Informatics Educational Institutions & Programs

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

The article Gusen concentration camp you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gusen concentration camp 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 K.e.coffman -- K.e.coffman (talk) 02:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Arijský boj you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of G. Moore -- G. Moore (talk) 04:01, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The article Michael Davitt you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Michael Davitt for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MX -- MX (talk) 20:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

The article Michael Davitt you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Michael Davitt 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 MX -- MX (talk) 00:41, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Given that the delete votes that it was all-plot were addressed by adding some reception, you should not have relisted that; you don't mind changing it to a keep, would you? ミラP 01:45, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Miraclepine, evaluating the article right now, it seems to be at least 90% plot, while most of the entries have no reception, so the NOTPLOT objection still applies. Supporters of keep haven't demonstrated compellingly that it meets WP:LISTN. If I had to close it right now, it would be no consensus result, hence relist. buidhe 01:52, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm currently trying to rescue the article. And for the record, the wording of WP:LISTN is a little confusing. Btw read WP:RBIAS. ミラP 01:56, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

The AfD seems to have been incorrectly closed; nothing was done with the page after the close._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 06:29, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Zxcvbnm, you should feel free to implement the closure yourself if for some reason it doesn't go through. buidhe 06:38, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

You recently reviewed El Guindi (surname); would you also please review Yussef El Guindi? Gratefully Aboudaqn (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks! Aboudaqn (talk) 16:48, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
  • buidhe: Did the review "go through"? This entry does not appear on Google searches... Is there another step before it becomes publicly searchable? Aboudaqn (talk) 02:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    Aboudaqn, it's definitely been reviewed. I don't know exactly how Google indexes things so can't help you there. buidhe 03:21, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    Buidhe, I understand -- and I thank you, o kind and courteous Wikipedian! Aboudaqn (talk) 03:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, would love it if you could contribute some Ireland articles towards this next month!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Salzburg Conference, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

[Text of proposed article — removed by Buidhe] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Band1301 (talk • contribs)

@Band1301: Please work on it at Draft:Reggie Jackson's World of Sports and submit to WP:Articles for Creation. Right now it would be rejected because the only source, imdb, is not a reliable source. buidhe 17:52, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Hi - you closed this CFD but you haven't removed the CFD templates from the categories. DexDor ^(talk)

•  Done buidhe 15:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey I was okay with the Ben 10 season 1 page because the summaries are my work. If you don’t like it, feel free to make it smaller. Ryker11 ^(talk)

• @Ryker11: Plot summaries do not need citations. However, as the article stands it fails WP:NOTPLOT #1: "Summary-only descriptions of works". This is part of a policy page so I don't see how the article can be kept in mainspace. If you add reception section citing sources that prove notability that's another story. buidhe 01:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey I was okay with the Ben 10 season 1 page because the summaries are my work. If you want, you can put the summaries all back and shorten them - Ryker11 (talk) 19:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC) 173.48.97.212 (talk) 00:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I found your name at a recent nomination and wanted to ask if you could perform a source review for my nomination of Aftermath (Rolling Stones album). It has received several substantial reviews, leading to 4 supports and a successful image review. isento (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Isento, Sorry, I don't really edit in the entertainment area. I don't have a good idea what is considered a reliable source on this topic so I'll leave the review to someone else. buidhe 15:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dęblin–Irena Ghetto you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

The article D?blin–Irena Ghetto you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:D?blin–Irena Ghetto for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

The article Dęblin–Irena Ghetto you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Dęblin–Irena Ghetto for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 16:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I have just added 3 and replaced 5 sources with Norwegian press. Is it enough? Eurohunter (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Eurohunter, I feel like you are not paying attention to the oppose rationales and close of the FLC. The article needs to be based on reliable, independent sources, not primary sources (that includes the BBC videos). buidhe 19:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

