit. Please let me know if I missed any new scripts. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 01:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Pending requests A script to simplify merging A script to tweak rollback links ...and many more, all available at Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests

---

• About the newsletter
• Subscription options
• Discuss this issue

"More Germans seems like a good idea"

I was thinking of cracking a joke about

AfD and AfD, but I concluded the latter is no laughing matter, particularly when the nearest German province to Auschwitz voted them in at the last election. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)}

15:39, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Unanswered Peer Review Requests

Click to unsubscribe or change your subscription

).

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
30		Intellivision Lives! (talk)	Add sources
10		York Way (talk)	Add sources
1,619		talk )	Add sources
51		Day of the Dumpster (talk)	Add sources
3,915		Sam Gyimah (talk)	Add sources
1,102		Guo Wengui (talk)	Add sources
226		Premiership of Theresa May (talk)	Cleanup
140		The Sunset Limited (film) (talk)	Cleanup
6		SpazzStick (talk)	Cleanup
72		Left Socialist-Revolutionaries (talk)	Expand
427		London Borough of Camden (talk)	Expand
38		Friedlieb Ferdinand Runge (talk)	Expand
20		TV Powww (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
64		Kate Dover (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
28		Herbert Rowse Armstrong (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
95		Pretoria Central Prison (talk)	Merge
19		Heterotetramer (talk )	Merge
19,992		Manson Family (talk)	Merge
2		Harvey Teasdale (talk)	Wikify
5		Aubrey Mokoape (talk)	Wikify
37		Fuhu (talk)	Wikify
17		Sergei Bobokhov (talk)	Orphan
2		St Albans Cathedral (Pretoria) (talk)	Orphan
58		Shooting bias (talk)	Orphan
9		Second Sight: A Love Story (talk)	Stub
223		Luke Graham (politician) (talk)	Stub
106		Royal prerogative of mercy (talk)	Stub
164		Oliver Dowden (talk)	Stub
6		Caroline Barron (talk)	Stub
7		Koran Sindo (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2019

• From the editors: Where do we go from here?

• Special report: Post-Framgate wrapup

• In the media: A net loss: Wikipedia attacked, closing off Russia? welcoming back Turkey?

• Traffic report: Varied and intriguing entries, less Luck, and some retreads

• News from the WMF: How the Wikimedia Foundation is making efforts to go green

• Recent research: Wikipedia's role in assessing credibility of news sources; using wikis against procrastination; OpenSym 2019 report

• Gallery: Finding freely licensed photo collections

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

• In focus: Wikidata & Wikibase for national libraries: the inaugural meeting

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXI, September 2019

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the legacy of World War II

The Bugle is published by the

this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk

) 09:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Failed GA review

Hello, I have failed your GA nomination due to it being in need of major reorganization. Please see my comments on the nom page and feel free to resubmit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%C6%91/8_and_be_there/GA1

talk

) 00:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@

Taewangkorea: I have no idea why that article particularly attracts the most inexperienced of editors. But thanks for your attempted input. ——SerialNumber54129

16:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Your

North Korean Embassy in Madrid raid

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caker18 -- Caker18 (talk

) 20:01, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Deprecated hyphenated parameters

Hi, in

WP:AN, you mentioned an old discussion about "deprecated hyphenated parameters". If you could ping me with a link to it, that might help me in a discussion on a different topic. Thanks, Mathglot (talk

) 22:37, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Crusades

Hi

Apologies for bolding your Sup on the FAR for this article. I thought that was your intention and didn't want for it to get missed in the large number of comments. If it was inappropriate at least I have learned something! Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

For your information

An IP editor has restored the contents of

Jim and Mary McCartney. --MrClog (talk

) 14:01, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on

Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk

) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

2019 Arbitration Committee pre-election RfC

A request for comment is now open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. You are receiving this message because you were listed as a user who would like to be notified when the 2019 RfC begins. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2019

• News and notes: Documenting Wikimania and our beginnings

• In focus: Ryan Merkley joins WMF as Chief of Staff

• In the media: Many layers of fake news: Fake fiction and fake news vandalism

• Discussion report: Meta proposals on partial bans and IP users

• Traffic report: Once upon a time in Greenland with Boris and cornflakes

• Op-Ed: We couldn't have told you this, but Wikipedia was censored

• Opinion: The Curious Case of Croatian Wikipedia

• Community view: Chinese Wikipedia and the battle against extradition from Hong Kong

