User talk:sgeureka

Two things to be aware of when commenting here: I prefer to continue discussions in one place, usually where they are started. {{Talkback}} templates are unnecessary, I use the watchlist. I refuse to fully read un-WP:CIVIL comments containing personal WP:ATTACKs. Polite disagreement spawns insight and collaborative compromise, while nastiness makes collaboration impossible.

Archives

Archive 1 (Feb 2007 – Dec 2007) Archive 2 (Jan 2008 – May 2008) Archive 3 (Jun 2008 – Oct 2008) Archive 4 (Nov 2008 – Jan 2009) Archive 5 (Feb 2009 – Oct 2010) Archive 6 (Nov 2010 – May 2019)

Welcome!

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

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! --Tone 11:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Emergency! characters 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/List of Emergency! characters (2nd nomination) 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:28, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jordan Orr has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable actor who has only had minor roles.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 04:11, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	Money Heist expert!
	Thanks for taking a lead role on getting Money Heist to GA - I knew it was worthy of such after you got to it! Hope to see you back at it for part 4! :) Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 00:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank YOU. I admit there are still a few spots in the article in terms of scope where I am not satisfied yet. (I knew beforehand it wouldn't be done by the end of the GAN review.) I'll keep working on it at my own pace for however long it takes, and I am certain I'll be back for part 4. – sgeureka ^t•c 16:15, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see any particular place to request it, so could you remove my rollback privileges if you’re able? I don’t really use them, and I’m worried about accidentally using it because I edit from my phone so often. TTN (talk) 14:56, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TTN: I'd do it if the interface was intuitive, but it's not, and I don't want to mess around to get it to work. You were granted the rollbacker rights on 13 March 2017, but Special:UserRights (in admin view mode) doesn't show rollback rights as active (and only lets me activate it with various >1-day exemption time possibilities), leading me to believe it is somehow linked to your status as as WP:Extended confirmed user. Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions#Removal_of_permissions says you should contact an admin, but I am not experienced enough to know what to do in this case. – sgeureka ^t•c 06:23, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I actually started my wiki career long ago with some fiction fancruft. But these days I think wikia is a much better place for them. The problem with a 'universe of' type of article is that it should be properly referenced, and also discuss the real world significance (inspiration, impact, etc.). For example, I was surprised but Interstellar Network News is surprisingly good and may even stand on its own. But few other articles from that show have reference sufficient to be worth merging. As such, I'd rather prune most of them. If at some point someone wants to create a good article about the universe, they likely won't have much use for cruft we are deleting. It is also worth noting that Star Wars universe redirects to SW. SW is one of the most popular franchises, with a ton of fans, and they weren't able/willing to write a universe article. Star Trek universe - ditto. SG gets Mythology of Stargate, which I could nitpick, but there are indeed many low hanging fruits so I don't think this needs to be axed now (in the next 10 years, as things are going around here, hmmm). Interestingly, another famous fiction series, Tolkien's Middlearth, doesn't get a universe of article, but gets Outline of Middle-earth. Oh well, for now I will go and kick nest of ants and nominate something from that series for AfD. Maybe Sting (Middle-earth)... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if possible and not too much of a hassle for you, I'd appreciate if you can leave me a note if you merge episodes back into the season/list pages. I've been working on cleaning and sorting episode redirects and I just noticed the Babylon 5 episodes were converted by seeing the template at TfD, and that specifically was a series I checked off my list so would not have seen it otherwise. Would appreciate it. Thanks! --Gonnym (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: Sure, I don't merge many episode articles, but when I do, I do so en masse. Is there a WP site that explains the current best way to do so? I used {{R to TV episode list entry}} for B5, which was the preferred method 10 years ago, but things might have changed. – sgeureka ^t•c 21:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a while back {{Television episode redirect handler}} which handles most scenarios and produces a consistent outcome (including handling of printworthy, double redirect, default sort and others). --Gonnym (talk) 23:03, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you went through almost all of them. Frankly, I'd think most of the main cast should be notable. Most of them have a chapter each in From Starship Captains to Galactic Rebels: Leaders in Science Fiction Television (see [1]). For Delenn/SI/LA, consider [2]. Other sources: [3]. I know I started this with going after the supporting characters, but I think for the main cast, an AfD would be appropriate (and I think I'd vote keep for some of them, actually). PS. I have rested 3-4 articles that I think may be notable and should at least to to AfD. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:48, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Well, I didn't merge them because they non-notable, but because after trimming for WP:WAF, there was no need for WP:SPINOUTs, and other reasons per WP:MERGEREASON. I noted these reasons in the edit summaries. I consider AfD-ing these main character articles a bad idea, because, as you said, they are notable, and I actually don't want them deleted (just merged for now). Anyone can resurrect these articles, but they should address the concerns that lead to the merger. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:56, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I've added a section on literary analysis and such to each article. This should help for now. I couldn't find anything for others, so they should stay merged until someone digs out more sources... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I am preparing the merge proposals for all character articles now. The main issue that I have is that the articles are 95% exceeeeeeesively long plot summaries. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:07, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to ping me for any relevant merge, but I think the 4-5 ones that survive right now can stay. Sure, they are totally unbalanced with regards to plot vs analysis, but that's probably ok... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:09, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I created a discussion at Talk:List_of_Babylon_5_characters#Merging_all_main_character_articles_here where I laid out all my arguments in favor of a merger. We can continue the discussion there. :-) – sgeureka ^t•c 08:53, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like something that should be prodded and deleted, unless you feel like merging and soft delete/redirecting first? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:51, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: That's the only SG article where I honestly don't know what to do, because there are some sourced production and design details that I'd hate to lose, but ultimately these warriors have been a 20-episode long plot contrivance. Technology in Stargate probably shouldn't have a WP article nowadays, and Mythology of Stargate and List of Stargate SG-1 characters don't really fit. Maybe merge to Stargate SG-1 (season 7)#Production? I'll probably deal with this article last, after I've dealt with the other SG articles. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kull Warrior ended shortly before my wiki return; I hadn't even noticed. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Merged into List of Stargate SG-1 characters#Other alien recurring characters. This works well considering there are already several alien race sections, and although Kull Warrior aren't individuals, they can be considered characters rather technology. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for providing a closing rationale at that AfD. Do you think we can also redirect in the same fashion two other articles I mention (and that are even more minor), i.e. Minor places in Beleriand and Minor places in Arda? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:53, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I am aware that this was an AfD that might/will get used as a precedent for the future of other Tolkien-based location articles. Therefore, I'd like to wait a few days to see if my AfD closer gets challenged at WP:Deletion review. If it doesn't get challenged, other editors (not me) can surely redirect Tolkien-based location articles citing this AfD. If the redirects don't stick, start another AfD citing this AfD result. – sgeureka ^t•c 09:04, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of Forgotten Realms deities. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Direct link: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 December 3#List of Forgotten Realms deities. – sgeureka ^t•c 11:19, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The spacecraft names, the ship names in the Culture series, are part of what makes the series of stories unique. They're obviously chosen with a good deal of care and gentle humour - can the list be reinstated? Mike Lacey, UK 22:48, 13 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeLacey (talk • contribs)