It would be imposible propably in 90% cases of all articles. References to BBC are linking to information included in BBC database or articles not videos. Official websites provide most details. News sites only include news lines like "Basshunter in Red Bull Rivals TV show" so adding them is redudant for me. They not include detailed information about episode, season or role. The other solution would be to add independend sources to official sources but what is the point? How many independed sources should be referenced to 1 information? 1,2, 4 or 8? Would be great if you could provide example. Eurohunter (talk) 19:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't know many editors currently active in this topic area. Any suggestions on how this can be rescued for DYK, if at all, would be appreciated. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:08, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

PLEASE DO NOT DELETE MY ARTICLE I SWEAR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camdenfreeway295CHROME (talk • contribs) 13:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leitmeritz concentration camp you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 06:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe, sorry for any unintended implication there: [1] Since FAR has been so dead for so long, I just try to take every opportunity I can to lay everything out on each new FAR, so that any people coming to the overall FAR page will start to get the idea about how it works-- the instrucions are quite complex! Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia, no problem, I apologize if I came off as snappish. I did not even know that such a template existed; perhaps the instructions could be modified to be more clear. buidhe 16:41, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The instructions are already so long … I feel like we keep moving chairs around on the deck of the Titanic in our attempt to get people to engage :0 SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe,

It’s me again!

I’ve been poking around in the template project page and saw your name, so I thought I’d ask you my question.

Let me start by saying I know nothing about coding or template structure. I am not a computer guy and it was a major victory when I figured out how to set up or amend a wiki table! Templates are beyond my ken.

But, I would like a minor tweak made to a template, the one I’ve been using in the articles on the Province of Canada electoral districts. That template only works for electoral « districts » in the Legislative Assembly. It doesn’t have any provision for electoral « divisions » in the Legislative Council, which was originally appointed, but switched to elected members in the mid-1850s.

Is there any way to have Legislative Council « divisions » added to the template?

By way of caution, this template’s primary use is for the federal Parliament and the provincial Legislatures, so it’s heavily used; wouldn’t want to screw it up.

I’ve posted inquiries on both the template Talk page, and on the general discussion board for Canadian wikipedians, but not a nibble of a reply.

Do you have any suggestions on what I could do next? Thanks for your time.

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, I may be able to help but I'm not sure which template you're talking about. I take it it's not this one, which you created. buidhe 23:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Is that a template? I thought it was a fancy table, with the little "E" that tells you how to edit it. I just copied another one I found and then edited it completely, to make a new one. But you're right that's not the one I mean. I mean the infobox about the electoral districts with the Union Jack that shows on the top upper right of the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_Canada_electoral_district , which "employs intricate features of template syntax." I have no idea where the code for that is, nor would I know what to do with its intricate template syntax even if I found it. All I know is that if I use the field for "Province of Canada" it always returns "electoral district" for the "Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada". I would like an option that says "electoral division" and "Legislative Council of the Province of Canada", but I have no idea how to do that?? Hope I've explained myself better! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:10, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, I'm afraid this is also beyond my abilities. I would try one of the users in Category:User template coder-4 or Category:User template coder-5. I don't want to volunteer anyone, but Dreamy Jazz and Headbomb are both active, so one of them could probably help. buidhe 01:59, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. Dreamy Jazz has already tweaked it!! (Sandbox level; will seek consensus on the change before asking for the template itself to be fixed.). Thanks for the help. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Operation Harvest Festival you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 00:21, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe. You are probably well aware of it, but I stumbled across Operation Tannenberg, which seems to me to be crying out for the Buidhe treatment. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Would you mind having a look at this draft? Draft:John H. Wotiz. Lately I have been translating articles from German to English about scientists who fled Europe to the US during WWII. Seems like that might be up your alley.Pelirojopajaro (talk) 09:11, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi - I'm interested to understand your reasoning for a no consensus closure (rather than keep) at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anita_Mehta.--Goldsztajn (talk) 13:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Goldsztajn,

1. According to WP:NACADEMIC, "Once the passage of one or more notability criteria has been verified through independent sources, or through the reliable sources listed explicitly for this purpose in the specific criteria notes, non-independent sources, such as official institutional and professional sources, are widely accepted as reliable sourcing for routine, uncontroversial details." (emph. added; "specific criteria notes" links to a section for finding citation counts). The sourcing you suggested for what you proposed as a NACADEMIC pass was not independent coverage since it was by the awarding institution.
2. Although officially SNGs are totally independent from GNG, there is controversy surrounding the use of SNG to keep articles in cases where sourcing has been examined and significant independent coverage has not been found.

