Informatics Educational Institutions & Programs

		The Halloween prep set award
		For your work related to the Halloween prep set at DYK. Your contributions are appreciated! Lightburst (talk) 17:47, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November songs

my story today

Thank you for checking OTD. I proudly remember having sung in an oratorio premiere seven years ago OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you busy in the Selected anniversaries where I feel like a newcomer. We are approaching a tercentenary, of the birth of Carl Friedrich Abel, about whom several specific things could be said: he was the last viol virtuoso, a prolific composer (mostly for the instrument and other chamber music), he installed together with Bach's youngest son, his friend, the first subscription concerts in London, and one of his symphonies was attributed to W. A. Mozart.[1] Good to know. The least we could do is mentioning him under births, but I dream of presenting his beautiful portrait by a famous painter - look at that dog! Would you have a good idea for a blurb? A festival of celebration with a new award in his name happened already in his home town.[2][3] --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Unfortunately, OTD doesn't usually do blurbs for people who are born unless the birth was significant itself, and currently the pictures are only for blurbs. Is there a significant date in this person's biography that we can use instead? Some examples might be the specific date that it was discovered that his symphony was misattributed to Mozart, or the premiere of a significant work. OTD blurbs are currently biased towards warfare, political events, space, vehicle accidents and natural disasters, so any suggestions of music/art that we can include is appreciated. Z1720 (talk) 14:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit strange, because music celebrates his day of birth, not day of discovery a symphony wasn't by Mozart. I remember 2020 when it was all Beethoven, just reduced by the pandemic. But understand for this one, - will have to turn to DYK, I guess. - I'll think about adding more music, promised. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ps: funny that Bach worked in Köthen in 1720, and Abel's dad was cellist in his orchestra ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Next day of pics - today my topic is a soprano. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another day of pics, and did you see the thread about Britten's birthday on DYK? The nom is now approved. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the extra effort! - My story today is a DYK hook from 13 years ago OTD: about the great music at one of my churches. Mozart's Requiem to come on Sunday, coupled with Arvo Pärt's Da pacem Domine, - I guess you might come if it was a bit closer. Perhaps watch the video of our last production, our first on yt, ever. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for standing to become arbitrator! My story today is Canticle I: My beloved is mine and I am his, - the composer, born OTD 110 years ago, didn't want it shorter (but the publisher), - more here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a reply to my cand question. I may discuss it after tomorrow's concert when we will sing the Mozart and listen to Pärt's urgent call for peace played by the strings, - I'm not in the mood before ;) - I mentioned Pärt for a reason, could have been Beethoven as well, in other words: I believe it's time for a fresh look, as we were told 10 years ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's legitimate that editors look at the role of infoboxes in articles again. ArbCom stepping into this topic area right now would probably drag out the process with little accomplished, and I think limiting responses in RfCs would be a better solution. I looked at the Mozart RfC before answering your question, I was not thrilled with some of the long responses with back and forth in the RfC, but I think overall the process worked and RfCs are the process to use in this topic area at this time. Z1720 (talk) 00:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I came to tell you that I added another Bach cantata to the anniversaries, - for some reason that I don't remember it was in the year (1723, 300 years ago) but not the day (26 Dec). - I think the Mozart RfC proves that editors are able to talk about infoboxes in a civil manner, which to do consistently would be completely enough to settle the disputes. Treating each other as warriors, however, is as certain not to settle it, and that happens when editors are compared to armies, and when a new editor who possibly knows nothing about any conflict (and abbreviations such as PR/FAC) and adds an infobox in good faith is reverted quoting no argument than its FA status. - I also think that CT infoboxes is way too general, because - as everybody reading Wikipedia can easily tell - infoboxes are almost everywhere, - they are contentious only in a small corner of subjects, in articles by a small group of editors. How that could successfully be styled as wars I have never understood. I met the dispute in 2012, for Samuel Barber (where I opposed for redundancy, but understood within a day that the redundancy serves readers with different needs). Brian Boulton added a compromise to Chopin as a RfC result in 2015. I thought that would settle it, dreamer that I am ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today: in memoriam Jerome Kohl who said (In Freundschaft): "and I hope that they have met again in the beyond and are making joyous music together" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello! I was wondering how to create a wiki --C00lsl0th54 (talk) 23:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@C00lsl0th54: What do you mean by "create a wiki". Do you mean create an article, or to create a whole new database of articles on a topic that is separate from Wikipedia? Z1720 (talk) 23:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to write about the Idols and small popular people in my country that have create a name by themselve by not well know need some pointers how to do that --MasterDale (talk) 21:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MasterDale: Thanks for your question. Take a look at Help:Your first article, which has tips and tools on how to create an article. Ensure that any article you create is for a person that is notable, which on Wikipedia means that the topic has had three, independent, reliable secondary sources write about the topic in a major way (and not a passing mention). Lastly, ensure that if you are being paid to write about a person, or if you know that person in real life, that you read WP:COIE to ensure that you comply with Wikipdia's conflict of interest policies. Let me know if you have any specific questions! Z1720 (talk) 21:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have not edited since I left and deleted two messages about a reappraisal of an article, then left another, on the coordinators' talk page. I wanted to be sure so I am posting this message. I note in the message on the coordinators page that there are two pages on A assessments which deal at least in part with reappraisals or reassessments. I am a new coordinator and thought I ought to be able to understand and proceed with the reassessment. I now think I am not likely to gain certainty on how to proceed without some further advice or instruction. That is the gist of my message there, which I invite you to read.
I also note that the article is no longer A class, probably not GA and will need some citations at almost any level. So I agree the article needs reassessment. If no other coordinator responds in the near future, I will ping them in case they read earlier messages and think I am taking care of this. I should mention that I do not have the sources to use to fill in the citations or any other improvements which might appear necessary so I can't work to improve this article myself. Sorry for the confusion. Donner60 (talk) 07:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Donner60: Thanks for this message. I left the message on the coordinator's page because the instructions on WP:MHR says "If an editor feels that any current A-class article no longer meet the standards and may thus need to be considered for demotion (i.e. it needs a re-appraisal) please leave a message for the project coordinators." Is there a process to initiate an A-class review, similar to WP:GAR or WP:FAR? Happy to help get things clarified. I also haven't edited over the weekend because I was at WikiConference North America. Z1720 (talk) 13:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you enjoyed the conference. I now see that the matter has been progressed on the coordinator talk page. I left a thanks and message that I would comment after someone else initiated the review. I wrote that one of my three thoughts or threads was mostly (if not entirely) correct. Now I know which one. Thanks for your patience. When Ian Rose comments that he has never dealt with a reappraisal, we know they have been rather rate. It think this is worth pursuing and will be educational for all participants and anyone who takes notice. Donner60 (talk) 22:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was great to meet you at the conference and I hope we cross paths in person again. Just wanted to leave this pic I took from the waterfront in West Vancouver, to show it is definitely worth a visit! (t · c) buidhe 02:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: It was great meeting you too! I am glad that we were able to chat in person. Maybe we will hang out in Vancouver sometime :) Z1720 (talk) 02:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go. :) Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! First of all, I just wanted to thank you for the comprehensive feedback you gave to the Arctodus article you gave last year. I finished completing your improvements, however while that was happening, I got some feedback about the length of sections potentially being too long. I've done some additional streamlining, reorganisation and rewrites. I know that you're quite busy, but if you'd be able to do take a look again to see how it's going, I'd greatly appreciate any kind of feedback. SuperTah (talk) 03:30, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720. I'm looking forward to hopefully working with you next year in the event that you're elected. I read your answer to a question in which you recommend referring AE threads without conclusion to ArbCom, and I would just note that in December, ArbCom amended its procedures to provide that: A consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may refer an arbitration enforcement request to the Arbitration Committee for final decision through a request for amendment. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 18:50, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@L235: Thanks for your message. The above refers to a consensus of admin requesting opening a case. In addition to this, I would like a definitive remedy from ArbCome stating that if an aspect of an AE case closes without consensus, the closing admin must refer the issue to ArbCom. Arbitrators are so busy that it is difficult to be aware of situations happening around Wikipedia; my suggestion would make it mandatory to bring an unresolved issue from AE to ArbCom's attention. Z1720 (talk) 20:39, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How would you feel about an intermediate step of encouraging administrators to do so without requiring them to do so? KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 22:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@L235: That leaves it up to admin discretion again, with some issues getting lost when an admin doesn't want to go through the hassle of opening a case (which is totally understandable, considering the required time that a case takes.) If this was left to admin discretion, then I would expect arbitrators to be actively monitoring AE closes and opening cases when they see a contentious or no consensus close (similar to what happened with the HPJ case, but that was triggered by an academic journal). This would add more work on arbitrators, which I am trying to avoid.

