User talk:Uncle G/Archive/2021-04-17

Notices
Yes, I am an administrator.
If you wish to discuss the content of an article, please do so on that article's own talk page. That's one of the things that they are there for.
I dislike disjointed conversations, where one has to switch between pages as each participant writes.
For past discussions on this page, see the archive.

Various thoughts on biographies of living and very dead people

Dropping by your talk page to leave a couple of thoughts, and as usual utter amazement at some of the articles you and others work on. The latter prompted mostly by the comment you left here (which I agree with absolutely, I find lists of awards from various science, medical, engineering and other learned societies are a good source of redlinks for people that it is easy to write about and where plenty of sources are available). It was really good to see some of the surgeons you mentioned there now have articles (thanks to Aymatth2), as that is an under-represented area and I've done a couple of articles on surgeons as well. But working on articles like that, where someone has lived a full and long career, and had much written about them, and there are sources in abundance to draw on, convinces me all the more that our approach with currently living people is wrong, that the bar is set too low, and articles can be created prematurely. My thoughts on this are at an ongoing AfD that you commented on, so you may have seen them already: thought, thought, thought. I was thinking of trying to expand on these thoughts at some suitable discussion venue or talk page. I am aware of the essays in your userspace, but would you have any thoughts on what I said there, or advice on where would be a good place to discuss such matters further? Carcharoth (talk) 03:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

• We can at least start here if you like. The page is all empty now that the 'bot is well again. (Three replacement motherboards, two replacement hard discs, replacement ATA cables, a replacement PSU, a replacement CD-ROM drive, and a replacement operating system.)

  It's been acknowledged pretty much right from the first version of Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies (here) that there's a difference between very dead people and living people, and that things are a lot simpler for the very dead. Although for the very dead there is, still, a spectrum between the likes of Frederick William Sanderson (AfD discussion) and the likes of Douglas Syphax (AfD discussion), for the living, there is a far broader spectrum. I wouldn't even put Riin Tamm (AfD discussion) at the low end of the spectrum. The true low end of the spectrum is the sort of stuff that I was addressing in User:Uncle G/Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Unsourced biographies: children whose lives and works are undocumented. Above that come the likes of Eva Lazzaro (AfD discussion), whose life is close to undocumented, even if one can find lists of her works.

  I'll take your Jack James (fencer), and I'll raise you Arvydas Juozaitis. You might think from the article alone that it's an entirely analogous situation: a sportsperson who is likely simply an Olympic statistic and otherwise unrecorded in history. In fact, as you can see from User talk:Drmies#Credibility, the situation with M. Juozaitis is not what'd you expect. This Olympic competitor is in the history books. I know because I found him in two.

  Uncle G (talk) 11:35, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  A nice empty page to fill up. :-) I do like the way you describe the living spectrum of notability as broader than that for the very dead. I was a bit disappointed with this proposal you sent me to, but I do see your point about how some articles on children can be examples of edge cases where you see the beginnings of the accrual of sources. Even Justin Bieber was unknown once, though some children (begat of royalty or modern celebrities) do seem to spring forth fully notable (some are written about before they are born). On a more sombre note, when people die young, strange things can sometimes happen to notability, but that might be best left for another discussion.

  One thing I did want to mention was the presumed dead and the maybe dead. The ones in limbo. Your Lithuanian Olympic swimmer has a birth date and a photo. Jack James has neither, though I see that since I last checked, someone has added a middle name, and that he might have been 1929 British champion (commented out). Maybe this crowdsourcing lark does work after all! But what lengths is it reasonable to go to find out death dates? You would presume the fencer is competing on the other side now, but if he was 18 in 1928 he would be 102/3 now. Not likely, but easily possible, so you can't really presume. And if that is the case, no amount of searching for a death date will work.

  There is a similar case with one of the redlinks at Stuart Ballantine Medal, the David George Croft Luck one. Born 1906, enough about his life and career around (I left some notes at User talk:Newyorkbrad because of an intriguing legal connection that may be a dispute over the status of his parentage), but if still alive he would be 106/7 now. The current list of redlinks I am working my way down is from that awards article (the ones created so far are Jack James (rocket engineer), Robert J. Parks and Leroy Chang). Those are ones where the death dates were easy and sources in abundance.

  The others may not be so easy, as they include those who are still alive, who have personal websites, and I'm not at all sure about creating articles on them. The articles would essentially read like modified CVs/resumes and have to be redone in any case when the time comes that someone (hopefully) issues an obituary. It doesn't help that one of the awards lists is in an area I know very little about (education): the redlinks at James Bryant Conant Award. Some of those redlinks are very interesting, but will take a while to get a handle on. Carcharoth (talk) 13:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  You need to archive Uncle G. Current size of this page is 0 GB (48,106 bytes). Oh! Wait! --Senra (talk) 13:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