Therefore, I felt that no consensus was the most defensible closure. I could have relisted, but these are disagreements that are fundamental and not likely to be solved by relisting an AfD. buidhe 18:47, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi again and thanks for the reply. I'll leave the closure as is, but as you probably expected, I have a different opinion. The specific criteria notes (under #3) include this: For documenting that a person has been elected member or fellow (but not for a judgement of whether or not that membership/fellowship is prestigious), publications of the electing institution are considered a reliable source. This is simply commonsense, since for this particular type of information, the issuing institution is more reliable than any secondary source. On raising concern about differing points of view on the relationship of SNGs to the GNG – I guess my (unsolicited) advice for this particular AfD is that if that was your concern and you felt there was a tension in this case between the two, then perhaps relisting and expressing a comment to that effect, might have been more appropriate. Anyway, thanks for your work and regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe. I am after a favour. Is there any chance that you could do an image review on my FAC, Battle of Drepana? It should be an easy one - there are seven images, five of which have been through a FAC before, and the other two are maps which look open and shut to me. I am aware that you have already done the source review, but amenable image reviewers are thin on the ground. Obviously, if time or motivation don't permit, I quite understand. However, I would be more than willing to review something for you; just point me. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

•  Done Feel free to ask if there's anything else I can do for you! buidhe 18:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

What were your reasons for keeping the Sheik of Araby article and closing it one day after it was nominated for deletion?Vmavanti (talk) 00:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, it was a case of WP:SNOW. Several editors made sound arguments for keep in terms of Wikipedia policies and guidelines and the chances of it closing as anything other than keep were negligible. You are welcome to revert the closure but do not expect a different result. buidhe 00:15, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Can you be more specific?Vmavanti (talk) 00:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, I'm not sure what you're asking. Could you clarify? buidhe 00:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Specifics. "Several editors": How many? What are their names? "made sound arguments": What arguments? What made them sound? You linked to "Snowball clause" as though I would automatically know what that meant. From that page "The snowball clause is not policy". Therefore I would be disinclined to use it as justification for closing a deletion discussion or even to discuss it. It seems to be comical commentary rather than a serious guideline. If the point is the article has a snowball's chance in Hell of being deleted, I would like to know why that is. I've looked for sources for that song. Two web sites about the Beatles aren't nearly enough to qualify as sources for an entire article. Without sources, there is no article. My experience has been that deletion discussions are given much more than 24 hours to be discussed before they are closed. They must have much more reasoning that what has been provided so far. The discussion should continue. Talking is good. I assume there's no hurry. This article has been sitting unsourced for eleven years.Vmavanti (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, OK, since you disagree I've reverted the closure. buidhe 01:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

The article Arijský boj you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Arijský boj 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 G. Moore -- G. Moore (talk) 14:21, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

		You are a Ray of Sunshine!
		It says here "The Ray of Sunshine is bestowed on that person who, when you see their name at the top of your watchlist, you know that all is right with the world and that you can relax. May be awarded to any person who consistently brightens your day." So here you go. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:08, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

• Wow! You made my day! buidhe 20:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, You merged an article Convener of Aam Aadmi Party (Punjab, India) with Aam Aadmi Party. But both articles are different. National Convener is another person and Convener of Aam Aadmi Party (Punjab, India) is another person. Preet m m singh (talk) 02:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

• @Preet m m singh: The AfD closed as merge because Aam Aadmi Party (Punjab, India) is a part of the larger Aam Aadmi Party. If any clarification is needed on the main article of Aam Aadmi Party to clarify this, that can be fixed with normal editing. Feel free to go ahead and add any clarifications necessary. buidhe 11:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for chopping and changing over this. It was late, I had too many tabs over, and trying to wrap up in a hurry before bed just got me confused as to what I was doing with which. Anyway, now supporting. Your usual classy job of work. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