I would rather it be mandatory that admin report contentious closes to arbitrators so that, at the very least, arbitrators are made aware of significant disagreement amongst the admin core. We already have wheel warring triggering ArbCom cases, and we have a common courtesy of the blocking admin being contacted before an unblock can take place. I think adding this requirement, or at least strongly suggesting it, would make the AE process better (and less likely to become siloed from ArbCom). I don't think admin would object too much because AE is a creation of ArbCom and thus they have more authority to generate rules for this noticeboard. Z1720 (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there How can I change my name on Wikipedia --Daylightshadow2008 (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Daylightshadow2008: Click on the following link for information on how to change your name: Wikipedia:Changing username. Z1720 (talk) 21:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time ... I see you have one or two other things going on :) When you get a chance, feel free to edit or comment on the blurb at this link. - Dank (push to talk) 04:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dank: I LOVE the selected picture. Science articles are far outside my specialty, so any suggestions are going to focus on prose. I'll take a look at it in the coming days. Z1720 (talk) 04:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dank: I read the blurb and don't have any concerns. Z1720 (talk) 20:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720. :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:19, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello! if it isn't too much trouble i need a bit of help adding userboxes to my user page, as they keep displaying as links. thank you kindly! --Squiggeel (talk) 05:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i think i've figured it out, actually! thank you anyways! Squiggeel (talk) 08:20, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Squiggeel: I'm glad that you figured it out. Let me know if you have other questions! Z1720 (talk) 15:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December songs