• News from the WMF: Meet Emna Mizouni, the newly minted 2019 Wikimedian of the Year

• Recent research: Special issue on gender gap and gender bias research

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Fram case comment

Would you please help me understand what you meant by, "It's a funny sort of RTV where the editor still talking to people on meta"? Did you mean to imply that was actually happening? If not, what did you mean? EllenCT (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Crusades

Hi SN, thanks for your comment on the FAR for this. One thing was it a Support—if so can you make it obvious for the co-ordinator please? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Why was my vandalism warning a misuse?

Buidhe deleted the article after the AFD discussion was found in favor of keeping it. He has also been ignoring my arguments in the AFD, being uncivil, and when he opened the second AFD he reused the same lines, despite being debunked in the first. TheMemeMonarch (talk) 15:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for the belated reply, MemeMonarch, but I see my secretary colleague ;) has explained it as I would have already. Happy New Year to though! ——SN54129 21:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Adding signatures to unsigned entries

Hi, I have seen recently your edit here: special:diff/935434220. Please note that {{unsigned}} creates a link to the user's page based on the supplied user name. However, anonymous IP users do not have their user pages. In such case a link to the user's contributions should be created instead. For this purpose please use the {{unsigned IP}} template. --CiaPan (talk) 09:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Kumar Rajagopalan

Hello, I am a second-year student of Mass Media from Mumbai with an interest in business and business personalities. Particularly, retail. My article about Kumar Rajagopalan was taken down by you citing that I was potentially being paid to edit the article. I am not being paid for any of my contributions. Never have been. This is an unbiased and free contribution. You can check from my previous contributions as well. I am a regular at editing other articles too to ensure that the quality of articles in terms of both the syntactic and semantic values is upheld on this platform.

Kindly restore my article or direct me towards the right manner of writing articles to ensure that I comply better with the guidellines. Thank you so much. Love from India.

DYK for A Short English Chronicle

On

King Edward IV as receiving instantaneous notification of treason from God? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Short English Chronicle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A Short English Chronicle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page

.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

The article Marc Bloch you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Marc Bloch for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

On

1458 Loveday, which was intended to unite Henry VI's nobility, only resulted in uniting his enemies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Loveday, 1458. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Loveday, 1458), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page

.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

Can you review the sentence in the lede containing the word 'money'. Your original was:

although the Yorkists were bound to pay large sums in compensation, this was done by with money already owed the by the government.

Recently this was:

although the Yorkists were bound to pay large sums in compensation, this was done by with money already owed by the government.

I've just changed it to

although the Yorkists were bound to pay large sums in compensation, this was done with money already owed by the government.

But that reads very strangely. "owed by the government"? Should that be "owed to the government"?

Shenme (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@

go ahead  :) ——SerialNumber54129

13:45, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

On 5 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Peasants' Revolt in Cambridge, Margery Starre danced with a mob that sacked Corpus Christi College and burnt its charters, shouting: "Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

The article William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm going to move your recent edit to the Fram PD talk to a new section, but I'd also like to invite you to air any grievances you might have against the clerks or the arbitrators here, on my talk page, or by email to me. I'm curious to hear what you think we should be doing differently. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:03, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure you should waste your time, SN. This got me nowhere - I was ignored in the end. The clerks seem to be almost as incompetent as the committee at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 21:29, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@SN, can I direct you to my reply to FPAS here? On this one, at least, the arbs and clerks can't be blamed; given the nature of the case if they didn't follow the established procedure there would be people screaming for heads on poles, and much as I may think this "sectioned commentary" business is a Really Bad Idea it's the way things have been done for the past four years. ‑ 

Iridescent

21:35, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

http://www.unkut.com/2005/06/holdin-new-cards-scaramanga-interview/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/sun-large-records-star-of-the-empire-mgmt-a-publ-70986832/detail/recent-activity/shares/ Finally the full true story about the Dr. Octagon concept is out!! Read now!!!

