User talk:Coffeeandcrumbs/Archive 1

 

Hi Coffeeandcrumbs! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:26, Wednesday, November 15, 2017 (UTC)

We were editing March for Our Lives at the same time. When I clicked Save, Wikipedia accepted my version, but it may have stomped on edits you had just made. It would be easier (for me, anyway) for you to make your edits again than for me to patch them in. Sorry for the inconvenience. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:39, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris: No worries. Happy editing!!!Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) 08:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Marlon Bundo's: A Day in the Life of the Vice President, A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! wumbolo ^^^ 18:19, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I BELIEVE THAT A MISTAKE WAS MADE IN YOUR CHOICE TO EDIT MY CONTRIBUTIONS REGARDING THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR TODAY'S SPECIAL CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION.

SO THAT I MAY BE BETTER EQUIPPED IN THE FUTURE TO PROVIDE ACCURATE ADDITIONS, COULD YOU PLEASE CLARIFY, SPECIFICALLY AND PRECISELY, WHAT EXACT ERRORS WERE MADE BY MYSELF THAT HAD CAUSED YOU TO EXPUNGE THE INFORMATION THAT I CONTRIBUTED, FOR I AM CONFUSED?

IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN, THE IMPORTANT INFORMATION THAT WAS INCLUDED WAS CITED BY REPUTABLE SOURCES (RANGING FROM LOCAL NEWS REPORTS (--TABLOID?!) TO OFFICIAL COURT DOCUMENTS)...SOME OF WHICH WERE LEFT ALONE WHEN CITED FOR OTHER LESS SENSITIVE/SUPERFICIAL INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE.

(SPECIFICALLY AS THESE RELATE TO THE FACTUAL AND PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS ASSOCIATED WITH MRS. TIPIRNENI'S MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAWSUIT, IN ADDITION, TO THE QUESTIONS AND CRITICISM THAT SURROUND HER CHOICE OF PUBLIC IMAGE/ SELF-PORTRAYAL-- BOTH OF WHICH YOU FELT WERE NOT WELCOMED ADDITIONS TO MRS. TIPIRNENI'S PAGE.

ADDITIONALLY, A CITED QUOTE FROM MRS. TIPIRNENI'S VERY OWN WEBSITE WAS DEEMED UNACCEPTABLE...

PERHAPS THESE WERE REMOVED DUE TO A TECHNICAL ISSUE, OVERSIGHT OR MISSTEP ON MY PART, I DO NOT KNOW.

I UNDERSTAND THAT MANY WISH TO REMOVE (EDIT OUT) FROM THE PUBLIC SPHERE (WIKI) SOME HARD FACTS (CRITICISM) THAT ARE INCONVENIENT TO ONE'S PERSONAL POLITICAL LEANINGS, BUT THAT ALONE IS NOT SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION TO SANITIZE AN ARTICLE...THE TIMING OF WHICH IS INTRIGING.

I SINCERELY HOPE THAT YOU ARE NOT PLAYING PARTISAN POLITICS ON THIS ONE, COFFEE.

THE CRITICISM THAT WAS INCLUDED WAS PUT THERE IN ORDER TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN-AS IT WERE, SO AS TO COMPLETE THE IMAGE OF A PUBLIC FIGURE...NOT TO TRY AND SABOTAGE THAT IMAGE. THE PAGE WAS/IS LACKING VITAL INFORMATION THAT AN ELECTORATE SHOULD HAVE FREE AND UNFETTERED (UNEDITED/CLEANSED) ACCESS TO, SO THAT A DECISION, EITHER TO SUPPORT OR OPPOSE, CAN BE MADE IN THE LIGHT OF THE TOTAL, AND NOT JUST THE SIDE/PORTION THAT IS DESIRED TO BE SEEN.

I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR RESPONSE.

THANK YOU.

Little embassy (talk) 22:44, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Little embassy For the love of god please turn off your capslock. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 22:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Chrissymad:, I am kinda of proud of this. The first tirade directed at me for doing the "Good Lords" work.---Coffeeandcrumbs 13:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

 

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN:, haha, I guess I am still too young. But it seems like a reasonable rule. Thanks. ---Coffeeandcrumbs 13:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Bob Honey Who Just Do Stuff at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

  Hello, I'm R9tgokunks. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to This is America (Childish Gambino song) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. R9tgokunks ✡ 06:33, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Fuck off! I have been protecting this article from every promotional John and Jane who want to add their name to the list of personnel. Help me or get the fuck away!---Coffeeandcrumbs 02:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Coffeeandcrumbs, that is not an appropriate response to R9tgokunks' message. I'm sure that you both have the best interests of the article at heart. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: The warning was unnecessary. And the lack of any attempt to look into my edit history was offensive.

• This is the edit that apparently deserved a warning tag.
• R9tgokunks assumed bad faith. All I did was remove a statement that, at the time, had no source attached.
• I first went and found the source and read it. Saw that it was written by a contributor to Pitchfork and not a Pitchfork staff.
• And I came to a valid but disputable conclusion. Considering due weight, it is perfectly logical to think a "Best New Track" attributed to a Pitchfork contributor (not a Pitchfork staff writer) is not notable and should not be included in an article of that is relatively still short.
• I was frankly pissed off that R9tgokunks gave me no chance to explain that and assumes I have some sort of personal bias against Pitchfork.

---Coffeeandcrumbs 21:40, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

1. The warning was completely valid. It was only a base level warning for an unconstructive edit.

2. If you read the source, then why did you remove it, and yet a day later insert a citation needed tag? Couldn't you muster the few clicks to cite it?

3. See this link which is located on the staff portal. [1]) Besides, your "contributor" argument gleans as weak. You could have at least checked the article for the staff member and seen that he has contributed many reviews, for tracks and album reviews alike.