story · music

Today's story is about Maria Callas, on her centenary. - Aaron Copland died OTD, and Jerome Kohl (mentioned in November) said something wise on Copland's talk, - yes, regarding a soft(er) stance towards infoboxes. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:38, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for Abishabis, introduced: "This article is about a Cree religious leader from the 19th century. Methodist missionaries and Hudson's Bay Company employees gave various accounts of his life and teachings, which have been analysed by modern-day researchers."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Back to arbitration: did you check out the history of the infobox of Callas? Compare Jessye Norman, Kathleen Ferrier and Jenny Lind. Did you check out the history of Copland? Compare Max Reger, Max Beckschäfer, Colin Mawby (from today's story), and Benjamin Britten (who died OTD). What's the difference? If what you see changes your answer to my question, feel free to change, and ping me. I would like to see a way to avoid in the future hundreds of editors commenting on Mozart RfCs, just to kind of restore the infobox he had in 2006. Happy new era ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: ArbCom does not arbitrate on content issues, and whether an infobox should be in an article is a content issue. The use or not use of infoboxes will probably need to be discussed on an article-by-article basis since any rules on infobox use will be subjective. However, editors should limit their responses, avoid walls of text, and limit back-and-forth, extended replies. If an editor is not adhering to talk page etiquette or the additional rules established in this topic area from previous ARBCOM cases, even after they have been repeatedly asked to by others, an AE request should be filed as infoxoes have a contensious topic designation. If AE requests are not able to solve the concerns, a new ARBCOM case can be opened. Z1720 (talk) 15:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the education, but nothing new. I will not take a colleague to AE, after what I've seen, and I put up "grant each other the presumption that we are acting in good faith" as a note to self. - I read A pocket guide to Arbitration only after my encounter. - More after the election. I hope you enjoy my mostly musical stories and articles, - that's what I am here for. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today, I managed to get the pics to snow (on 28 Nov), and heard a lovely concert, after listening to a miracle of meditative dreaming on 6 December (or just click on music). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... and today, to Paris (29 Nov) with a visit to the Palais Garnier, - to match the story of Medea Amiranashvili, - don't miss listening to her expressive voice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My story today is about Michael Robinson, - it's an honour to have known him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had hoped to see the 300th anniversary of Bach's first Christmas cantata among the anniversaries for 26 December. Any chance? Perhaps instead of another battle, on a day that is still Christmas in some countries? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: We might be able to swap it in. What's the article, and what you like the blurb to be? Z1720 (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what to say differently, - there's only one item with a blurb for 1723 in 26 December. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: OTD sets are prepared on their selected anniversaries page. For example, December 26's page is at Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 26. If a blurb is not on that page, it is unlikely to be considered for OTD. If there are any other suggestions for OTD blurbs, please put them on their Selected anniversary page.

For the article, I put it into the article and put Bach into the image slot (I don't think it's ever been used for OTD, and it's a pretty good image). Let me know if there are any other concerns. Z1720 (talk) 14:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Pics up to 3 December (with my shadow in one of them), and a story about Beethoven in memory of his birth. When the arb who wrote the infoboxes case installed the community consensus - in 2015! - I hoped these infobox wars were over, really. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today, I have a special story to tell, of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder what readers will say that we will run this news late ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations to your election! - I uploaded more pics, with Christmas trees and related artworks, and I have two women on the Main page (for a sad reason). Our Christmas singing (of my user's infobox music "singen, singen") was pictured! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I boldly added Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1 to the Selection for 25 March. I noticed that Annunciation is marked ineligible, but it would be Feast of the Annunciation, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Feast of the Annunciation can be used instead, though I would like the paragraphs at the end of the "History" section to be referenced before it appeared on the main page. Z1720 (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do. I saw only today that there are two articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can I make my own article that doesn't say "Sandbox" and I can make it it's own name --Madteals (talk) 14:21, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Madteals: since you are a new editor, you will need to create a draft of the article and get it approved for it to appear on Wikipedia. Click on the following link: WP:AFC, then click on "Click here to start a new article". Follow the instructions and ensure that your article has at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources. When the article is ready, submit it to AFC and another editor will look at it to approve or give feedback. Z1720 (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It was great to meet you at WCNA :) Based on what we had talked about, I worked on a tool to hopefully help with checking articles: https://otd-helper.toolforge.org

For making it easier to update the OTD pages themselves, I wanted to change the comment format for inelgible articles to be a list rather than table. Then we'd have a user script of some sort that makes it easier to re-arrange articles (maybe literal drag and drop?) and leave notes for ineligible ones. Curious if 1) this tool will help you out and if you'd like to see any other changes/features 2) if you have any thoughts regarding a user script for the second part! Legoktm (talk) 23:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making this @Legoktm: I've used it to check the upcoming hooks and it gives a lot of useful information. Some other information I would like to see in the toolforge are:

• Article rating (FA, GA, start, etc.)
• What year the hook is for (to help with selection of articles)
• Ineligible: what is the reason given for its ineligibility?
• What country the article is from (this can possibly be done by capturing which Wikiprojects the article is attached to)
• How many citation needed tags are in the article.