1. "Dr. Octagon/Dr.Octagynocologist)-Bulk Records/Mo'WaxRecords/DreamWorks Records 4 songs 1."No Awareness b/w Bear Witness" 12" 2. "Dr. Octagon" 3. "On Production" 4. "Biology 101"

The Dr. Octagon concept was developed by Sir Menelik for Kool Keith in 1994. The multi-syllabic, on beat/off beat style of rap cadence with futuristic/sci-fi context was the calling card of the Dr. Octagon album. Assistance and inspiration also came from Alexander Calderon of the rap group "Raw Breed" Alex Calderon had a group named "Dr. Bizarro" that disbanded that had a similar plot in pre-conception to Dr. Octagon. Alex and Sir Menelik worked on demo's for songs together at Ice-T's studio in LA at the time. The original concept song that started the whole Dr.Octagon recording process was the "So Intelligent" featuring Kool Keith and DLS (produced by T.R. Love UltraMagnetic Mc's) off the Cyclops 4000 demo TR Love was making at the time for for Sir Menelik in 1994. T.R. Love also worked on demo's at that time for Raw breed and Kool Keith. After some time the duo of Sir Menelik recorded the Dr. Octagon track (produced by K.Matlin). Dan Nakamura had Bulk Records that wanted to put together a project with Kool Keith. Stretch Armstrong and Bobbito on 89.9 got the So intelligent demo from Sir Menelik. That is how the Dr. Octagon project got its legs.Sir Menelik had made the demo's recorded during that time period a two part project -Dr.Octagon demo's were for Kool Keith, and Cyclops 4000 demos were for Sir Menelik. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Menelik aka Scaramanga (talk • contribs) 11:04, 2 September 2019 (UTC) You claim to opposes the Wikimedia Foundation's arbitrary, opaque, and dictatorial office-banning of administrators when the community and ArbCom are more than capable of handling the issue themselves. And yet, you do commit the same offenses against me and countless other users!! You are a hypocrite!! Stop flagging my user page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Menelik aka Scaramanga (talk • contribs) 11:33, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Sir Menelik aka Scaramanga: I have no idea what you are talking about. The page has been deleted. Please do not recreate it. Many thanks. ——SerialNumber54129 12:33, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk

This is to let you know that the

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the article, and sorry that I missed the FAC with the introduduction "Gang of ruffians, hiding out in Sherwood Forest, duffing up royal officials, fair maids and boozy priests, history releases not their secrets. The Coterel Gang: A likely historical antecedent of the Robin Hood legend. AKA more fun and games from the early 14th-c. when the King wanted to go to Scotland but ended up in Derbyshire, and those who wanted to stay in Derbyshire went to Scotland."! - I'll open a peer review for Clara Schumann, today, the day her piano concerto graces the Main page ;) - ... her image graces even more. - I don't know what to respond to PMC who tells me a ban is a ban, the day I celebrate that my favourite editor told a freshly banned (OTD seven years ago) "go on with life, have a laugh". Along with the creed of the banned, it's in my edit notice, and premeditated to survive me. More on my talk, with the face and the smile. Now going to improve Anke Fuchs who died. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Fuchs is now on the Main page. Thank you for comments towards article improvement in Ritchie's case, - nice to be not alone. I typed a lot (because I was called out for my ping above) on my talk this morning, ending on "should be unblocked", - and then found out he was ;) - "don't believe in miracles, rely on them" (Mascha Kaléko). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:32, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Today, I am proud of a great woman on the Main page, Márta Kurtág, finally, who has several things in common with Schumann! - Here's my ideal candidate for arbcom. - Enjoy your break. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:22, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Serial Number. Since you left a brief comment there, I wonder if I could interest you in a prose review at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Ursula_K._Le_Guin/archive1. It's nice to have comments from folks who usually write about very different topics; it helps me find things that I missed. No pressure though. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

The article

I don't know, #54129, but closing something in pink is probably against some guideline somewhere. This may count against you if you run for administrator! Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

...the wife, the cook, and her lover kill a canteloupe? You can't make this up. Drmies (talk) 15:18, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

For a work in progress, you might've just hit on the DYK! ——SerialNumber54129 15:36, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

		The Oddball Barnstar
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of numerous very fine articles true to the tradition of, um, well, the one which you seem to have started yourself. Long may it prosper. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:21, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: pray tell! Surely Mowbrays, Bonvilles etc not so oddball 😊 hope all's well! ——SerialNumber54129 11:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