• Maybe off-topic, Douglas Syphax seems marginally notable at best. I only found one article giving a short bio, although others mention him. There is only fragmentary data about his life: civil war service, real estate ventures, veterans relief committee. But his family is much more interesting to me: his grandmother, father-in-law and son. One approach could be to merge the bio into an article about the Syphax clan. But I would not completely rule out letting Wikipedia include genealogical entries - as long as they were sourced - for non-notable people. Or perhaps non-notable dead people closely related to notable people, to keep the numbers down. Digging around on the Bloodgood clan got me thinking of that, and checking the Syphax clan reinforced it. That goes beyond the scope of a traditional encyclopedia, but there would definitely be interest... Stray thought. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for your note. NetNus (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Md Sabur Khan

Isn't this a G4? Dougweller (talk) 15:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabur Khan. Looks like. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Lynette Nusbacher

Hi, I quoted a post of yours at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Lynette_Nusbacher. Insomesia (talk) 11:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Jaine Green

Your prod of this was contested at WP:REFUND, so I've restored it. I'm letting you know in case you either want to work on cleanup or take it to AFD. LadyofShalott 15:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Another for the new article creation committee

I am probably not competent to create Vagindra script but it clearly demands to be created. (Ignore the editor's mention of the little section at Agvan Dorzhiev; that was my doing after I finally found what name we had him under). Yngvadottir (talk) 21:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Possible Conradi sock

It's been brought to my attention via email that User:AsianGeographer may be a current Tobias Conradi sock. Though I had dealings with him back before he was blocked, I'm not up to date on the recent ways of identifying his socks. You appear to be more familiar with his recent activities, so I figured I would toss this your way. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Imperium Romanum Sacrum for some accounts that are fairly obviously Conradi. They all, as does AsianGeographer, have one of the several Conradi tell-tales that I look for. However, I do look for several, not just one, and what I wrote at User talk:DGG/Archive 66 Jul. 2012#Time in Illinois applies. On the gripping hand, labelling everything as "attacks" is another tell-tale, one of three that I noted at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive236#Tobias_Conradi: Still community banned?. Focussing on the spelling of place names, including Philippine provinces and Indonesian provinces is another tell-tale. So yes, AsianGeographer has all three major tell-tales.

  Enjoy the fact that LatinoLatino is also "a student of geography". For a common interest between Conradi's original account and AsianGeographer, see Talk:Special Region of Yogyakarta and the edit history of Yogyakarta (disambiguation).

  Uncle G (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi both, I have just CU-blocked Tiago Meu (talk · contribs), GranColombia12 (talk · contribs) and AsianGeographer (talk · contribs), which are a  Confirmed match to NVanMinh (talk · contribs) and I have tagged them as Tobias Conradi's socks. Review is welcome, since I am still not that familiar with the sock master in question. Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 13:28, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Tiago Meu and GranColombia12 don't have the second of the aforementioned tell-tales. But that is simply because they have no talk page contributions at all. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 19:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Thanks again for the reply. When you have a bit of free time, would you please e-mail me these various tell-tales, so that I can more easily spot Tobias' socks? Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 22:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion sorting

Hello Uncle G, when you add an AfD to a delsort page such as you did with Paul Jefferys at United Kingdom (step 1), you need to tag the AfD by adding the relevant tag (step 2), in this case {{subst:delsort|United Kingdom|~~~~}} , which will inform editors that it has been listed there & avoid it possibly being listed more then once. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 06:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Ucycoin's sandbox

Hello. Your action in clearing the contents of User:Ucycoin/sandbox is being discussed here. It would be appreciated if you explained the policy basis behind your action, and why you did not notify the user in question. — Hex (❝?!❞) 13:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

About IP's and stupid admins

How can anybody misuse "dialup" to mean "ISP customer"? (That's some diff, you must be compulsively tidy. :-)) What is it they are distinguishing "ISP customer" from? I thought everybody was one. Now I feel even stupider. :-( (Please use words of maximum one syllable in reply.) Bishonen | talk 18:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC).

• Not all customers of ISPs use dial-up Internet access. Some use DSL, and some use cable, for example. So it's an error to classify an IP address as "dialup" when what one really means is "ISP customer". Uncle G (talk) 20:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I knew that, that's not what I meant. Sorry I wasn't clear. Please look at WhatisMyIPAddress, for instance here. There's a field called Type, which is in this case given as "Dial-up". You say that's an error, they should have said, or meant to say, "ISP customer". But isn't ISP customer always the answer? Isn't everybody an ISP customer? How can there be a field where something that's always the case is supposed to be the answer? Or, to put it another way: isn't the Type field supposed to contain a subgroup of ISP customers, i. e. dialup or DSL or cable? Are you saying "they didn't think it through, they just put dialup for all their customers"? Bishonen | talk 11:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC).
    • Not everyone is an ISP customer. Aside from the fact that some people are ISPs, obviously enough, some organizations do their own internetworking and some IP addresses are not customers. Here's a famous IP address that isn't an ISP customer, and here is an IP address owned by IBM. Uncle G (talk) 22:40, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Jargon

I notice you complaining about -ista again. Shouldn't that be -ist? No-one talks about deletionista's or eventualista's do they?

My pet peeve is refactor as we're supposed to be writing English not algebra or code.