The drag and drop sounds good, or perhaps a selection box, so a user can checkmark the hooks, then confirm at the bottom of the page that these are the five hooks they want for the set, or if the hook should be moved to ineligible. It would also be great if, at the beginning of building the hooks, the tool can automatically move the previous hooks to the eligible category. My brain is swimming with ideas, so I'm excited to improve this process with you and make OTD easier! Z1720 (talk) 14:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, I've added in article rating, list of WikiProjects, and how many citation needed tags (and other inline ones) since those were straightforward, and I'm figuring out how to do the rest :) Legoktm (talk) 05:12, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DYK admins: Cia Z1720: If possible, kindly add the biography about Guy Lombardo to the DYK queue for review, ASAP using the hook which is related to NEW YEARS DAY as described below. Many thanks in advance for your help & HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!!160.72.80.178 (talk) 18:44, 7 December 2023 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

Guy Lombardo

• ... that Guy Lombardo & his Royal Canadians popularized the tradition of heralding the arrival of New Year's Day to audiences around the world with a rendition of Auld Lang Syne for nearly five decades ? Source: ^[1]
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: 160.72.80.178 (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

Created by William Crump (talk). Nominated by 160.72.80.178 (talk) at 18:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Did you know; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

160.72.80.178 (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC)NHPL 160.72.80.178 (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC) 160.72.80.178 (talk) 18:44, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [reply]

Hey mentor how you doing i tryna put my promo Link in External Links but my edit got undone and deleted but y mine got deleted while many others are putting their link what should i do so I can also place my link there like other --Suman200722 (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Suman200722: Wikipedia does not allow promotional links in their articles. If others are doing it, you should post a notice on the talk page or remove it if it is an obvious promotional link. Z1720 (talk) 15:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'd like to know how I could change my username? I just realised it might be in violation of Wiki's username policy. --Salt & Candy Agency (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Salt & Candy Agency: Instructions on how to do this can beb found at WP:RENAME. Feel free to message me below if you have any additional questions. Z1720 (talk) 14:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The DYK holiday award goes to?
		Thank you for allowing me to work with you in this section of the project. I want to wish you happy holidays! Lightburst (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message for the nominator of a review you just passed. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 17:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for taking the time to peer review articles I put up for the process (2 of them are good articles now)! I will always be grateful for your help. Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 15:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Z1720, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Spicy (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Please note that when nominating an article for GAR, you should always notify the WikiProjects on the talk page and any recently-active major editors, per the instructions at WP:GAR. I do not think you did that for the three articles you recently nominated there. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: Thanks for letting me know. I have been using the GAR helper script to nominate articles and assumed that it completed all the steps for me, including notifying Wikiprojects. I will keep this in mind for future nominations. Z1720 (talk) 18:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The GAR helper script notifies previous nominators/reviewers of the articles, albeit with tickboxes if you don't want to alert them for whatever reason; after you have pressed the "submit" button, it auto-formats the {{subst:GARMessage|ArticleName|page=n}} ~~~~ message for you to copy-paste onto relevant talk pages. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to you on the peer review with questions I do have. The Cadillac Ranger (talk) 02:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Z1720, you have been elected to the arbitration committee! The results of the election are available here: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2023#Results. You will likely be contacted by the existing committee for onboarding. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 01:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Z1720! Good luck with all of those email messages! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning arbitrators following their election by the community. The two-year terms of these arbitrators formally begin on 1 January 2024:

• Aoidh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Cabayi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Firefly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• HJ Mitchell (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Maxim (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Sdrqaz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• ToBeFree (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Z1720 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Upon meeting the Wikimedia Foundation's criteria for access to non-public personal data and signing the Foundation's non-public information confidentiality agreement, all incoming arbitrators will be subscribed to all Committee-managed email lists, assigned the CheckUser and Oversight permissions for use in office, and given access to the CheckUser and Oversight queues on the VRTS system.

We also thank our outgoing colleagues whose terms end on 31 December 2023:

• Enterprisey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Izno (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• SilkTork (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Wugapodes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Outgoing arbitrators are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, to remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the functionaries' and arbitration clerks' mailing lists following their term on the committee. To that effect:

• Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing arbitrators, who have not elected to retain them, after 31 December 2023:

  CheckUser: Enterprisey, Izno, SilkTork

  Oversight: Enterprisey, Izno, SilkTork

• Outgoing arbitrators are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. Whether or not outgoing arbitrators will remain active on any ongoing case(s) will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
• All outgoing arbitrators will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list, with the exception of Enterprisey, who has elected to be unsubscribed.
• All outgoing arbitrators will be unsubscribed from the clerks-l mailing list, with the exception of Izno, who has elected to remain subscribed.

For the Arbitration Committee, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 04:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § 2024 Arbitration Committee

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720, and thank you for your contributions. The Vanguard is a fine ship indeed, but I am here to politely ask if you would consider rescheduling the TFA. I understand that I am making a very late proposed add to the TFA list, but I have been entirely reworking a very old album FA of Green Day's Dookie from the depths of 2007, and this seminal, iconic rock album turns 30 on 1 February. I'm afraid I'm too late for that deadline, but I have been rapidly translating a fully-developed French version into the English page, and 22 February was the day its lead single "Longview" debuted on MTV and began to propel the band into rock legend. I plan to have it fully functional by tomorrow evening, and I'm assuming this FA is old enough to be re-run (I don't know if it is, so you can stop me here if it isn't). I see the nominator was someone else but they have not yet offered support on the TFA proposition; if you would like me to consult Sturmvogel I would be happy to.