But it is the others that stick in the mind. Good thanks. Trying, and failing, to get back into some content creation. (People keep distracting me by sending me reading matter, the bounders.) You? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:58, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Heh  :) ​ I was thinking, how about a co-nom on Battle of Pontvallain? It might ned a little tidying first, as I haven't looked at it for sometime, but it should be doable, and it's rather up your street isn't it? Or perhaps a little late than you prefer? Although I see that as I do, you enjoy a movable feast. The bonus, of course, is that we share results for half the work. What say ye? ——SerialNumber54129 15:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

A co-nom sounds good to me. It also has the attraction of allowing each of us to run a separate independent FAC at the same time. My last FAC was from 1355, so I am breaking out of the 1345-46 ghetto. Actually my next two FACs were going to be from 256 BC and 1945, just for a change. How would you like to approach it? I could give it "the works", then you could comment on all the things that you don't like about the result; or I am happy to use any other approach you prefer. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:55, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

GtM, I've never done it before. Well, a co-nom anyway :) how about you give it your treatment? I'm aware that perhaps even the layout, structure might be adjustable: let's have a look with what you come up with?

The Battle of Cape Ecnomus is a nice article. Well out of my comfort zone, fair play to you! ——SerialNumber54129 18:30, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Re co-nom: me neither, which means that I have no preconceptions/haven't a clue what I am doing. I will try to start tomorrow. Note that I usually take several runs at an article. So me going right through an article making changes is not necessarily an indication that I think I am finished.

Ecnomus - that was part of the idea. It was interestingly stretching to try and get it into a comprehensible article. Much the same applies to my getting sucked into the late-Medieval stuff. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Right. I have done some work on Pontvallain. It certainly seems FACable, and probably without too much further work - you have done a good job there. I have done a fair bit of copy editing, MoS-proofing and shuffling things around; now is the time to scream if you really don't like it. If you do, maybe you could:

1. Have a look at the query on the talk page.
2. Let me know if you are happy with the third paragraph of "Background". If you are I will see if I can find some references.
3. Have a read through and flag up anything you're not happy with or which needs further information or work.
4. There are five unused references. Do you want to see if you can find something in each of them to cite the revised text? (It would be nice to keep them.)

Gog the Mild (talk) 20:53, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

this also removed someone else's post (Ritchie's) - not sure that's what you intended. — Ched (talk) 07:02, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks Ched, have restored the post to its place. ——SerialNumber54129 07:08, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk

Please respect the In Use tag and allow me to work through the sources. The article is far from finished. Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:27, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@

English Wikipedia policy and so as about as important as it gets. Please read that page if you have not been directed to it already. Furthermore, much of your additional material is, as I said in my edit-summary, unfortunately—but frankly—not wholly encyclopaedic in either content or tone. Such additions are not only not protected by the {{inuse}} tag but should, in fact, be summarily removed. Have a good weekend! ——SerialNumber54129

17:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

But that's neither hear nor there. While I stand by my statements in regard to the IP user, I have chosen to move forward and leave any actions in the hands of WilyD. The BLP matter itself has also been resolved, and I have no interest in dwelling on this any further. DarkKnight2149 18:12, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Darkknight2149#CVUA offer and User talk:Darkknight2149#Jasper Rine where the matter was handled. DarkKnight2149 18:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, it certainly sounds like the issues have indeed been resolved...until next time. One thing history teaches us (blah blah) is that those who do not learn from their mstakes are bound to repeat them. I hope it's not a truism. Have a good weekend! ——SerialNumber54129 18:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

To be fair, history already has repeated itself. The last time I was accused of casting aspersions was with Twitbookspacetube in February 2017, who frequently parroted and tag-teamed with other users while acting in bad faith. Do you know what happened? Nobody listened to me... And seven months later, he was banned from Wikipedia for all the things I warned everyone he was doing (and then some).

The reason I'm posting this is to clear up any residual doubt. I absolutely did violate BLP (inadvertently), but the "cast aspersions" claims are incorrect. One thing I have observed at

game the system

when:

A) A hypothetical ANI thread is a drawn out, unorganised, and complex mess that's difficult to keep track of. That's actually why I insisted that people talk to me about BLP on my talk page instead of there.

B) When there's a sliver of truth in their claims. In this particular case, the sliver was that I violated BLP.