Warden (talk) 12:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Ken Hoang

Hello again Uncle G, I see that you removed the AfD template from Ken Hoang's article & deleted the deletion discussion due to repeated bad faith nominations by a user who was ultimately blocked as a sockpuppet. A deletion discussion has now been created for a 7th time see here by a new user NNN1102 (talk · contribs). You may also want to check the user who voted in that same discussion, I thought I'd bring it to your attention & let you do what you deem necessary. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 20:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

. . . and again, with creative misspelling, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Hoang (6th nominatien) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Hoang (7th nominatien) . Best, --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Gold5Digger66

Hi Uncle G, by any chance would Gold5Digger66 be the same as Chipper2Lews who you marked yesterday as a 'disruptive sock puppet'? SagaciousPhil - Chat 16:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Seconding this, same userpage, same contribution pattern (keeping articles at AFD as 'looks good'). He also un-struck a !vote at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Bullnese that you had previously struck.--TKK ^{bark !} 16:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Uncle G. You have new messages at Surajt88's talk page.
Message added 10:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Suraj T 10:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Canvassing - use of indirect quotations

I wonder if you would care to express an opinion at Wikipedia talk:Close paraphrasing#Proposal: Quotations. This seems the sort of topic you would be interested in. Personally, I am not particularly concerned about what is decided (see my ALT1 and ALT2 suggestions - I can live with either) but am much more concerned that we have clear guidelines with plenty of examples. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge by Admins

Opps, seems I can't merge articles without an admin. If you have time, could you look over the talk page for Temperateness and see if this can't be merged and redirected to Temperate Climate. Watchwolf49z (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks like someone else got to it ... but thanx anywho Watchwolf49z (talk) 11:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

You seem to deleted M.O.P comment at WP:AN/I

[1] Maybe you can restore it?--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 08:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

• That was MediaWiki, not me. Somehow it decided to resolve the conflict between my insertion of {{hat}}, {{On AFD}}, and {{hab}} and this contemporaneous edit in that manner. Both Master of Puppets and I were seeing an edit conflict page already, so this is MediaWiki's answer to edit conflicts upon edit conflicts, it appears. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 09:30, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

About this discussion

Hi Uncle G. What the flipping heck? Best regards, --Shirt58 (talk) 10:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• Is your question based upon not following the hyperlink to User talk:Drmies/Archive 43#What's in a name?, not knowing what the number on Sean Denham's jumper was, or not knowing about Drmies' quest for youth credibility that we support xem in? ☺ Uncle G (talk) 11:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

On the notability of dogs

A Texan cotton farmer and a Mauritanian village got me thinking about Newfoundland dogs, gentle giants. Some are the subject of articles, and at least one has been eulogized in a poem. One lives in my house. She has been the subject of a photo essay on water rescue in the newsletter of a newfie owners' association, with a short biography and a character sketch, available online. She has also featured in a community newspaper with a circulation of several thousand copies for her key role in a Santa Claus parade. This paper also gave a character sketch and biography, and is also available online. Two reliable and independent sources is good enough for me. But I am not entirely confident about the response if I were start an article on this notable dog. I suppose AfD is the worst that could happen. Just a stray thought... Aymatth2 (talk) 01:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• You are obviously very bored, to consider descending into the list of bad article ideas. I suggest that you consult some books on guitars (ISBN 9780760315613, p. 36; ISBN 9780933224186 p. 10; ISBN 9780062731548 p. 121) and music and take the Gibson Advanced Jumbo (AfD discussion) article to task. If you wanted to get really adventurous, you could put prose into Gibson Guitar Corporation product list using the likes of ISBN 9781556524189 pp. 218 et seq. and ISBN 9780879309626. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 09:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• I don't really see it. For a singing cowboy the Gibson could be more interesting, but where have all the singing cowboys gone? For a child struggling in the water, a Newf is what is needed. I must admit that just possibly the notability of this particular Newf may not be entirely clear-cut. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

don't change the meaning

I don't know why you came to the AfD for Rah Crawford, but your edit there changed the meaning by improperly showing that one of my posts was a reply to the immediately preceding post.  There are two priorities in such a case, (1) we are here to build an encyclopedia, and (2) don't change the meaning.  Thank you, Unscintillating (talk) 09:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• Uncintillating, your grasp of MediaWiki list markup is terrible. As is your grasp of common courtesy. Badgering people who merely fix your broken list markup without touching a single word of meaning whilst you're busy removing and refactoring other people's discussion contributions wholesale is rather high on the irony scale. And your clear inability to just remove the one asterisk character, instead of ineptly hitting the undo button and re-botching all the list markup for the entire page again, shows an unconstructive and unthinking approach. There are more than enough people who are unable to use anything but the undo button, and demonstrably unable to actually edit. Don't be yet one more. Uncle G (talk) 09:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• Is that your idea of an apology?  Why are you dumping on me?  This is the second time in a month, and I have yet to start to talk to you about the first incident.  I know you to be one of the editors involved in the foundation of the current WP:Notability, so I have reason to respect you, and would prefer to work constructively with you.  A few months back I requested another editor to invite you to WP:CORP because we valued your opinion.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
• You seem to take negative feedback poorly, but you also need to consider that your "tidying" came 36 minutes after an edit that removed one of my comments, and an edit that restored text without documenting for readers that a change had been made.  So in addition to changing the meaning, your edit confounded a compromised talk page, and has led to complicating the discussions on two other talk pages.  Your timing appears to show poor judgment.  Do you have an explanation for getting involved with discretionary edits 36 minutes after a talk page incident?  My priority was to cut back to the compromised material and get to work.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
• I have noted and reviewed the link you provided to "Help:List".  Thank you, Unscintillating (talk) 01:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Uncle G/Archive. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

To infinity ...