4. "Best New Track" is a staple feature of Pitchfork and has been for at least 9 years. Many contributors write for the feature and are featured on Wikipedia articles for respective songs.

None of this excuses the uncivil(WP:CIVIL) behavior. That kind of thing doesn't fly on Wikipedia. R9tgokunks ⯃ 02:44, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

I encourage you to read Wikipedia:Civility#Avoiding incivility for yourself. Especially the second bullet point. I also remind you that WP:Wikipedia is not censored. When you come to my talk page and begin with assumption of bad faith and templated warning tags, I do not owe you niceties. My response is still, GO AWAY! Because, I remind you that you are still complaining that I removed unsourced material.---Coffeeandcrumbs 22:47, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Why the hell would you remove [2] context like Oliver Twist is by Dickens or Fagin is a character? Ribbet32 (talk) 02:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ribbet32: All I did was switch "citeweb" to "Cite web".---Coffeeandcrumbs 02:23, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

What the fuck are you talking about?---Coffeeandcrumbs 02:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ribbet32: Oh! I see it now. That was not intentional. My Apologies. That was an edit conflict.---Coffeeandcrumbs 02:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

OK, I apologize. I swore at you and you swore at me, so we'll call it even :) Ribbet32 (talk) 03:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ribbet32: It's all good. Keep doing good. I support you!---Coffeeandcrumbs 03:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

 

Your recent editing history at This Is America (song) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Take it to the talk page; the addition of the template has been reverted. And please stop with reverting every change made to the article. You've been doing this for weeks now. Your reverts come off like WP:OWN. Ss112 07:39, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ss112: What did I do now? ---Coffeeandcrumbs 07:49, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Rob Hiaasen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:55, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Coffeeandcrumbs, this edit popped up on my watchlist as a regular editor of elderly sailing ships. Idly wondering what purpose the edit serves - I've not spent time in the minutiae of date format updating so am curious as to the advantages of keeping these tags this current. -- Euryalus (talk) 01:36, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@Euryalus: Its benefit is minor and I would be willing to totally avoid such edits if it is irksome to local editors. The reasoning is to indicate that the article has been recently checked for MOS:DATEFORMAT. When a page goes on Main Page it usually experiences a lot of edits which introduces bad date formats. The edit indicates to other gnomes that it has been recently checked.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:06, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

We now have 97 participants.

Be sure to welcome our newest members, BrantleyIzMe, Coffeeandcrumbs, and Nolan Perry, with warm regards.

Work is proceeding apace. We have 2 major thrusts right now: converting the intro sections of portals, and building the components of the one-page automated model...

Converting the intro sections

We need everybody, except those building software components, to work on converting intros. If you have AWB, definitely use that. If not, then work on them manually. Even one a day, or as often as you can muster, will help a lot. There are only about 1,000 of them left to go, so if everyone chips in, it will go pretty quickly. Remember, there are 97 of us!

The intros for most of the portals starting with A through F have already been converted to use the {{Transclude lead excerpt}} template.

The standard wikicode for the automated intro that we want to put into place looks like this:

{{/box-header|Introduction|noedit=yes|}}
{{Transclude lead excerpt | {{PAGENAME}} | paragraphs=1-2 | files=1}}
{{Box-footer|[[{{PAGENAME}}|Read more...]]}}

That works for most portals, but not all. For some portals it requires some tweaking, and for others, we may have to use a different or more customized approach. Remember to visually inspect each portal you work on and make sure that it works before moving on to the next one.

Be sure to skip user-maintained portals. They are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Portals#Specific_portal_maintainers.

AWB tips

I've started an AWB tips page, for those of you feeling a bit overwhelmed by that power user tool. Feel free to add to it and/or improve it.

Portal automation

We have some very talented Lua programmers, who are pushing the limits of what we can do in gathering data from Wikipedia's various namespaces and presenting it in portals. Due to their efforts, Lua is powering the selective transclusion core of our emerging automated portal design, in the form of selected article sections that rotate content, and slideshows.

To go beyond Lua's limits, to take full advantage of Mediawiki's API, we are in the midst of adding another programming language to the resources we shall be making use of: JavaScript. The ways that JavaScript can help us edit portals to boost the power of our Lua solutions, are being explored, which will likely make the two languages synergistic if not symbiotic. Research is under way on how we can use JavaScript to make some of the portal semi-automated features fully automatically self-updating, in ways that Lua cannot. Like gathering random members from a category and inserting them into a portal's templates as parameters. Once the parameters are in place, Lua does the rest.

If you would like to get involved with design efforts, or just keep up on them, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals/Design.

When should we start building new portals?

Well, not at the present time, because building portals is quite time consuming. The good news is that we are working on a design that will be fully automated, or as close to that as we can get. And the new design is being implemented in the portal department's main portal creation template. This means, that not only will portals update themselves, their creation will be highly automated as well. That's the nature of templates. You put them in place, and they just... work.

What I'm getting at here, is that it would be better to wait to build lots of new portals until after the new design is completed. Because with it, instead of taking hours to create a new portal, it will likely take minutes.

That does not mean we should be idle in the meantime. The main reason most of us are here is because it became apparent that portals were largely unmaintained and had grown out-of-date. This had become so apparent that a proposal was made to delete all the portals and the portal namespace to boot. That makes our main objective in the short term to improve all the existing portals so that the community will want to keep them—forever.