• No, thank YOU for your great work on this article and for your review! buidhe 12:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Postwar anti-Jewish violence in Slovakia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I see that you have NAC closing abilities. So I want to point you to a snowy AfD that you may consider closing. Lightburst (talk) 17:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Lightburst, err, non-admins can't close as delete. Sorry. buidhe 17:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to ping me from any such Commons review page, and I'll try to stop by and comment. Could you add some images to our article? I added one, but more would be nice. Also could you perhaps identify (link) the photograph I mentioned at Talk:Warsaw_Ghetto_boy#Most_iconic? I hope it's on Commons. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm asking you revert your close there. Let's let an administrator close it. John from Idegon (talk) 12:23, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Will you please reverse your NAC here? You redirected the article to a redlink, and there was no consensus for a redirect (the only response suggested a merge elsewhere). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe, now that Fallschirmjäger (World War II) has been moved, and there is no other primary topic, I believe that the disambiguation page should be at Fallschirmjäger and the redirect at Fallschirmjäger (disambiguation). Leschnei (talk) 12:20, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

• @Leschnei: I don't think you're correct. Please see the RM rationale on Talk:Fallschirmjäger (World War II). The other German paratrooper units are not actually called "Fallschirmjäger" in English and the Nazi era Fallschirmjäger are the clear PRIMARYTOPIC. buidhe 12:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing me to that discussion and I have no objection to Fallschirmjäger (World War II) being the primary topic (and I see that you didn't cause this problem but are trying to fix it!). I was confused because the disambiguation page has been moved prematurely (as far as I can tell) - if Fallschirmjäger (World War II) is moved to Fallschirmjäger, then it will make sense for the disambiguation page to be at Fallschirmjäger (disambiguation). In the meantime, it's confusing to have a primary topic be a redirect to a '(disambiguation)' page. Since the page move for Fallschirmjäger (World War II) is being considered, it should all come right in the end. Leschnei (talk) 12:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Leschnei: I have moved Fallschirmjäger (disambiguation) to Fallschirmjäger per WP:MALPLACED. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe, I noticed that the nominator has finally replied to your review. I think they meant to attract your attention with the "review again" icon; if you're willing to resume the review that would be great. (If not, please let me know.) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:04, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Can you also reverse your close on this AfD also as it had not run for the *minimum* of 7 days. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

And another - please reverse your close. Perhaps you should take a step back from closing AfDs for a while until you are sure about what to do? HighKing⁺⁺ 13:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

This was closed before the 7 days allowed listing time had expired, please reopen. Also, could you please be a little less trigger happy on closing AfDs? Sometimes at or shortly after 7 days a clear consensus has not emerged and a relisting is more appropriate. I've noticed a number of articles you've closed which should have been relisted as the consensus was not clear (i.e. only a couple of comments). HighKing⁺⁺ 13:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

• @HighKing: No one in this discussion seemed to disagree with the outcome (redirect) which does not require AfD process or a strong consensus to implement. Same with the other ones. If any participant in the discussion is unhappy with the close I am generally happy to leave it to a more experienced editor, but in this case I just cannot see the purpose of reopening the discussion. The other two discussions had clear consensus to keep and letting them run longer was not going to produce a "delete" consensus. buidhe 18:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
  • No one in the discussion *yet* you mean. Kinda difficult to contribute when someone closes the AfD early. And the policy is Articles listed are normally discussed for at least seven days, after which the deletion process proceeds based on community consensus. Just re-open the AfDs and let them run for *at least* seven days as they're supposed to. And stop closing AfDs early! HighKing⁺⁺ 13:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Since you are uninvolved perhaps consider a snow close of this question about page name change. Lightburst (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

• @Lightburst: Thanks, but I have no experience closing RM discussions so I'd prefer to leave this to someone else. buidhe 20:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Good time to get some. Seems easy enough and it is not very Bold Lightburst (talk) 20:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

It is done. never mind. Cheers Lightburst (talk) 21:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