Someone recently referred to your article User:Uncle G/Wikipedia is not infinite. We could use some enlightened thinking like this at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1 metre. Please take a look. Warden (talk) 16:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

• I had a look, had a think whilst driving, and was going to return to the discussion now. But I find that in the meantime it has been closed. Uncle G (talk) 09:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Lest I be typecast ...

I had the cheek to create Vagindra script. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

In case you're interested...

I'm trying to see if the Babes in the Wood article can be further beefed up. You did some great work there, though I don't know how busy you are now. Perhaps you could look at the article's talk page. MezzoMezzo (talk) 11:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Lua requests

Hi Uncle G, I noticed you've been a prolific Lua script contributor at Module:Citation, Module:Convert, Module:Mw, Module:Wikitext. I just created a request page for Lua scripts at Wikipedia:Lua requests and it'd be great if you could watchlist it to assist anyone who needs help with Lua scripts. Thanks! Dcoetzee 00:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup

Hello, Uncle G. You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Citation needed span

Template:Citation needed span has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 15:07, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

fyi

I have made mention of your prior actions in an AN/I discussion here.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (3rd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 03:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just stumbled on Grammarians' War; a fantastic article on a rarely-covered but fascinating subject. A barnstar for you :). Ironholds (talk) 22:06, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

A note regarding User:Mishae and AN/I

User:Mishae was brought up in this discussion at AN/I, and (following his being blocked as a result of the discussion) invoked your comments on his talkpage in a way that appears to me to be erronious. Thought I'd give you a heads-up. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:03, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

• My goodness. That was May 2012 when I pointed out that the database size is never decreased by this. So xe's been at that wrongheaded whitespace removal for roughly a year. Uncle G (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Darius Dhlomo Drive

Hello. You are invited to join Darius Dhlomo Drive, a project which aims to cleanup and resolve one of the oldest copyright investigations on the sire. We hope that you will join and help to clean what's left of the copyright violations. You are getting this invitation because you have helped out previously, and I am inviting you back to hopefully wrap this up. Wizardman 01:37, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't mess up thread formatting on Talk:Kurgan hypothesis

The way you ended your message with a list made it very difficult to add a reply in a manner that would be clearly distinguished as a reply, and your subsequent tinkerings completely smooshed together and conflated your message and mine, and so were hardly useful. AnonMoos (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Apology Invitation

You are formally invited to place an apology to make up for your rambled confusion over at the administrator's noticeboard, which I've only now just seen. Second, I highly suggest you familiarize yourself further with this topic before continuing. :bloodofox: (talk) 17:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Ping: User:Writ Keeper/Cathreim Thoirdhealbhaigh

Hey, Uncle! I've been working on another article from your list, and I was just wondering if you would mind taking a look. There's a little bit of discussion on Drmies's talk page for it, too. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey Uncle

Are you faring well, dear Uncle? Drmies (talk) 17:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with a citation dispute in article Talk:The Last Temptation of Krust#Title related to "The Last Temptation of Christ

Hi. I read your page on sources and content and would really appreciate it if you could help us out as an objective point of view. A few editors (including myself) are in the middle of a strange discussion about the title of a The Simpsons episode and it's relation to a novel and film as shown in the title of this section. I suspect that the discussion will not be resolved unless someone with more experience in these matters provides some advice. Thank you! Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 18:01, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 21:37, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

• Yes. Where art thou, dear uncle? Drmies (talk) 19:48, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
• Not writing may well suggest not reading. Yet, you read and wrote. I think the previous two questions have been answered. I hope you have more? All the best, dear uncle. Drmies (talk) 21:25, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Wolf House

Thank you very much, Uncle G, for your assistance. I may not be able to complete all of your assignments immediately, as I am a slow and plodding worker. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Blue Wing Inn

How on earth do I move that into article space while preserving attribution to you? I am having a stupid day anyway ... Yngvadottir (talk) 23:58, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for writing that article, Uncle G. I am sure you saw the topic on my list of possible future articles. Like Yngvadottir, I have no idea how to move the article to main space. And if you return to active editing, I hope that you will give me some tips on research skills. Yours are formidable. Thanks again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I did attribution the old-fashioned way, with a zero edit. Soon there will be a lovely DYK template on this page. Uncle, I hope you're doing well. Remember my schedule: I don't teach Wednesdays, and lunch would be great. Drmies (talk) 02:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