Building lots of new portals comes later. Let's fix up the ones we have first. ;)

And on that note, I bid you adieu. Until next newsletter, see ya 'round the WikiProject.    — The Transhumanist   12:29, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Women Disobey

I decorated my talk, thank you for the inspiration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

It is an awesome photo, isn't it? I knew when I read the words Women Disobey that I must create that page. It is sad that the story of the protests was eclipsed by the senseless shooting at The Capital Gazette. I am having trouble expanding it with Reactions and Aftermath. Two days later, there was another much bigger protest, Families Belong Together (you will love the main infobox photo). That got a lot more coverage. I also started that page and Jmaxfield18 just ran with it (great work!). Jmaxfield18 seems very shy to engage but follows advise, without responding or reverting. A great example of why not to pre-judge an SPA.

Hey, would you be interested in a colloboration project. I have many draft ideas at User:Coffeeandcrumbs/Drafts that I am think of developing. Any of those peak your interest? Or can you suggest something? I have always believe I learn so much when I work side-by-side with someone. It gives me a chance to ask why someone makes certain editing decisions and challenge my own thoughts.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:23, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I love collaboration, but am not familiar with the topics and their sources. I will happily look shortly before you want to move a draft, - how is that? I have my routine of writing an article a day, and am 'booked' for weeks to come. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:47, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I made it one of my examples, Template:User QAIbox/doc#women disobey, feel free to share. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:55, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1980 of Precious, a prize of QAI! - Moon, moon, moon, - excellent landing job! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, WOW! What a nice coincidence! Thanks for keeping in touch! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 11:09, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

  Hello, I'm 190.198.124.88. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Rayo de Jalisco Sr. have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. 190.198.124.88 (talk) 12:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

 

A tag has been placed on 2018 extreme weather events requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

No context. Created because of this.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Hddty. (talk) 16:32, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

A user has opened a socking investigation into us here. They failed to notify you so that you can address the claims, so I am. --Kbabej (talk) 01:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm glad you joined. We need all the help we can get!

Do you have any ideas on how we might automate the insertion of a quote section for portals that do not have one?

I look forward to your reply.    — The Transhumanist   11:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: Please {{ping}} me if you reply. Thank you.

@The Transhumanist: Although, I have some technical expertise off-Wiki and I am learning fast here, I wasn't exactly offering that as my contribution. I am still relatively new to Wikipedia. I am more of a content person that is better suited at selecting a library of quotes. For example the 1920s portal has six selected quotes pages I can fill. I was thinking of doing all the portals for the last dozen decades. Also possibly selecting other featured items on portals.

But if this is going to be undone by an automated process anyway, I am not sure how to help. I will just read more about the Portals Project and see where I can help.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Undone? No. We want to develop tools that combine human input with automated gathering of data. We don't want an AI takeover. :) If you can dream up some ways to combine capabilities, that would certainly help. Keep an open mind – you never know when the lightbulb will flash on.

Sheer ideas are the starting points. Another way you can assist in general, is, to make wishes. "I wish I had a portal tool that could...", "I wish portals could...", I wish portals had a section that...", and so on. Even wild and outlandish wishes could inspire ideas. For example "I wish I could think of what I want on the page, and it just appears." Who knows when some crazy programmer might figure out a way to do this (actually, I think some companies are working on it). You can post your hopes and dreams for portals at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals/Design#Discussions about possible cool new features.

An idea you have given me is a quote database, as an auxiliary to Wikiquote and portals. A central repository of quotes, so they can be tapped into by multiple portals. Each entry could include subject designators, to aid in look ups. This may be beyond my programming ability at the moment, but I'm learning fast.

One thing we can do when we build a quote section maintenance tool or function, is provide delimiters to signify human input, so that the function retains that data, along with whatever it adds. I'm in the process of dreaming up PortalTool.js. I'll add this to the desired features section. Thank you!

Magic menu items. You click on one, and the desired thing happens. The question is, "what menu items should the program have?"    — The Transhumanist   00:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I think I may have a genius idea and I need confirmation to assuage my low self-esteem. Slambo touched on it in Random file from Commons category?.

• We get a bot to add all subpages of Wikipedia:Today's featured article, and all subpages of Template:POTD to Category:Uncategorized today's featured article blurbs and Category:Uncategorized today's featured picture blurbs
• We have the project participants start categorizing by century/decade/year/, by country, by subject... We can make this a drive.
• Then all we have to do use a bot to periodically transclude a randomly selected blurb from a relevant category in the Portals featured subpages.

Known issues:

1. This will mean modifying long-standing archives which requires WP:ADMINBOTS)
2. We have add categories and (if the bot can't substitute in the blurbs and remove links at the bottom) we have to move the links to onlyinclude. Both require consesus at WT:Featured articles and WT:Featured pictures
3. Eurocentrism and US-centrism.

@The Transhumanist: If you like the idea I can copy this discussion to above mentioned post by Slambo.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 08:59, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

That does sound ingenious. Before we jump into this, we need to explore where User:JL-Bot gets featured articles from. That's the bot we currently use for populating "Quality content" sections in portals. It just so happens that I'm in a conversation with the author of that bot to learn if we can adapt it for the purpose of gathering page names to insert as arguments in portals' "Transclude" templates. See User talk:JLaTondre#Adapting JL-Bot.

I'm pretty sure that all the featured articles and featured pictures are already categorized somewhere. There must some categorization, because JL-BOT posts to portals by subject, but I don't know how much. We should look at the Special:CategoryTree for those before deciding what approach to take in further categorizing them.

Once you've looked over the categorization scheme, let me know what you think. In the meantime, I'll continue researching how JL-Bot knows where to get the featured articles for each portal.

Good brainstorming. Keep those mental juices flowing!    — The Transhumanist   10:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: There are 2,419 categories with the word "featured" in their titles. For the list, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=5000&offset=0&ns14=1&search=intitle%3A"Featured"&searchToken=dfb9zu7rgch9pvjkvu0dik2fx (best viewed with SearchSuite.js).