• Since the title of this section is why I'm writing this, I put it here, but in reality, it is far more about the two threads preceding this one. I nac AfD discussions too. My personal policy is if my close is questioned, I revert my close and leave it for an administrator. YMMV, however, neither of those closings meet the criteria for snow close. I might have asked the nominator if redirect was a satisfactory solution and with a positive response from them, snow closed Ironside as redirect (as it clearly could have been done boldly by the nominator instead of going to AfD), but the bio had a delete vote, disqualifying it from snow closure. The reason mere mortals like us are allowed to nac AfDs is to lessen the workload on the admins. That's why I adopted the personal policy of undoing any questioned close I make. If you are getting pushback on how you are doing closures, that will eventually become something administrators have to deal with, increasing their workload and totally defeating the purpose of allowing nac in the first place. Remember, unless in bad faith or clearly defective, a nomination for deletion is a !vote to delete. Any discussion that isn't unanimous is not eligible for snow close. John from Idegon (talk) 21:15, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Buidhe...

I noticed that you moved my article to draft space pending my beefing up its citations... I don't have a problem with that, but I was just wondering what Wikipedia's policy was in terms of online dictionaries... Generally, those are the only possible references that I can provide for it.

Thanks in advance,

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 20:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)O.ominirabluejack.

The article Leitmeritz concentration camp you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Leitmeritz concentration camp for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 10:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The article Leitmeritz concentration camp you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Leitmeritz concentration camp 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 Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

The article Operation Harvest Festival you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Operation Harvest Festival 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) 21:21, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Gog the Mild, Thanks so much for the review! buidhe 21:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe, no problem. Don't hesitate to ping me if you want another. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

April–May 2020 GAN Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the April–May 2020 GAN Backlog Drive starts on April 1, and will continue until the end of May.

MX (✉ • ✎) 15:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

		The WikiChevrons
		On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 19 reviews between January and March 2020. Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:33, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1938 deportation of Jews from Slovakia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Acceptable level of violence you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MX -- MX (talk) 19:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Salzburg Conference you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 23:21, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

		The World War Barnstar
		For you invaluable edits to World War Two activity in Eastern Europe and the Holocaust - Jon698 Talk 23:33 3 April 2020

The article Salzburg Conference you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Salzburg Conference 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 Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 23:42, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Partisan Congress riots at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --evrik ^(talk) 04:41, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I think the paragraph on the methodological issues of Spanish statistics needs more sources. It's a long paragraph that is based on a single source and it would definitively benefit from more sources for each part. I'll give it one more try. -- ChaTo (talk 22:40, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I see there are more sources now. I've added a reference to the MoMo report as it is mentioned in the newspaper article but not linked from there, now article readers can find the reports we're referring to. -- ChaTo (talk) 09:19, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Postwar anti-Jewish violence in Slovakia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vami IV -- Vami IV (talk) 12:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francisco Hernando Contreras is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francisco Hernando Contreras until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Melcous (talk) 14:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Václav Kopecký at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 18:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:List of victims and survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I just started three articles on related books, and The Warsaw Ghetto: A Guide to the Perished City in particular might be close to your interest. I'd welcome your input on it and the other two, those being Such a Beautiful Sunny Day: Jews Seeking Refuge in the Polish Countryside, 1942–1945 and The Forgotten Holocaust: The Poles Under German Occupation, 1939-1944. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 16:28, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, could you add an inline cite to the part about him "stage-managing" the trial? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Hope you are well in these difficult times. Sorry to bother you with a cheeky request. You're one of the top source reviewers at FAC, so I'm wondering whether you'd be willing to take on the SR for Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/George_Washington_and_slavery/archive1? Factotem (talk) 07:41, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Factotem: Unfortunately I don't have time right now to do the thorough review that this article deserves. buidhe 07:51, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

No problem. Factotem (talk) 07:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