I completely understand if you or Sturmvogel wish to decline, as it has appeared on the front page once many moons ago and you have a canonical anniversary date set, but 30 years is a big milestone for this record, and it's not just any record. Again, your decision, but I figured the worst I could hear is no. Happy new year, dannymusiceditor ^oops 20:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: I am not a TFA coordinator, so I only propose articles for TFA's consideration. I have no objections to swapping articles, although I have not taken a close look at the Dookie article. Pinging @WP:TFA coordinators . Z1720 (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it is, it wouldn't pass; I'll need until no later than the end of the day tomorrow night (EST) to finish the touches to Dookie. It's gone unnoticed as a decaying article for a long time until I picked it up and started sporadically improving it in bursts starting just about a year ago. But 30 years is 30 years, and if you'll humor me I can do the rest in one run of a handful of hours. dannymusiceditor ^oops 20:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: When you are done, I'd appreciate it if you could mark it as "Satisfactory" at WP:URFA/2020A. Thanks. Z1720 (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild is scheduling February. Wehwalt (talk) 20:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• DannyMusicEditor you are cutting this damn fine. I am in the middle of a run of scheduling and am five away from Vanguard. I am not necessarily preferring either of these at the moment. So I shall stop at Vanguard and possibly sleeping on it will bring clarity. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I completely understand. I'll get cracking on Dookie to make it as presentable as possible to you tonight. dannymusiceditor ^oops 21:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DannyMusicEditor, once you have it more or less as you want it, could you nominate it at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests immediately below HMS Vanguard to give the community at least some chance to comment. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild, it's about a quarter to one in the morning in eastern America, and after taking a break for a few hours from my last message, I've spent roughly the last four and a half translating French. I'm going to sleep for a little bit, but I should have this done imminently - I still have to polish the live performances and write about this album's legacy (of course it has one, it's a diamond record), but I do not work tomorrow and I could not be happier spending my free time completing this. Any further updates I will send to your talk page. dannymusiceditor ^oops 05:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		Military history reviewers' award
		On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (2 stripes) for participating in 7 reviews between October and December 2023. Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Hi mentor, what is "Tags: possible BLP issue or vandalism"? Is it good or bad? Why my edits are being tagged so? Can you look into it? --Vargibu (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vargibu: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! WP:BLP stands for biography of living person: an article about a person who is alive falls into this category. BLPs have extra scrutiny, which means that when editors add information about them it is important to always cite the information to reliable sources. If edits are being tagged so, I would post a message on the talk page of the article that asks the person who tagged the article for more information. Don't forget to ping them using a Template:Reply to so that the person is notified of your question. Let me know if you have any other questions. Z1720 (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what is the impact of Wikipedia on web, as we have numbers of websites similar to Wikipedia. --Shrimaa Singh (talk) 18:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shrimaa Singh: Thanks for your question. I do not know the answer to that question, but the article Wikipedia might have some of the information you are looking for. Z1720 (talk) 18:41, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello how long does it take for one to have permissions to write their own wikipedia articles? --Suprisedr (talk) 18:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Suprisedr: Your account needs to be at least 4 days old and have made 10 edits. This is called "autoconfirmed", which you can read about at WP:AUTOCONFIRM. Z1720 (talk) 18:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I responded to you on the peer review again. The Cadillac Ranger (talk) 00:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Real Life Barnstar
	Thank you for participating in Toronto's Wikipedia Day :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see another 300 coming up: St John Passion, first performed on Good Friday 1724. It was 7 April then, and is 29 March this year. I think it belongs there, for its meaning. Right? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I misunderstood the "no answer" to this question. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Today a friend's birthday, with related music and new vacation pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm obviously brand new to participating in articles. I would like to start contributing articles based on my interests and experiences. Going through the help and guides I'm going to setup a sandbox and I was wondering if I can share an article I've created in my sandbox with another editor to get advice. The only option i see says publish but I don't really want my sandbox public. Thanks --Velosaint (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Velosaint: Thank you for signing up for Wikipedia! Yes, you can share and article you are working on in your sandbox and ask for feedback from other editors. However, please note that all edits in your sandbox are still public. The wikilink to your sandbox will look something like User:Z1720/sandbox12 (this links to my sandbox article about the Brown-Dorian administration). Let me know if you have other questions. Z1720 (talk) 18:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How u create a backlink --Ratndip 2004 (talk) 10:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ratndip 2004: What do you mean by "backlink"? Are you talking about a wikilink? This is created by surrounding the term with two square brackets. So for example, if I want to link to the Wikipedia page for lion, I would type in [[lion]], which creates the lion link. Let me know if you have other questions. Z1720 (talk) 14:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Z! Didn't want to start a tangent...Re this edit, where did you go to see the numbers of admins who had moved to queue each month? Valereee (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: Thanks for starting this discussion, hopefully we can build momentum to some kind of change. I counted the number of admin who updated Template:Did you know/Queue/NextPrep. Z1720 (talk) 15:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, I think I do remember that!