I noticed that you are not registered to use WP:AWB (you definitely have the smarts for it).

I've banged out a couple hundred thousand edits with it. Does wonders for the self-esteem. ;)

If you look at my contribs, you will see that most of my work on portals is with this tool.

Work on portals is highly repetitive, and we could really use another AWB user.

Most of the rest of our AWB'ers seem somewhat reluctant to get their feet wet with it.

Please take the plunge!

Though it might be a good idea to create a user page before you request registration.

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   09:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I understand your desire for a lead spot, but showing one woman at a demonstration that involved hundreds looks a little strange. Please keep nominating hooks with images and I'm sure you'll make the top spot soon. BTW I left a note on the talk page of the article saying that this protest should be added to Occupy ICE. Best, Yoninah (talk) 22:42, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi again. When I suggested you post your request at WT:DYK, I didn't mean that you should reprint our whole conversation and then delete it from my talk page. Talk pages belong to the user and are altered at their discretion. You could have simply stated at WT:DYK that you prefer an image slot and reference our conversation with a link. Best, Yoninah (talk) 01:21, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: My apologies. I thought that was what you meant. I can read now that was totally not what you meant. I won't do that again without permission. It is not the first time I have seen a discussion moved from a user talk page or even the first discussion I have moved. I thought it was part normal practice in keeping conversations in one place.

Thinking on it now, I can see how it can be off-putting. Won't happen again!--- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Yoninah (talk) 11:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Can you help me through the etiquette considerations when reviewing a DYK hook? I am sure my first edit fixing spelling of Edinburgh was no problem. Would it also be OK to change it to include The Meadows without first consulting the nominator? The reason being NPOV and give the Scots equal billing.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:39, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Don't be shy, just ask there ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, Coffeeandcrumbs, and thanks for becoming a member of Women in Red. From your interesting article Women Disobey, it looks as if you are in the right place. As a relatively new editor, you might be interested in our Ten Simple Rules. Please let me know if ever you need any help or run into and difficulties. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sơn Tinh (tropical storm). Since you had some involvement with the Sơn Tinh (tropical storm) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. B dash (talk) 02:17, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello there,

I'm coming from the article Corinne Gallant where we had an edit conflict. In the edit conflict editor it did not highlight all the minor changes that were done using the script that you used in your edit. I'd like to reinstate those changes so that the article conforms to the MOS. Would it be possible for you to run the script a second time, or barring that, pointing me in the direction needed to acquire said script?

Best, Acebulf (talk) 23:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

@Acebulf: No biggie. I gotchu!--- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:29, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks! Acebulf (talk) 23:29, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Coffeeandcrumbs. Are you sure "People named..." is a good idea? Wouldn't you end up with thousands of categories? Best, - Jarry1250 ^{[Vacation needed]} 21:53, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jarry1250: I created it to serve a very specific purpose, to determine PRIMARYTOPIC in move discussions. I believe one of the intended purpose of categories is to facilitate the maintenance of the encyclopedia WP:PROJCATS. It is necessary to be used in combination with Massviews Analysis. You should read my !vote at Talk:Andy Cohen (television personality)#Requested move 28 July 2018. Perhaps you can teach me how to change into a hidden category.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:16, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

(watching:) isn't Andrew Cohen even better, because it might have red-link people? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh no, I do not mean to replace that page. It was just a trick I used to count all the page views for all people named Andrew Cohen. I realize now it was against clear policies. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 13:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Unusual Activity by Coffeeandcrumbs. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Dear Coffeeandcrumbs,

thank you very much for helping us improve the 2017–2018 Romanian protests article! :)

Rotruthseeker (talk) 00:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rotruthseeker: Thank for the kind words. I am concerned by your frequent use of we/us to refer to yourself. I hope you understand sharing a user account among several people is strictly against policy. You also mentioned mobilizing /r/Romania, to help improve the page which is fine, but I read a different post requesting people vote at ITN. That is clearly WP:CANVASSING. Please don't do that again.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: Oh, I just meant "we" as in the people working on that article. Didn't know about Canvassing - my bad! I've deleted the reddit post that linked to the ITN discusison. Sorry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rotruthseeker (talk • contribs) 00:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Perfect! Thank you! We all make mistakes and can't be expected to obey rules we were unaware of. We I try to assume good faith here. Let me welcome you again to Wikipedia! Have fun editing! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: thanks for the understanding and for the warm greetings! :) --- Rotruthseeker (talk) 23:25, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: You wrote above, "I am concerned by your frequent use of we/us to refer to yourself." Then, contradicting your concern just a few sentences later, you write "we" when referring to yourself: "We all make mistakes..." and "We try to assume good faith here." How do you explain this contradiction? If you are referring to more than yourself when you use "we," it would be good to have a citation that references who the others are. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellshook (talk • contribs) 01:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Good point. I struck out one of the we's. "We all makes mistakes" is a common enough expression that I don't see any possibility of confusion. Thank you! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello:

The copy edit you requested of the article 1962 Rangoon University protests has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Best of luck with the GAN. Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: Do you have any advise or criticism? Is there any part of the narrative that was lacking? Any part that seemed confusing? I did not write the original so I am interested in your reaction to it. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:27, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

I thought the article was very well written. Most of my edits were to improve its wording. I think it provides a well-rounded history of the protests and their place in Myanmar's history. I don't see any reason for it not to reach GA status. Best of luck. Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

flowers, music, balloon

Thank you for what you did for the balloon, image and moar ;) - take some flowers, it's my parents' wedding anniversary, and the bridal flowers were gladiolas from her parents' garden. I share them in loving memory, with a touch of art. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Love them! Thank you! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:51, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