And thanks for The Grave, on behalf of poetry lovers everywhere. The grave's a fine and private place. I can have lunch with you tomorrow also, if Monday is better for you. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Scott Peterson (writer)

Hello Uncle G,

This is just a courtesy visit to apprise you that I took the liberty to slightly expand your article citing relevant sources to back it. Hopefully you'd like my little effort. Best regards, (MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC))

• It was definitely in need of some serious attention. Uncle G (talk) 10:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Blue Wing Inn

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Grave (poem)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:57, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

• A fine piece of work, dear Uncle. Since I'm drinking a big bottle of Affligem, I can toast two people: Davidiad and you. Cheers, wherever you are and whatever you're doing. Drmies (talk) 04:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Cheers.  davidiad { t } 05:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

The Grave (poem)

It's been a while since this happened, and I commented at the time on Drmies's page but thank you again! It was very exciting to see such an excellent article from out of the blue! If I could entice you to write an article or two more related to Blake that would be awesome! We can always use some more excellent work at WP:Blake! Sadads (talk) 19:51, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:COIN#Michael Mic Neumann

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:COIN#Michael Mic Neumann. You were involved in a prior discussion about that user. -- Lexein (talk) 10:45, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, the matter was closed soon after this was posted. --Lexein (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (4th nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Bandy Papers

The article The Bandy Papers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article has no references, and the article is unclear on whether it wants to be about the novel series The Bandy Papers, or about the character in the series Bartholomew Bandy. Without a clearer description about the novel series, as well as no references, the description of the character almost seems like a copy-and-paste addition to this page.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Steel1943 (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mama Lucy Gang

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Global account

Hi Uncle G! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

• I went through this years ago, and decided to not merge administrator and non-administrator accounts for the obvious security reasons. Uncle G (talk) 10:43, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Hi, while I understand your concerns and they are certainly valid in general, I don't think they apply to Wikimedia global accounts. First of all your local accounts will be automigrated into global ones soon, so you will then have several global accounts. As you probably have different passwords and email addresses your accounts wont be automatically mergeable, thus each local account will be renamed and turned into one global account with the new name. Due to that CentralAuth will then create multiple accounts on the English Wikipedia for you (which can become a mess). On top of that, I don't see the security benefit of having multiple accounts, that all use the same infrastructure (and eg. access from one site to another is possible with JavaScript via CORS). In fact you make yourself easier to attack by having multiple passwords that could be used to hijack one of your accounts and then to take over other accounts from there (unless you took countermeasures to that, eg. by disabling JavaScript). If you care about security a lot, I suggest you to create a global account and choose a very good password for it. If you want to do more, you can look into using something like NoScript, which is especially interesting over here, as we have a fairly high number of users (all administrators) to change JavaScript. - Hoo man (talk) 22:18, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year!

It's a shame that you weren't more active in 2014 as you're one of Wikipedia's finest so here's hoping that we'll be seeing more of you in 2015. Andrew D. (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Mass blanking/Notice

Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Mass blanking/Notice, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Mass blanking/Notice and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Mass blanking/Notice during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 20:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (4th nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Wikipedian supporters of the sovereign nation-state listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Wikipedian supporters of the sovereign nation-state. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Wikipedian supporters of the sovereign nation-state redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. DL9C (talk) 05:29, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

EddieSegoura Ban Appeal

Hello. I am notifying you that the above is currently being considered at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Community de facto ban appeal by User:EddieSegoura, and your input (positive, negative, or otherwise) is invited there. You have received this notification and invitation as you participated in the previous ban appeal in 2009 and may be familiar with or remember some of the earlier context, you may be aware of other matters which are relevant to the appeal, or you may wish to express whether or not your view has changed since the last discussion. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bird People

Hello Uncle G,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Bird People for deletion, because it seems to be vandalism or a hoax.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. SwisterTwister talk 19:51, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

We missed you very much.

Drmies (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	It is always a pleasure to see your work, Uncle G. Drmies (talk) 01:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

• Hear, hear. Andrew D. (talk) 21:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Meanness

On 26 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Meanness, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that meanness is a personal quality whose classical form, discussed by many from Aristotle to Thomas Aquinas, characterizes it as a vice of "lowness", but whose modern form deals more with cruelty? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Meanness. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Meanness), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Architecture of Las Vegas, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Xanadu and Ranger. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your rewrite of Architecture of Las Vegas! Dubbinu | t | c 18:27, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Republican establishment → Eastern establishment

Thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republican establishment. It looks like you made a sincere attempt to salvage the article, and I wish to convey my respect for that.

Did any of the WP:RS you looked into provide authoritative information on the so-called Eastern establishment? As with the deleted article, this is another thing to which pundits make loose reference, but it has the advantage of being an identifiable thing. I have a perfectly crummy, unencyclopedic draft started, and would like to get serious about it, pending a library visit for quality sources. If you can recommend, I would appreciate. / edg ☺ ☭ 13:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

• Hess & Broder 1967 certainly talks about it, and is cited by others on the subject. So it might be worth consulting. The fact that Safire 2008, p. 205 has quite a clear definition is a far better start than "Republican establishment" ever had. And there seems to be a lot where that came from. You know about our Rockefeller Republican article, no doubt. Uncle G (talk) 22:05, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Safire, William (2008). "Eastern Establishment". Safire's Political Dictionary. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195340617.