Just FWIW, I hope I'm not coming off as simply a crank. I became an admin to work at DYK. I used to move preps to queue often. There were months I was doing one per day when needed. Then one day I burned out to the point I completely stopped editing, realized one day that I hadn't edited in literally months, and I'd been a daily editor for years. I decided to figure out why, so I handed in the mop and found I was interested in editing again. Went back to building preps when I felt like it. Then one day DYK got desperate, and I said I'd try to build a prep in the next day or so. Didn't edit at all for days. That was when I realized it wasn't adminning that was burning me out, it was DYK and the feeling of duty to the other workers there -- which is not them or anything they said or implied, it's me, it's my own problem I feel that way -- and that's when I hit on doing a move for each nom I made and picked up the mop again. I feel okay because I'm still doing more work than I'm causing, and I more or less can remain mostly ungrumpy. Usually. :D Valereee (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: I don't consider you a crank at all! My frustration is from the immense work I did in December promoting queues, and how other admin are not coming in to help. Taking a look through the edit history of the NextPrep template, you can see the names of admin who used to be active but haven't promoted a queue in over a month: leeky, Premeditated Chaos, Cwmhiraeth, Cas Liber, BorgQueen. And I think less than 20 admin have promoted queues in the past year, out of over 400 sets. DYK is burning through admin, and is not sustainable. I don't know what the solution is, but something needs to change, and more admin need to help out. I don't know how to make that happen though. Z1720 (talk) 16:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly how I was feeling, and I sincerely hope you'll find a way to prevent yourself from becoming completely burned out to the point you walk away like I did. I was feeling actual resentment, and I didn't like feeling that way toward people I genuinely like. And I kind of realized it was my problem. None of those people were telling me I had to do the work. They just didn't want to do it themselves and hoped someone else would do it. Although I do have to say that every time I see a vote by the majority to increase the workload for the minority, I feel completely justified in doing only more work than I cause. If DYK implodes because no one's willing to do the work...well, my philosophy is that in volunteer work, if no one is willing to do a task, maybe it's not worth doing. I hope it never happens because I do value DYK as a way to get eyes on new creations, and the process always seems to improve the articles. But oh, well. I'm doing more work than I cause. I don't have to carry the entire project just because 98% of people don't value it enough to do their share. Valereee (talk) 16:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: I think one big reason why I got addicted to editing Wikipedia was to improve articles that appeared on DYK. That's why I want to keep DYK going: so that new editors might catch the Wikipedia bug. I think I am stretching myself quite thin, with DYK, OTD, and ArbCom, so that's why I'm hoping to build a roster of admin who can help out in the first two. I'm hoping these proposals will help find admin who can help. I also need to write an article one of these days, or I'll do terrible in the Wikicup... Z1720 (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know...it would be interesting to know how many moves we'd get each week if every time an admin made a nom, they made a move to queue. I'm not sure how many queues I see that don't have a nom from an admin. If we could even get admins to commit to making a move of one single prep set to queue when they make a nom, we might not have a problem. Valereee (talk) 17:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: I'd be in favour of replacing their QPQ requirement to a "move to queue" requirement. Z1720 (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would work for me. That would actually lessen my own workload from 9 to 8 reviews, so for me personally a decrease. But for the average high-frequency admin nominator, it represents an 8x increase in workload plus the increase in risk, tedium, frustration, unpleasantness associated with reviewing 8 hooks that may or may not have been carefully scrutinized by reviewers and promoters. Getting folks on board for that...well, we can try. Valereee (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I promote to queue, I don't check as much as I do for the average review. When I promote from prep-to-queue, I only check to ensure that one fact is in the article and verified to a reliable source (not 2+ ALTS), skim for article tone, use earwig to check for copyright, and use a tool to check the article to ensure everything is cited. Major problems should have been sorted before it gets to this stage. Perhaps if we make it an either/or (an admin can promote a set or review an article) it might encourage more promotion.

I just posted in Discord's Admin thread asking for help, and the feedback about DYK is interesting (and not positive). Might be a good readthrough to see why admin are staying away. Z1720 (talk) 18:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it would be an interesting readthrough, but I don't use discord. If these are admins who don't nominate, do we care what they think? And if they're admins who do nominate, why aren't they discussing it at WT:DYK instead of there? Sorry to be grumpy, but why is this even being discussed by admins somewhere else when literally everyone affected by it is at WT:DYK? Valereee (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still processing this, and the more I think about it, the more dismayed I feel. Admins are discussing a Wikipedia project off-wiki in a way that is discouraging other admins from helping out at that project. That's really troubling. Valereee (talk) 10:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

story · music · places

My calendar story today is about Michael Herrmann celebrating his birthday. Perhaps I can get the festival into OTD, - you said birthdays don't count ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today I am happy about a singer on the Main page (at least for the first hours), after TFA the same day last year. - I still have the Good Friday question open (see January), but take your time, just don't forget please, over all the amazing things you manage to do for OTD and DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

more music and flowers on Rossini's rare birthday --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

still in the context: I added Rossini's Petite messe solennelle on its premiere day, 14 March 1964, which is 160 years ago. I believe that the time to repeat Mikado (1885) will be next year ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720, you are my mentor and I want to say hi and ask a question. Several months ago I suggested a minor edit to a page GINI coefficient. I am not sure what should happened next.