The image is up for discussion, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Technically, they are right. So, I will just abstain.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:43, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Today, another image, balloon continued. Where in the Trump articles would the performance go? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Never mind, I placed her performance to Donald Trump in music, had to make a new section about Classical music ;) - I think the gladiolas match your signature well! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chiyo Miyako. 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. Andrew D. (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

'is a book'. Perhaops if you were to read it,you could turn this Wikipedxa page into an article. It may have been written by a former President of the US, but that doesn't make it notable. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kudpung: Will do. I have moved it to draft space in the interim. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:31, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kane Tanaka. 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. 100.40.125.198 (talk) 16:48, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

No, I am not convinced this is a legitimate notification. I believe you targeted me because of my previous support for this article. You have lost a !vote by gaming the system. I was already aware of this and was considering what to do and say. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 17:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I didn't lose anything i was just notifying people about the discussion as User:Andrew Davidson did with the Chiyo Miyako deletion review you can do whatever you like as you've probably already seen several people involved with the AFD have already voted but User:Editorofthewiki who started the deletion review request didn't notify the people involved with the AFD so i decided to. 100.40.125.198 (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

But did you notify everyone who voted or commented on the AfD? No! The proper way to do this is to notify everyone, even the delete voters. Every person you notified !voted Keep. You were clearly WP:VOTESTACKING. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

No i wasn't 5 or 6 out of the 8 that voted Delete in the AFD already voted in the Deletion Review and i haven't notified all the people that voted Keep yet either I'm busy but I'm going to notify everyone who didn't vote yet. 100.40.125.198 (talk) 20:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Ping me when that is done. Please go from top to bottom. Don't be selective. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:30, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, where is the problem with "Marketing" section specifically? Hddty. (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Hddty.: In the "Marketing" section, I have marked a paragraph with "Not in source cited". In the "Other venues in Jakarta", there several more capacities listed with no source. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:30, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

What specifically "Not in source cited"? That one paragraph is based on a cited PDF. Hddty. (talk) 01:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Not in the source:

• "The same day the logo was unveiled, three new mascots were also unveiled, replacing the previous cenderawasih mascot"
• "They represents the Eastern, Central, and Western regions of Indonesia"

--- Coffeeandcrumbs 04:30, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

I have added some source. Hddty. (talk) 05:57, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! I am usually much more helpful in helping nomination by actively improving them myself. Just been busy. I hope you don't feel I was holding it up. I have marked it as ready. I will wait a few hours and upgrade to needs attention. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:18, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

This issue is about portal creation...

Myself and others have been testing and experimenting with the new components in upgrading existing portals and in building new portals. They have now been applied in hundreds of portals.

The templates are ready for general use for portal creation.

They are still a bit buggy, but the only way we are going to work the rest of the bugs out is by using them and reporting the bugs as we come across them.

I look forward to seeing what new portals you create!

Be sure to report bugs at WT:WPPORTD.

The main portal creation template is {{box portal skeleton}}.

After starting a portal using {{box portal skeleton}}...

1. Placing a panorama (banner picture) at the top of the intro section is a nice touch, and really makes a portal look good. {{box portal skeleton}} doesn't automatically insert panoramas. So, you will need to do that by hand. They can be found at Commons:. For some examples, check out Portal:Sharks, Portal:Cheese, and Portal:Florence
2. The search term provided in the Did you know? and In the news sections is very basic and rarely matches anything. It is best to replace that term with multiple search arguments, if possible (separate each argument with a pipe character). For example, in Portal:Capital punishment, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Capital_punishment&diff=855255361&oldid=855137403 Searches in templates use Lua search notation.
3. Check the In the news and Did you know? sections for mismatches. That is, sometimes entries come up that shouldn't be displayed. If there are any, refine the search strings further, so they don't return such results.
4. Finish each portal you've created before creating a new one. We don't want unfinished portals sitting around.

Check out the Did you know? section on Portal:Determinism.    — The Transhumanist   02:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for changing back to 'media' (much appreciated!) and for the heads-up re the WP:ITNC#RD: Mirka Mora nomination. Tomorrow morning I will try at least to get a list of her exhibitions up asap and delve through newspaper & magazine articles for reviews to ensure there is more focus on Mirka's career...perhaps her very colourful character has unfortunately blinkered the editors of this bio from concentrating on what she did? And yes there is a concern that she is eclipsed here by her ex-husband Georges, for whom I had started a separate article some time back, so he doesn't need much space here. Best, Jamesmcardle^(talk) 11:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English). Legobot (talk) 04:31, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sophie Simmons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

		Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives New: Religion Deceased politicians Asia Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): WikiProject AfroCine launches (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Women Disobey 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/Women Disobey 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. wumbolo ^^^ 10:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Portals have passed the 4,000 mark.

Here's a list of portals created since the last issue

Please inspect these portals, report problems or suggest improvements at WT:WPPORTD, or develop them further (see below). Thank you.

There is still lots to do...

There are many subject gaps that need to be filled. This can be done by creating new portals, or by adding Selected article sections to existing portals. To create a new portal, simply place {{subst:Basic portal start page}} on an empty portal page, and click "Preview". If the portal is complete, click "Save". After you try it, come share your experience and excitement at WT:WPPORTD.

Each new portal is just a starting point. Each portal of the new design can be further developed by:

• refining the search parameters to improve the results displayed in the Did you know and In the news sections.
• adding more specific Selected articles sections, like Selected biographies.
• inserting a Recognized content section.
• adding more pictures to the image slideshow.
• placing a panoramic picture at the top of the intro section (especially for geographic portals).

Besides the new portals, there are still about 1200 portals of the old design that need to be converted to the new design.