@MikeLacey: It was discussed and unanimously decided at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of spacecraft in the Culture series that wikipedia should not have an article/list on these ships. The list has found a new home at https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_spacecraft_in_the_Culture_series though. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please reinstate the list. The Culture series is notable beyond a small fan base, the naming of it's minds contributes to its appeal and uniqueness and it's personally one of my most often referenced pages on wikipedia. The tracker and ad infested wiki of fandom is no replacement for it. Wikipedia just got poorer to me after reading up on the deletions going on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.131.177.100 (talk) 11:57, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is WP:NOTWEBHOST for material found unsuitable for wikipedia, and as I already said above, the wikipedia community (not me!) decided this topic was unsuitable for WP. – sgeureka ^t•c 12:06, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After spending an hour trying to find out what happened to this page I am wondering why it doesn't show up as deleted in the deletion log or has the usual "Deleted Page" notice when opened through the various links that are still around on the internet (e.g. news.ycombinator.com has discussions about it, duckduckgo still finds it). Would it not be nicer for everyone if it was easier to find out what happened? (Note I am not trying to discuss why it was deleted or whether it should or should not be restored. I understand why it had to be deleted, even if it makes me sad.) Hn3000 (talk) 21:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The log at List of spacecraft in the Culture series says it all. Apparently, User:Muboshgu moved the page history to User:Winter's Tulpa/List of spacecraft in the Culture series post-deletion, but I have neither knowledge nor interest in exactly why, but you could dig up the info on those users' talkpages. – sgeureka ^t•c 22:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of starships in Stargate 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/List of starships in Stargate (2nd nomination) 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. TTN (talk) 12:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After cleaning up the categories, looking at Category:WikiProject Television descendant projects it seems that these are possible candidates to convert to TV task forces:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject British television (similar to Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/American television task force)
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject British TV/Channels
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject British television/Shows
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Scottish television
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian television
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Idol series
• Wikipedia:WikiProject ITC Productions
• Wikipedia:WikiProject NCIS
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Nickelodeon
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Television Stations
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Television Game Shows
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Top Model
• Wikipedia:WikiProject The X Factor