Thank you

rogmike --Rogmike (talk) 22:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rogmike: It looks like the edit was reverted in this edit. I suspect that the editor who reverted your edit thought that you were adding a source to an article that you authored yourself. Wikipedia considers it a conflict of interest when editors add sources that they authored themselves. If you want to add this information to the article, I suggest finding another source that verifies the information you tried to add that was authored by someone else. Z1720 (talk) 22:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720. Thank you for this insight. I am not sure how to proceed. I found the statement on the page to be incorrect and wrote the proof that I put on SSRN. Proof itself is rather trivial, but I do not know if anybody looked at this relationship before, so I do not have any other source to support my claim. I do not think I am unique, so probably you can guide me on how to incorporate proposed change to the page. Will it help if I just remove the link to the article I put on SSRN? Rogmike (talk) 22:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone with a conflict of interest can propose an edit to an article by using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Once the request is made, another editor will determine if the edit should be added into the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720, I am unable to reply to you here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Ingush_towers, however I have already replied on WT:DYK earlier. See diff Muqale 16:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 Pickersgill-Cunliffe review four books

Hi. I saw your comment on errors that we have a backlog and I'm willing to help. It looks like the default is that the previous years entries roll over. This is confusing as you cannot tell what has changed from year to year without going through the history!I think we should try for different stuff every year, of we can. Do you have any tips or tricks for this area? Secretlondon (talk) 13:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Secretlondon: Thanks for helping out in this area. When I swap the hooks, I try to use different hooks every year. The OTD helper here shows which hooks have appeared on the Main Page and when. You can also find new hooks using a Wikidata query; the links are at the bottom of the WP:OTD page. Ensure that a hook placed in the OTD set is eligible for the main page: the date that the event happened or the person was born/died needs to be cited in the article, there are no orange banners anywhere in the article, and there are few (or ideally zero) uncited passages, and the article has not been featured on the Main Page in the past year.

Feel free to swap a set and send me a message, and I will check the articles you placed there. When you finish swapping a set, please indicate that you have done so at WT:OTD. Thanks again for offering to help! Z1720 (talk) 16:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
• Vami_IV (submissions), with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
• MaranoFan (submissions), with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
• Skyshifter (submissions), with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
• voorts (submissions) and Elli (submissions), both with one FA and one DYK each.

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

		The Peer Review Barnstar
		Thanks for all your help and feedback on pages submitted to Wikipedia:Peer review ! GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 18:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You nommed this one at TFAR. Any objection to switching the image from one co-star to the other? April TFAs are a bit heavy on white-male images. - Dank (push to talk) 23:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dank: No objection. Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

(t · c) buidhe 02:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

• Generalissima (submissions), who has 916 points mostly from one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher), 15 GAs, and 16 DYKs on a variety of topics including New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures, in addition to seven reviews
• Vami_IV (submissions), who has 790 points from two FAs on Felix M. Warburg House and Doom (2016 video game), two GAs, one DYK, and 11 reviews
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who has 580 points from one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, two DYKs, and five reviews
• Sammi Brie (submissions), who has 420 points mostly from nine GAs and seven DYKs on television and radio stations
• MaranoFan (submissions), who has 351 points from one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and three DYKs
• Skyshifter (submissions), who has 345 points from one FA on OneShot, one DYK and two reviews

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

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

Hi @Z1720: I am thinking about nominating 'Pornography' for Good article review if you be willing to take it up for review anytime soon. Rim sim (talk) 06:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rim sim: If you nominate it to PR, I'll take a look. Z1720 (talk) 13:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Nominated it for PR under 'General' topics here[4], you may examine it now. Rim sim (talk) 17:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

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

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

---

Hi Z1720, I wanted to thank you for your suggestion for a peer mentor on the Etika PR. It's been several months and I haven't received as much feedback as I'd like outside of a few suggestions, so I wanted to ask if you would like to leave any more feedback, if you have the time? If not, may you please archive the review tomorrow? Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 22:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PantheonRadiance: I don't think I will have time to review the article. Instructions on how to archive PRs is at WP:PRG, and I highly recommend using the script mentioned there, as it makes the process easier. Good luck with the article! Z1720 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you so much! PantheonRadiance (talk) 22:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720, thanks for participating in the WikiCup. You recently submitted Talk:Oakland California Temple/GA2, Talk:Abigail Larson/GA1, and Talk:Alison Frantz/GA1 for GANR points in the WikiCup, but you do not seem to have completed your reviews yet. As per Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, you may claim points when your review is finished. For GAN reviews, this means you may claim your points when the review is passed, failed, or closed. Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Sounds good. In previous years I had submitted GA reviews while they were in progress: in the future, I'll submit them when the reviews are complete. Z1720 (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 four recent works