Many portals need to be de-orphaned, by placing links to them (in the See also section of the corresponding root articles, at the bottom of the corresponding navigation footer templates, and on the corresponding category pages).

Many of the new portals still need to be listed at Portal:Contents/Portals.

Bugs keep popping up in portals. These need to be tracked down and reported at WT:WPPORTD.

Tools are needed to make developing and maintaining portals quicker and easier.

Dreaming up new features and capabilities. Innovation needs to continue, to design the portal of tomorrow, and the portal development-maintenance-system of the future. Automation!

So, if you find yourself with a little (or a lot) of free time, pick an area (or more) above and...

...dive in!    — The Transhumanist   07:05, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Landsat 4 at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 16:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

declare if you have a conflict of interest at Creative Planning? There have been some obviously paid edits by others at that page re: the fine CP paid. I will revert your last 2 edits. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 01:40, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Smallbones: I don't have a conflict of interest. I just thought it was undue weight for so much of the article to be about the fine. This seems like a case of recentism. These fines are minor violations compared to other fines levied in the industry: [3][4][5]. These fines are par for the course and not very notable. I don't think it should be in the lede per NPOV when compared to how we treat these firms elsewhere on WP. I also don't think RIABiz meets Wikipedia standards for RS. You have also resorted to citing the court documents themselves. That indicates to me that you are promoting to make something not noted in the press notable on WP.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:50, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

There are now 4,180 portals.

Will we break 5,000 by the end of the year?

I know we can. But, that is up to you!

( New portals are created with {{subst:Basic portal start page}} or {{subst:bpsp}} )

 

 

 

 

Hello everyone! Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice (if it's occurring in your area of the world), and thanks for your work in maintaining, improving, and expanding portals. Cheers,    — The Transhumanist   06:51, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

 

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

The following portals have been created since the last issue:

Keep 'em coming!

By the way, the above list was generated using this Petscan query. It can be easily modified by changing the date. The data page (under the Output tab) also has options for receiving the data in CSV or tabbed format, which some operating systems automatically load into a spreadsheet program for ease of use, such as copying and pasting the desired column (like page names).

We'll keep it short this issue.

Expect a flood next time. Or the one after that.  

Cheerio,    — The Transhumanist   07:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello Coffeeandcrumbs. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Komoju, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: see previous decline. Do not retag. If you doubt the subject's notability, consider merging to the company per WP:ATD or take to WP:AFD. Thank you. SoWhy 08:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Last issue, I mentioned there would be a flood, and so, here it is...

We now have 4,620 portals.

And the race to pass 5,000 by year's end is on...

Can we make it?

The New Year, and the 5,001st portal, await.

( New portals are created with {{subst:Basic portal start page}} or {{subst:bpsp}} )

After disappearing in mid-thread, Evad37 has returned from a longer than expected wikibreak.

Be sure to welcome him back.

User:FR30799386 is working on making {{Portal image banner}} even better by enabling it to chop the top off an image as well as the bottom.

Many pictures aren't suitable for banners because they are too tall. Therefor, User:FR30799386 added cropping to this template, so that an editor could specify part of a picture to be used rather than the whole thing.

Work has begun on upgrading Wikipedia's flagship portals (those listed at the top of the Main page).

So far, Portal:Geography, Portal:History, and Portal:Technology have been revamped. Of course, you are welcome to improve them further.

Work continues on the other five. Feel free to join in on the fun.

In place of many missing portals, there is a redirect that leads to "the next best topic", such as a parent topic.

Most of these were created before we had the tools to easily create portals (they used to take 6 hours or more to create, because it was all done manually). Rather than leave a portal link red, some editors thought it was best that those titles led somewhere.

The subjects that have sufficient coverage should have their own portals rather than a redirect to some other subject.

Unfortunately, being blue like all other live links, redirects are harder to spot than redlinks.

To spot redirects easily, you can make them all appear green.

And I'll see you next issue.  

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   08:12, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Before, we could only cut off the bottom of pics.

User:FR30799386 has pulled it off, and made the upgrade to {{Portal image banner}}...

So, this:

 

Becomes this:

 

Here's the code for the above banner:

{{Portal image banner|File:American Falls from Canadian side in winter.jpg | [[Niagara falls]], from the Canadian side |maxheight=175px |overflow=Hidden|croptop=10}}

To see it employed in a portal, check out Portal:Niagara Falls.

We were racing against time to create 5,000 portals by the end of the year (just for the heck of it).

We made it. We've passed the 5,000 portals mark, with time to spare!

And the 5,000th portal is Portal:Major League Baseball, by Happypillsjr.

Congratulations!

The 10,000th portal mark. But...

...there is plenty else to do in addition to building new portals:

1. The new portals need to be linked to from the encyclopedia.
2. On those portals about subjects that are not typically capitalized, the search parameters need to be refined/expanded, to maximize the chances of Did you know and In the news items being found and displayed.
3. A Recognized content section needs to be added to each portal that has a corresponding WikiProject.
4. Addition of a category on those portals that lack a subject category.
5. Implement the portal category system, adding the appropriate categories to each portal.
6. Upgrade, and complete (as per the tasks enumerated above), the old-style portals that are not regularly maintained, which have not been converted yet (about 1,100 of them).
7. Find and fix the remaining bugs in the underlying lua modules.
8. Build portal tools (scripts) to assist in the creation, development, and maintenance of portals.
9. Build a script to help build navbox footer templates, via the harvesting of categories, amongst other methods.
10. Update the portal building instructions.
11. Update the portal guideline.
12. Refine the programming of the portals to reduce their load time.
13. Design and develop the next generation of portals and portal components.

And whatever else you can dream up.  