What do you think? --Gonnym (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: My motivation to turn inactive TV WikiProjects into taskforces was to discourage the creation of more TV WPs >> creation of more in-universe fancruft articles under fanboy protection >> more to clean up five years down the road when the fans have moved on.

With most of the your listed remaining WPs, I think fancruft will not be much of an issue, so there is not as much (imagined?) pressing need. However, there seemed to be a general interest in unifying more subprojects under the WP:TV header during my recent proposal, and I'd certainly support your proposal as well. I don't really see how anyone would oppose it; all WPs all inactive or low-interest. – sgeureka ^t•c 22:06, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit: can you please provide attribution for the copied text, as described in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia? Thanks very much! isaacl (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I did exactly that. (quote: At minimum, this means providing an edit summary at the destination page – that is, the page into which the material is copied – stating that content was copied, together with a link to the source (copied-from) page, e.g. Copied content from page name; see that page's history for attribution.). – sgeureka ^t•c 18:13, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm used to seeing the actual text "see that page's history for attribution" in the edit summary in order to connect the dots for attribution purposes, though I appreciate one could infer it from your edit summary. I also am used to seeing the {{copied}} template being used, though I know it's additional work. Thanks for your quick reply. isaacl (talk) 02:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This may sound like a crazy idea, but I was already partly thinking of this before your post at the WT:FICT discussion made me think of it a bit more seriously, but is there any easy way to document the history of fictional areas (like STARGATE and MIDDLE-EARTH) that were crufty but survived for ages and have a long history that could be documented? And would there be any interest in that (both from those who edit in such areas and those who might want to read about it in passing)? I suppose a starting point would be a list of articles, of deletion and merger discussions, and the start, middle and end points of various 'deletion' waves? I'd also be interested in tracking the editing activity and stats (e.g. number of editors, number of edits, number of years the articles existed). Page views might also be of interest. It would kind of feel like drawing a line under it, but maybe only in a rudimentary way as doing too much might in itself be a waste of time. But I do think it is important to document things in some way to prevent repetition of the same mistakes. The deletion discussions themselves only give some insight into that. Carcharoth (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For Stargate, a good starting point for the notability/merge discussions are the talk pages of WP:STARGATE, starting at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Stargate/Archive_9#WP:EPISODE, our guideline for articles on episodes in mid 2007. I made my first comments there shortly afterwards, and started or participated in many merge/redirection discussions, the most recent one in November 2019. Major changes are pretty well documented there, because I am that kind of person, but also because I like to protect my merge-work against "boo-hoo you haven't properly pre-discussed this so I'll revert you, you evil deletionist". Another approach is to look into Category:Stargate character redirects to lists, reviewing the redirects to the remaining SG articles (What links here >> Show redirects only), or looking for {{merged-from}} templates on talkpages (I used to be very thorough with this). – sgeureka ^t•c 18:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply. I will try and include Stargate article histories if I get back to this. Are you aware of other areas that might meet the criteria of: (a) being around for a long time; and (b) being fairly well organised? Carcharoth (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A good starting point would be Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Descendant WikiProjects and task forces, which lists projects for TV shows where editors joined in en.wiki's early days to improve the fiction coverage. If these projects were every well organized, I don't know. You'll either find their articles are a huge abandoned in-universe mess, or their articles are the average "main characters and seasons are the only spinouts we have" (either because the project never really took off, or cleanup has already happened). WP:SIMPSONS appears to be an outlier: they are still active, and have the necessary manpower, desire and notability to still produce decent stand-alone articles. (ETA: I only really work in the TV area and can't comment on other fiction areas.) – sgeureka ^t•c 12:12, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The worst of both worlds, eh? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:19, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It didn’t list the main crew members who died and you placed Bourne, Deon, Strassi and Mason Freeman were adversaries. Also, Brody was main cast for season 2 and the first seven episodes of season 3, while “Causalities” can mean injury or death so “Fatalities” is a better word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.56.20.130 (talk) 23:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT. After all these years, the goal is to finally have a list that follows WP:WAF instead of WP:UNDUE WP:FANCRUFT. The few remaining errors (which happen in any cleanup attempts) can be spottet and fixed more easily also. Repeatedly reverting cleanup work, without addressing the underlying problem or being willing to work together, actually does more harm, as it discourages other editors to spend time on cleanup and thus leave an eternal mess around. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:18, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add back the pages for the characters by season as well as the recurrings. It'll help show stuff like who lived and who died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riders&Rangers (talk • contribs) 17:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Riders&Rangers: Stand-alone character lists per season are completely unnecessary per precedent. If someone reestablishes them another time for this show, I'll run them through WP:Articles for deletion to get binding community-wide input, but it's almost certain they'll get deleted (or redirected). The in-universe status of characters can be covered in the main character list. How should that list look (format, content)? You can get some inspiration from character lists of other show, but keep WP:WAF and WP:MOSTV in mind, because those other character lists might also be poor and not serve well to draw from. Otherwise, go crazy, I have no vested interest in the main character list. I just think, with my years of wiki experience, that the current list is in a healthy state to continue further improvement from, rather then the poorly formatted list(s) that it was previously. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Meet the Browns (TV sreies). Since you had some involvement with the Meet the Browns (TV sreies) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 00:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Check out my work here. If you are interested you can collaborate. --Kasper2006 (talk) 05:41, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I used your work in Draft:List of Money Heist characters in the voice Professor (Money Heist). Thank you again. --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kasper2006: Discussion continued at Talk:Money Heist#Scope of Characters and Casting sections. In short: I am interested in collaboration, but not for another week or two. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kasper2006:@Vaselineeeeeeee: It's been almost a month since my last reply, and I want to be honest here and give some perspective. For the time being, simply the thought of editing wikipedia is too draining, and I need to conserve my energy for other things to not go nuts in these trying times. Money Heist is still high on my priority list, and I still want to work on its en.wiki coverage, but I need to wait until I feel like its fun again. I hope that the relaxed lockdown regulations will help with this, but of course I can't say for sure. Thank you. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Million Award
	For your contributions to bring Money Heist (estimated annual readership: 3,900,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Reidgreg (talk) 12:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dan Lerner has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable TV director

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 13:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements. Some stuff is getting relisted. We could use more comments from the experienced editors. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Game of Thrones wars and battles has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today, thank you for Characters of Carnivàle, introduced (in 2008): "As far as I could determine in the last 6 months, the information that he gave there is unavailable anywhere else except for fan forums that copy-pasted his messages, so I ref'ed his original messages"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC), introduced (in 2008): "As far as I could determine in the last 6 months, the information that he gave there is unavailable anywhere else except for fan forums that copy-pasted his messages, so I ref'ed his original messages"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the Stargate Program article? The article does not only write about the characters, it is a general view of the development of the Program. I think it is useful for a better understanding of the series and I think it should exist. Andypos (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1. I didn't WP:DELETE it. 2. See WP:PLOT and WP:NOTABILITY. – sgeureka ^t•c 19:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the Characters of Carnivàle article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 19, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 19, 2021, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll check it out later. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

-- RoySmith (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Characters of Carnivàle for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Mjroots (talk) 03:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated List of Carnivàle episodes for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 05:58, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Alexbrn (talk) 05:38, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive: On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Howard Klein (television producer), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Jamiebuba (talk) 08:06, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mythology of Stargate, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mythology of Stargate (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]