Your recommendations have been taken into account and the Oakland California Temple page has been updated. Please take another look at the page for its subsequent GA review. Thank you! yoscotty (talk) 12:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been reworked according to your instructions. Please, take a look at the page let me know if I did not catch anything that needs to be fixed. Thank you again! Yoscotty (talk) 18:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your notes! I put more citations in the Christmas section–let me know if that is better for notability. The quote from Brigham Young has been removed from the lead section. Information about statistics for four out of five visitors to the FSC is a specific statistic for the Temple Hill FSC location. Let me know if there is anything else I should change. Thank you very much for your help! Yoscotty (talk) 19:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your notes! The page has been updated according to your specifications. Please, let me know what else I can change! Yoscotty (talk) 17:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your notes. I've worked through the edits as you've highlighted them. Please, take a look and let me know if anything else needs to be adjusted. Yoscotty (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Thank you for the work on the selected anniversaries, again! I enjoyed Rossini's mass especially. You pointed out that we shouldn't run the same fact two years in a row, - then we should not use BWV 1 on 25 March this year, but next year for the 300 years. I think that Feast of the Annunciation is better sourced now. How would it go to the top line? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: The hooks are usually swapped a few days before the date. When the hooks for March 25 are swapped, if Feast of the Annunciation is not added to the top of the template you can post a request on the selected anniversary date's talk page, and you are welcome to ping me in that message. If it is two days or one day before it is set to appear on the Main Page, you can post a message on ERRORS and an admin will take a look. Z1720 (talk) 14:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining! - I uploaded vacation pics (from back home), at least the first day, - and remember Aribert Reimann. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tentatively moved Feast of the Annunciation to the "staging area" for the 25 March selection. - Pics of third day begun.

Thank you for handling that. - In WP:TFAR, I moved some articles that you requested to the summary, but only dates, titles and your support, - please add reasons. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that. New pics: a calf in the mist and chocolate cake, and a story of collaboration --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I listen to Bach's St John Passion today, - 300 years after it was first performed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two days later in time, a different music, - Happy Easter! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And the following day another contrast. I added that "exhilarating" music to the anniversaries, and while I would have preferred it today, I wouldn't find 10 April impossible, with Eastertide lasting for 50 days. If an image, not old Bach again please, but perhaps the contemporary Nikolaikirche. (I added this here under March because of the context, April will follow.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that SMS Lothringen, 2019 FA Cup final, Mary Anning, Raymond Brownell and Take Ichi convoy have been scheduled as today's featured articles for May 2024. Please check that the articles needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurbs, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before each article appears on the Main Page. Thanks for the nominations. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your sterling work at OTD. Just so you know, we had a WikiCon in Auckland over the weekend and I gave a presentation about the homepage. I made a plug for editors getting into OTD prep work. I hope that (at least) one of them will act on it and give you a helping hand. All the best. Schwede66 18:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. – Aza24 (talk) 02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. How come Good Friday s not currently featured on Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/March 29? It seems quite odd that such a big international day is not featured on there. Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 06:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Therealscorp1an: The article has too much uncited text. If you would like it added this year, please add the necessary citations at the end of every paragraph or remove the information if it is not notable, appropriate, or unverifiable. Z1720 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720. Could you please check whether Emirati08 and M5Ehistory are related? Similar edit history and Emirati08 is trying to restore an edit previously made by M5Ehistory on Al-Zaffa Clan. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Quinlan: I can't do a check right now as I am about to go offline. If you suspect sock/meatpuppetry, I suggest filing a report at WP:SPI, where other admin can take a look. Z1720 (talk) 03:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, no worries. I wasn't quite certain enough to block so I thought a CheckUser made sense. Regards. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

---

Hello. How does one nominate an article for On This Day? Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Therealscorp1an: There isn't a formal nomination process. Any editor can add an article to the "eligible" list of the date that the event happened or the person's birthdate/deathdate. For articles to be selected for that year's OTD, the date of the event has to be cited, the majority or all of the article needs to be cited (except for the usual exceptions) and there cannot be any cleanup yellow or orange banners. Z1720 (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Okay, so, let's say, how would this article — Cruise of the Kings — be added to the On This Day section? On 23 August, it will mark the 70th anniversary of the cruise, so how could this be placed on On This Day? - Therealscorp1an (talk) 05:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Therealscorp1an: Write a short blurb for the event and add the blurb to the "eligible" list on Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/August 23. Z1720 (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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, Nick-D and Pickersgill-Cunliffe discuss six (count 'em, six!) works comprising eight volumes Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on a lecture by the Australian official historian

Thank you for your attempt to review Dia Bridgehampton at GAN. I unfortunately had some major life issue arise so had to step away from wiki for a few months. I am back now, have made your suggested edits, and have re-nominated the article for GA status. I would love for you to take another look at the article but completely understand if I missed my chance. Thanks. Found5dollar (talk) 17:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Our current top scorers are as follows:

• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 642 points, mostly from 11 GAs about radio and television;
• voorts (submissions) with 530 points, mostly from two FAs (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three GAs;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 523 points, mostly from 11 GAs about coinage and history;
• SounderBruce (submissions) with 497 points, mostly from a FA about the 2020 season of the soccer club Seattle Sounders FC and two GAs;
• Tamzin (submissions) with 410 points, mostly from a FA about the drink Capri-Sun and three GAs;
• Kusma (submissions) with 330 points, mostly from a FA about the English botanist Anna Blackburne and a GA.

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

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