Thanks. I'll see if I can find the Broder and Safire this weekend. Not only am I aware of the Rockefeller Republican article, I'm keeping an eye on its Notable Republicans classified as "Liberal" as a BLP hazard, cf. hit-lists previously included in the RINO and Cuckservative articles. / edg ☺ ☭ 19:21, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

• • edgarde, if you are keeping your eye on it, you may have seen a substantial edit go by just now. :) Drmies (talk) 13:46, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

    @Drmies: Appreciated! / edg ☺ ☭ 15:54, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Venetian people, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Venetians, Veneti and Este. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 13:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Treating allergies/autoimmune diseases in humans by manipulating the microflora of the gut., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bacteroid. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:07, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Association of churches has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Uncle G. Association of churches, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Association of churches

On 15 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Association of churches, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that under US tax law, an association of churches can have churches of different denominations and still be tax-exempt? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Association of churches. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Association of churches), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Define and Describe Talk listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Define and Describe Talk. Since you had some involvement with the Define and Describe Talk redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Wishva de Silva | Talk 12:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

On notability

		The Philosophy Barnstar
		10 years ago today, you started the essay User:Uncle G/On notability, one of the most influential essays in Wikipedia's history. Thanks! Fences&Windows 19:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

LoL listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LoL. Since you had some involvement with the LoL redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 06:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Uncle G. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Uncle G/Archive.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Uncle G. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Workington (disambiguation)

The article Workington (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary deletion page.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. PatGallacher (talk) 01:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Drmies talk page

Is like a coffee place I know in Istanbul, chaotic, within metres of trams and other chaos, yet the delightful smell and ambience is more than the Melbourne (Victoria) lane places of the same sort. In the middle, a delightful comment - your analysis of wikipedia and australians! may you have a long life, and a safe one, may you not be subjected to the whiles and wheys of the current jokester and his hench beings, may your sense of humour prevail! JarrahTree 00:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Uncle G. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Independent (Dominica)

The article The Independent (Dominica) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NNEWSPAPER.

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Independent (Papua New Guinea)

The article The Independent (Papua New Guinea) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NNEWSPAPER.

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Selfish brain theory

You defended the article against deletion seven years ago. But I think that there has to be a warning notice that its (main) content was written by only one author. Another user disagrees with that, so it's 1:1. Can you decide it? --Nov3rd17 (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

• No, but I can add to the talk page discussion as a third party opinion. Uncle G (talk) 07:17, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of The Independent (Dominica) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Independent (Dominica) 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/The Independent (Dominica) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Citation

Module:Citation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:19, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

A kitten for you!

Moppyjonahmommy (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Uncle G. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Uncle G, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, I love rpgs [please ping me! ] 15:34, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Precious

thoughtful collaboration

Thank you for quality articles such as Joseph Day (inventor), Grammarians' War and Asega-bôk, in collaboration, for service from 2005 (Black Screen of Death begun 14 years ago today), for admin help, for thoughts about an unanswered question, - repeating from ten years ago: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps not to late to say Happy 2019! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:52, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 2113 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:29, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (4th nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. CoolSkittle (talk) 11:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Joke nom btw :) CoolSkittle (talk) 11:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Les Cent Contes drolatiques

There's a standard translation and a very brief Britannica article. I believe I have enough stuff from the local university library and JSTOR to create a stub. But I'm not feeling like article writing right now, given WMF actions. So I'm posting partly to nudge any talk page watchers you may have who don't share my feelings. (What I'd personally like is to save this and others for the fork, but if someone else could do it, the reader would have it sooner. My skills are not indispensible.)

While I'm here, can I ask why you always use sfn referencing? Teaching myself the citation template arguments was bad enough without adding a whole layer of alienation and memory tricks on top (how on earth do you remember the year while moving between parts of the page?), and it may have been your stubs on Drmies' talk page where I first encountered the format. Anyway, good to see you again, and it's been interesting to read about the Contes. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Well for one thing, {{sfn}} links back to the various Harv citation templates. Used in conjunction with User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js and other tools described on User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck, this helps ensue that all references have a citation and vice/versa, and helps with many other similar errors. As for remembering the years... well that's only a problem if you have more than one source by exactly the same author(s) but different years. In that case, the only way to keep things straight is to double-check carefully. If that is not the case, e.g. you just used the wrong year and created a cite to a source that is not used on the page, scripts will flag it visibly. See forex these errors from Fifteen Signs before Doomsday:

Giliberto 2007, p. 129.