And apologies. It's just been pointed out to me that Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests exists, which is where I should have made the request. Factotem (talk) 09:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Spain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Mundo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, and I hope you are well! I noticed that you list access to Cambridge UP on your userpage. Is this request something you could answer? Regards, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Eddie891, Yes. Please email me and I'll send you the pdf of the chapter. buidhe 16:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

tks, sent! Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to be a bother, but do you think you could send it soonish? I'd like to nominate the article I'm working on for A-class in a week or so. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:18, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Eddie891: I did send it a couple days ago. buidhe 19:31, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Huh... I don't see it in my inbox at all... How odd! I'll trawl around for it, perhaps its an error of eyesight on my part Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:36, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Svedectvo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --evrik ^(talk) 17:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Evrik: I'm a bit confused why you left this message on my page when you didn't highlight any actual problems with the article that you wanted me to fix, other than handwaving that "it's not neutral". You have to be more specific as to what you think is wrong with it. I was not able to find any RS which have a positive opinion of Svedectvo. buidhe 17:06, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Pink Swastika you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Iazyges -- Iazyges (talk) 22:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

The article The Pink Swastika you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Pink Swastika 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 Iazyges -- Iazyges (talk) 01:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

So it is your opinion that phrases like "Communist internationalism" and "Communist sympathizing artists" refer to a particular political party and that it is perfectly fine to have piped links in direct quotations? Primergrey (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abrams (surname), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Abrams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe. Earlier today, you filed a technical request to move the page International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. While I certainly applaud this, you made a mistake while doing so: International Classification of Disease, singular. The correct name is International Classification of Diseases, plural. User:Minorax didn't notice the typo, and moved the page to the wrong name. But no worries! I've created a new technical request, so this will be fixed soon. I have also notified Minorax. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 17:50, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi.

You closed this RM at 05:18, 18 April 2020 (UTC) but the move has not been performed.

Can I help? Noting of course that I'm involved.

Or am I missing something? Andrewa (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Andrewa: Since my pagemove permission expired, I wasn't able to perform it myself and therefore listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. Someone will get to it eventually. buidhe 19:53, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Understood! Thank you. Andrewa (talk) 23:52, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Done. Andrewa (talk) 09:07, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe, did your edits last week address the sourcing issue request? If so, could you please post to the nomination so the reviewer is aware that they can continue with their review? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:09, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I've granted you the extendedmover user group indefinitely. I came by to thank you for working through the big RM backlog and saw above that you ran into technical problems after your permission expired. Hopefully you find it useful! If not let any sysop know and it can be removed on your request. Again, thanks for your hard work with the RM backlog! — Wug·a·po·des​ 01:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi

16:16, 22 April 2020 Buidhe talk contribs block moved page Talk:Santa Maria Maddalena (Castiglione d'Orcia) to Talk:Santa Maria Maddalena, Castiglione d'Orcia without leaving a redirect (RM closed as move)

Why was the redirect suppressed? Andrewa (talk) 16:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Andrewa: In order to swap two pages without using G6 (which I can't do, I'm not an administrator), you have to move without leaving redirects. That is how WP:ROUNDROBIN works. buidhe 16:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Then a redirect should have been created at Talk:Santa Maria Maddalena (Castiglione d'Orcia) as part of the cleanup, which I have now done. Otherwise for example WP:RM is left pointing to a discussion redlink. There are also five regular pages that were left pointing to a redlink. Andrewa (talk) 02:35, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I just closed a talk page section on a page you moved per a WP:RM. Please remember please close the talk page discussion using the instructions shown on WP:RM so the bot will remove the listing off of the Current Discussions section. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 18:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Diff Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 18:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Except, of course, the WP:AUTOED element of the edit did clean up and properly format the article. GiantSnowman 06:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

If you have concerns with the types of edits that AutoEd makes, or would like an explanation as to why, I suggest you raise with @Plastikspork:. GiantSnowman 06:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

A small typo by one voter was replicated by you in this close - Talk:Ingeyo ingan#Requested move 20 March 2020. The correct spelling of the result is "Ingyeo ingan" (note swap of characters in first word). Confirm with the IMDb listing. Hoping you can take the steps to correct this. -- Netoholic @ 07:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Netoholic: I copied it directly from Snowfire's suggestion without noticing that there was a difference in spelling. Anyway, it's easy to fix. buidhe 07:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

  Yep, I didn't notice his typo either until I reviews the closed RM discussion and saw the redlinks still present. -- Netoholic @ 07:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)