But most of all, have a...

 

 

Happy New Year!

Thank you everyone, for your contributions to the Portals Project, and have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   11:00, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Where we are at:

Single-page portals: 4,704

Total portals: 5,705

You might be familiar with the Ref desks, by their link on every new portal. They are a place you can go to ask volunteers almost any knowledge-related question, and have been a feature of Wikipedia since August of 2005 (or perhaps earlier). They were linked to from portals in an effort to improve their visibility, and to provide a bridge from the encyclopedia proper to project space (the Wikipedia community).

Well, somebody proposed that we get rid of them, and the community decided that that was not going to happen. Thank you for defending the Ref desks!

Here's a link to the dramatic discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Indefinitely_semiprotecting_the_refdesk#Proposal_II:_Shut_down_the_Ref_Desks

The wake of disruption left by Emoteplump and the admins who reverted many (but not all) of his/her edits is still undergoing cleanup. We could use all the help we can get on this task...

Almost all of the speedy deleted portals have been rebuilt from scratch.

For the portals he/she restarted (many of which were done mistakenly, overwriting restarts and further development that had already been done), and/or tagged as the maintainer, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Emoteplump&oldid=881568794#Additional_Portals_under_my_watch

We're at 5,705 portals and counting.

Prior to 2018, for the previous 14 years, portal creation was at about 80 portals per year on average. We did over 3 times that in just the past 9 days. At this rate, we'll hit the 10,000 portal mark in 5 months. But, I'm sure we can do it sooner than that.

There are 5 drives for portal development:

1. Create new portals
2. Expand existing portals, such as with new sections like Recognized content
3. Convert or restart old-style portals into automated single-page portals
4. Link to new portals from the encyclopedia
5. Pageless portals

Let's take a closer look at these...

Portal creation, for subjects that happen to have the necessary support structures already in place, is down to about a minute per portal. The creation part, which is automated, takes about 10 seconds. The other 50 seconds is taken up by manual activities, such as finding candidate subjects, inspecting generated portals, and selecting the portal creation template to be used according to the resources available. Tools are under development to automate these activities as much as possible, to pare portal creation time down even more. Ten seconds each is the goal.

Eventually, we are going to run out of navigation templates to base portals off of. Though there are still thousands to go. But, when they do run out, we'll need an easy way to create more. A nav footer creation script.

Meanwhile, other resources are being explored and developed, such as categories, and methods to harvest the links they contain.

The portal collection is growing, not only by the addition of new portals, but by further developing the ones we already have, by...

• Improving and/or adding search parameters to better power the Did you know and In the news sections.
• Adding more selected content sections, like Selected biographies.
• Adding and maintaining Recognized content sections, via JL-Bot.
• Adding pictures to the image slideshow.
• Adding panoramic pics.
• Categorizing portals.

More features will be added as we dream them up and design them. So, don't be shy, make a wish.

By far the hardest and most time-consuming task we have been working on is updating the old portals, the very reason we revamped this WikiProject in the first place.

There are two approaches here:

A) Restart a portal from scratch, using our automated tools. For basic no-frills portals, that works find. But, for more elaborate portals, as that tends to lose content and features, the following approach is being tried...

B) Upgrade a portal section by section, so little to nothing is lost in the process.

Or "portal deorphanization"...

Dreamy Jazz Bot is purring along.

And a tool in the form of a script is under development for linking to portals at the time they are created, or shortly thereafter.

See below...

Saved portals, are portals with a saved page.

What is the next stage in the evolutionary progression?

Quantum portals.

What are quantum portals?

Portals that come into existence when you click on the portal button, and which disappear when you leave the page.

Or, as Pbsouthwood put it:

...portals that exist only as a probability function (algorithm) until you collapse the wave form by observing through the portal button (run the script), and disappear again after use...

Introducing...

Wikipedia:WikiProject Quantum portals (see it's talk page).

...'til next time,    — The Transhumanist   09:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Previous issue:

Single-page portals: 4,704

Total portals: 5,705

This issue:

Single-page portals: 4,562

Total portals: 5,578

All Portals closed at WP:MfD during 2019

Grouped Nominations total 127 Portals:

1. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/US County Portals Deleted 64 portals
2. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Districts of India Portals Deleted 30 Portals
3. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portals for Portland, Oregon neighborhoods Deleted 23 Portals
4. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Allen Park, Michigan Deleted 6 Portals
5. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cryptocurrency Deleted 2 Portals
6. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:North Pole Deleted 2 Portals

Individual Nominations:

1. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Circles Deleted
2. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Fruits Deleted
3. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:E (mathematical constant) Deleted
4. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Burger King Deleted
5. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cotingas Deleted
6. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Prostitution in Canada Deleted
7. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Agoura Hills, California Deleted
8. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Urinary system Deleted
9. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:You Am I Deleted
10. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cannabis (2nd nomination) Reverted to non-Automated version
11. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Intermodal containers Deleted
12. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Adventure travel Deleted
13. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Adam Ant Deleted
14. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Benito Juárez, Mexico City Deleted
15. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Spaghetti Deleted
16. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Wikiatlas Deleted
17. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Greek alphabet Deleted
18. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Deleted
19. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Accounting Deleted G7
20. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Lents, Portland, Oregon Deleted P2
21. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Ankaran Deleted
22. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Jiu-jitsu Deleted G8
23. Portal:University of Nebraska Speedy Deleted P1/A10 exactly the same as Portal:University of Nebraska–Lincoln also created by the TTH

Related WikiProject:

1. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Quantum portals Demoted

(Attribution: Copied from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Portal MfD Results)

This was a spin-off from WikiProject Portals, for the purpose of developing zero-page portals (portals generated on-the-screen at the push of a button, with no stored pages).