Dunn 1958, p. 189. Gatch 1964, p. 380. Giliberto 2007, p. 130. Baker 1897, p. 63. Heist 1948, p. 421. Harv error: link from CITEREFHeist1948 doesn't point to any citation. Giliberto 2007, p. 130–131. P/PP error? p. 130–131.; Heist 1948, p. 424. Harv error: link from CITEREFHeist1948 doesn't point to any citation. Emmerson & Herzman 1980, p. 376. Conley 1915, p. 41. Morris 1985.

Clopper 1978, p. 230.

 ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

• I haven't always used it. My use has changed over the years, in part because the citation system has changed. Years ago, we did not even have <ref>, for example. {{sfn}} is close to the sort of almost-Harvard <ref name="Yngvardottir2019a" /> that I was doing anyway at that point, and it has several conveniences, not the least of which for me is the |p= and |loc= parameters. Of course, I am also familiar with the system because I wrote the original LUA modules that underpinned them before MediaWiki switched to that. ☺

  I didn't list Les Cent Contes drolatiques at User:Uncle G/Missing encyclopaedic articles because we actually did know that we did not have it, although it was not hyperlinked anywhere in main article space. You might enjoy that list of missing articles, by the way.

  If you do not want to write articles, by the way, I suggest venturing opinions on Dennis Bernstein (AfD discussion), Cormac Ó Comáin (AfD discussion), and Jada Facer (AfD discussion). Find sources where I did not. You'll find researching the first interesting, researching the last saddening, and researching the middle one hard given that I'm trying to raise the bar way above the usual general-wave-in-the-direction-of-Google-Books level of some AFD discussions.

  Uncle G (talk) 02:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

  • (Fixed my header; I was very tired, as well as sad). I see, but I don't really see, if you get my drift :-) For me the added complexity, plus the requirement to remember the year rather than just the name (or a ref name when referring to the same page) is too much memory load. It may be that people used to the sciences, where years are usually used as reference identifiers, find the output comfortingly familiar (and possibly my difficulty remembering years is unusual); I know tastes differ a lot because many Wikipedians don't find the order of Harvard-style cites and what they put in boldface as ridiculous as others of us do :-) But there are error messages a-plenty generated by citation errors, including the ever-popular bare links, so I'm still puzzled why we would need such complexity. And it's for the reader, too; separate notes and bibliography take up a lot of real estate at the bottom and when I read such articles I have found it annoying to have to search for what reference the note actually refers to. Oh well. I'm feeling more and more helpless before all this template proliferation. As to AfDs, thanks, but I've dialed back on AfD participation anyway after losing some hard-fought battles. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:34, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
    • (talk page stalker) I wish more editors used sfn. That might help reduce a problem I see in some articles, where there will be a citation such as <ref>Dunbar, p. 256</ref>, but no other mention of a work by Dunbar. I find using sfn makes it easier to properly reference articles, and, I believe, makes it easier to follow-up references for readers who care to do so. - Donald Albury 15:43, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Since I'm already guilty of party crashing, I might as well double down and add more... The thing I strenuously dislike is that ProveIt gadget, which drops {{cite book}} etc inside <ref></ref> tags directly into article text. That's all well and good for Wee tiny little articles that are easy to see from top to bottom in one glance. However, but when the article gets larger the whole thing becomes an impenetrable thicket, especially over years, with multiple editors using multiple cite styles etc. It takes several days of genuinely very hard work to clean up, see forex Aristotle, which may be a mess again. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 23:17, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited I Monetary Advisory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shivajinagar (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) 00:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Romford

Ha, I'm waiting on you to close that discussion and issue a verdict. Thanks Uncle. Drmies (talk) 00:51, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

• I could probably contribute to the discussion, but would not close it because neither argument there is based upon decent scholarship and I would not pick either one. Uncle G (talk) 09:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Learned from you

Hello @Uncle G: Thank you for tidying up the Saint Thomas Anglicans page. Wish I could've done it earlier, but wasn't sure how to. Learned from you today and added page numbers for a reference. --Tharian7 (talk) 04:54, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

• It was partly Wikignoming, partly because people at AFD tend to look at sources, and partly because I wanted to look at the sources. Notice how it shrank the page size, both in terms of wikitext size and the rendered page length.

  I noted as I did it the huge variation in citation styles. I was thinking to myself as I did it, either this person is utterly crazy, or xe copied citations written by a bunch of other people from a bunch of other places. I infer that since you learned from what I did that the latter is the case, and you are not utterly crazy. ☺ I did not really touch the citations that point to things that aren't books, news articles, press releases, or papers. So there are a few citations (to the likes of the various church pages and so forth) that still need some attention with {{cite web|ref={{harvid}}}} and {{sfn}}.

  Uncle G (talk) 06:17, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Lauriergracht

I didn't even look at the quote. Mea culpa. I can't believe you quoted German on a Dutchman. BTW I lived for a while in a weeshuis, but not in Amsterdam. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

• The most Dutch street name in the world has to be Lijnbaansgracht, which I can only parse as "tram canal". My special friend JanJoost is music director at the Westerkerk. Guy (Help!) 20:35, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • See User talk:Drmies#Some baklava for you! for a redlink farm that is quietly being recoloured. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Estacion Theme Park

Thank you for your very kind and encouraging message on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Estacion Theme Park. It really lifted my spirits and I am truly grateful that you took the time to write it. I will investigate the Spanish language searches that you suggest. Best, Railfan23 (talk) 23:08, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

CFD

You know what, I can't even think of why I used that... Koncorde (talk) 13:59, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Happy dance

If there is anyone happier than me to see you back, they must be smoking something. Guy (Help!) 20:33, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Robert's Landing

Thank you for finding the information relating to Robert, California, and moving it to Robert's Landing, as well as writing the whole article. I didn't find this information when I researched "Robert".