Either way, I have no more intention of harping on this. The past is the past, I just hope that I helped clear some of this up with you. Have a great weekend. DarkKnight2149 20:19, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

• Uh-uh. Well, accusing editors of socking without evidence ("
  aspersion, which has been reiterated by the abitration committee on numerous occasions ("An editor must not accuse another of misbehavior without evidence, especially when the accusations are repeated or severe", for ex). But it is the doubling-down that is less than reassuring. ——SerialNumber54129
  16:11, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

The article

Hello Serial Number 54129, I notice that you have not started to respond to my review of the article yet. The article is due to be failed in three days' time if the issues I raised have not been addressed. Please let me know if I can help in any way. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 13:00, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh

A discussion relevant to your actions has been started by another user here. It doesn't name you by username, but the edits specifically are relevant to yourself afaict. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm so used to editors opposing items that are listed on ITN/R with comments similar to yours, that I assumed you were trolling. Sometimes I need to remind myself to assume good faith more often. Please accept my apology. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:52, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Muboshgu, thanks very much for the message, and also apologise for my rudeness. You see, I've been working on medieval York (IRL) for the last few weeks now, so it's always the first thing I think of when I see "York". Talk about bizarro! I fel such an arse afterwards—population of 200K or 10 million, how easily confused are they! "D'oh" as they say. Anyway, no hard feelings? Hope you're keeping well! ——SN54129 16:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

This is to let you know that

Thank you for the article about a "pathological prioress, negligent nuns, a blundering bishop and unchaste chaplains; it rather says it all about Littlemore Priory that the only character that comes out the story looking even mildly positive was—in a career first and last—Cardinal Wolsey."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Brian, we miss you

And today, thank you for

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Requesting block review: Katfactz". Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 00:29, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@Ivanvector: Thanks, replied there. But how does your block of that editor involve me, may I ask? Although I appreciate the notice in any case. Cheers! ——SerialNumber54129 07:33, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

You made the full protection request so I thought you might have more insight into the dispute, that's all. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 10:47, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

I learn one or more new thing everyday on WP. I new there were page patrollers, but not a talk page watcher. I appreciate knowing that. You answered one question about number of articles created, can you answer another for User:Drmies. Just curious because all that I see of his contribs is reverts and blocks, well there are a few non revert edits, but by and large nothing but reverts and edits. I did not think that was the purpose of an editor, and an admin is an editor, is he not? Thanks.Oldperson (talk) 18:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

The article Order of Brothelyngham you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Order of Brothelyngham for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Double voting Support and Oppose in the EvergreenFir RfA? Trying to have your cake and eat it? ;-) Prob best to get rid of one of them, unless you want to triple up and pop in a quick Neutral vote too...? - SchroCat (talk) 12:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Ooh, I like the sound of that last option, the trifecta. Let's go with that. Mr rnddude (talk) 12:23, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Would you Adam and Eve it. Thanks, both. ——SN54129 14:01, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks - I have no idea how I reverted it in the first place! - SchroCat (talk) 04:20, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@SchroCat: S'okay—I've already emailed T&S about your deliberate misuse of the rollback tool :p

Apologies for the delay replying by the way...was slightly involved in the minor matter of a—ahem—17x-expansion :D hope all's well! ——SN54129 16:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Washington Redhawks. 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. 4meter4 (talk) 02:39, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey friend, I just reverted you. Check out the rationale for my changes on the talk page. If you disagree, I won't edit war and we can just discuss my arguments for the changes.

Regarding this comment, editors have in the past requested or started RFCs about the FAC coordination process. We continue to be sensitive to the possibility that some folks may feel that way, and respectfully open the door to such requests. --Laser brain (talk) 12:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Since this is apparently the Diffless Society, I'll join. 2012 or thereabouts seems to be about right; since then, processes affecting the wider project and internal tweaks of criteria. Cheers, Laser brain. FWIW, (some of) those questions you were asked at ACEXXIX were fucking outrageous. ——SN54129 12:45, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, You have been quite brutal at ANI. I hope I have a better experience with you in the future and look forward to working with you on the project. Have a great weekend and a great thanksgiving. Lightburst (talk) 20:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Blunt, rather than brutal. ——SN54129 16:56, 25 November 2019 (UTC)