It has been merged back into WikiProject Portals. In the MfD the vote was "demote". See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Quantum portals.

At WP:VPR, mass creation of Portals using semi-automated tools has been put on hold until clearer community consensus is established.

See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Hiatus on mass creation of Portals.

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Proposal 1: Interim Topic-Ban on New Portals.

Keep on keepin' on.    — The Transhumanist   02:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Should I promote the DYK hook on October 3? Or are you going to move the hook to a dedicated page for July 2019, similar to the April Fools Day page? Yoninah (talk) 18:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: If we only need a single day of DYK's we don't need Wally Schirra. So please proceed with October 2018 date. Thanks. I apologize I should have said something earlier. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 18:39, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Yoninah (talk) 18:50, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

For my eyes, to have reference in the texts is tough to read in edit mode. Why change? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

It makes using Visual Editor almost impossible.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:30, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Also: why change to "interlanguage link multi" when there's no "multi", - misleading and also hard to read. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 2 minutes ago

I regret that edit.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:30, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Gerda, please take over. I speak no German. Glad you are online.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:32, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

To both: all featured and good articles I wrote have the refs in a separate section, - making it easy to edit a ref if you want to edit a ref, without a search for it in the article, + the text is much easier to read. - Sorry that I know nothing about visual editor, - first time I hear that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:46, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

It is just a personal preference. I am not opposed to other way as long as it is consistently used. Before I edited the article was using both. I move everything to reflist template now.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:58, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I see we're working in tandem, searching for sources. Nowhere have I found that he wrote for Davar as a young man. The biographies being written after his death are quoting from the Wikipedia article, and The New Yorker article from 2004 doesn't say anything about him writing for Davar before he published his first short story collection. In fact, he wrote political essays for Davar which he collected into a book later in life. Here's another fact-filled source: [6]. Best, Yoninah (talk) 23:17, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. One second while I fix that. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Nice work. We are ready for ITN now I think.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:52, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Criticism of Hinduism on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

On September 7th, the Tauride Palace is due to be POTD, at Template:POTD/2020-09-07. In fact there are two photographs of the palace, as you can see here. I think it would be good to have both for POTD rather than them appearing separately on different days. What do you think? If you approve the idea, can you organise it? I will rewrite the caption to suit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth, I put them together. I think with two images that is better. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 09:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, that looks good. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

•   Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
•  HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
•   Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.

Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:51, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

September

Dahlias in Walsdorf

I like today's Main page, with the TFA (thank you for help with the blurb!) on the anniversary day (of both dedication and our concert), a DYK, and a great photographer who didn't make it soon enough, Jürgen Schadeberg, - more on my talk, mostly about the tribute to Brian who shared his sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

By chance I read the ref you gave on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Buidhe

that is https://www.cjr.org/first_person/new-york-post-reporting-lessons.php -> "S.I. COLLEGE BOOTS ITS PERVY PUPIL".

Eye opening. It will also affect how I deal with BLP here on Wiki. Zezen (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Zezen, "temba with his eyes open!" We are much too quick to add long sections of controversy, allegations, and crime. We have ruined people's lives. We can at times be evil. We do not realize that some publications elevate non-notable crimes to a national audience. Child predators are repugnant, but most child predators are not notable. Most crimes are not notable. We do not have to include every crime. We do not have to include every lawsuit. People get sued all the time. A crime or lawsuit does not make a person notable and every crime or lawsuit is not notable on an article about a person. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

So true. But then: POV is what makes us tick (And I am guilty as charged, having edited NAMBLA recently). Think of WP vs Nupedia case.

Bows Zezen (talk) 11:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, I think you could have just moved Shooting of > Killing of rather than opening a formal discussion. I suspect Drmies was just in a hurry when they created it, and I don't see that there's been a previous attempt to move that was reverted. —valereee (talk) 13:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, no. This has been such a contentious subject for so long that it is better to be cautious. While it seems obvious to me, some editors have argue over and over again to keep these "Shooting of .." titles despite the title's pro-police connotations and perhaps racist undertones. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 14:28, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, it's certainly not a wrong move to open a discussion. :) —valereee (talk) 14:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, told you so. This is what I am talking about. Police are special. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 10:59, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Or Black people aren't. Those two categories, compared, ought to be enough for a sitewide RfC on what terms we use, as we clearly need set policy. —valereee (talk) 11:03, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, I created File:Death or Killing or Murder.svg with that in mind. But when I told some people about it, they got bogged down in the minutiae. They sought perfection, the enemy of good. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I think that's great, but maybe it's trying to do too much. —valereee (talk) 11:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, that is what I meant by people got bogged down in minutiae. The original version, before people asked for changes, was much simpler. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I think we need to narrow the focus to deaths in police custody and keep it there. IMO, this is a racism issue, not a MOS issue. —valereee (talk) 11:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, thank so much!!! for finally seeing what I have been railing about for the past year. I have come close to quitting Wikipedia over this issue. I was furious two days ago when I saw "fatal shooting" at DYK. Hence, why I broke my own rule and created a user page for myself. I am in tears. It feels so good for someone else to see it for what it is: racial bias. Racial bias on Wikipedia manifesting in such a prominent place, the title of articles. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry that the bias on the project has caused you pain. I just wanted to say that I expect your user page to receive pushback, one day, so I wanted to just alert you to that. It may not be today or tomorrow but eventually, some editor will see the page and will see it as polemic and not valid criticism. Thanks for your work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Liz, thank you for the kind words, and gentle and genteel criticism. I have made a small change to it to ensure that people realize it is an "essay[], perspective[], personal philosophy, [or] comment[] on Wikipedia matters" as allowed by WP:UPGOOD. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)