I am putting a comment on that page requesting to close the deletion.

Naddruf (talk) 19:39, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Ulster Literary Theatre

On 29 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ulster Literary Theatre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a lack of help from W. B. Yeats caused one of the founders of the Ulster Literary Theatre to say, "Damn Yeats! We'll write our own plays!"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ulster Literary Theatre), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

valereee (talk) 00:03, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mulford, San Leandro, California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subdivision (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	please repair my page Angel Tee before redirected or delected Thank You Roseirena (talk) 03:38, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

• Don't obscure what you want to say to people by hiding it inside barnstars. Uncle G (talk) 07:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Eliakim Doolittle

On 9 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eliakim Doolittle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (Talk) 02:26, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• Over 4000! Not bad for an old white dude. Drmies (talk) 00:02, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

El Salt

Uncle, I'm having some issues. I don't really want to include bibliographies (I've said before that that's not really what we do), but this one could be relatively complete and limited, and I stuck it in a box. Problem is that two of them are also cited in the article. If I take em out and put them in a regular "References" section, then the bibliography becomes incomplete; I suppose I could solve that by calling it "Further reading", as you often do. Or I could throw all kinds of caution to the wind and have a complete bibliography that the footnotes refer to. What do you think? Plus, I was hoping you could help me do that fancy thing with sfn and all that. And maybe you can write some content, because what I managed to distill out of the sources is pretty bad. I think I lost my touch, along with my cool. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:17, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• Srsly please work your magic. I'm putting it up for DYK. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 00:05, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Hmm. Drmies (talk) 17:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Francis Joseph Bigger

On 11 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Francis Joseph Bigger, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a century after Irish antiquarian Francis Joseph Bigger had revived the Ulster Journal of Archaeology, sites he had dug were still being referred to as "well and truly Biggered"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Francis Joseph Bigger. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Francis Joseph Bigger), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Popular beat combo

I think it might be worth splitting out the recurring themes / tropes from the Private Eye article and merging this in leaving a redirect. What do you think? I know it's partly my middle class public school background, but these phrases have been part of my everyday speech for well over 40 years, and the inclusion of this one on HIGNFY through Ian Hislop has certainly brought it sufficient prominence to make it a likely search term and worth discussing its Ingrams-era etymology. Guy (Help!) 16:01, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

• I have some thoughts on this, but I am going to put them into the AFD discussion, in response to where M. Dingley asked me. Uncle G (talk) 16:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oooh, we have Recurring in-jokes in Private Eye, but it's pretty awful. With that and the rather bloated main article we have two very poorly sourced lists of tropes. I think I might go and dust of my machete. Guy (Help!) 16:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
    • As you can see from the AFD discussion, there are three articles that we do not have, one of which was actually the main thrust of the book chapter source being waved around. Uncle G (talk) 19:46, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Yes, I like your thinking. There is a rich vein to be mined here, though I don't know if the focus should just be on humour ior be slightly wider, to encompass satire and satirical commentary (e.g. The Secret Barrister). I'd leave that to you to mull over I guess. Guy (Help!) 09:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
        • I'll see what comes up, and whether anyone even agrees with the idea in the AFD discussion in the first place, and can be persuaded from deletion. No-one has discussed it so far. In the meantime: Your small removals from Private Eye are actually in several histories. There was more than one precursor magazine and there are a whole bunch of recorded name suggestions (for which there are, bizarrely, even sources in Italian). Have a read of the two sources that I've cited. Uncle G (talk) 11:16, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

At the moment I am focusing on stuff that's unsourced or badly sourced. I have ordered some dead tree sources that will help with completeness. Guy (Help!) 08:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

As per your request

The William Roberts house in San Lorenzo, California

I offer you this photo. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Roberts Landing, California

On 7 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Roberts Landing, California, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the polluted Roberts Landing on San Francisco Bay, California, was cleaned up to create a housing development and a marsh, now home to the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Roberts Landing, California. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Roberts Landing, California), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

"EPIPE" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect EPIPE. Since you had some involvement with the EPIPE redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:45, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Beef

If you have an issue with me be honest about it....♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:52, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

You seem to regularly make comments at AFDs which is fair enough, but I've noticed three or four comments recently which seemed a bit hostile so I wondered your intention. I've moved the Juegos notice back to the original page BTW.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Wikitext

Module:Wikitext has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:02, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

a comment

@Drmies "see also" your lies!

the unverified longterm disruption is you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.251.7.112 (talk) 19:51, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Uncle G, you go in and out--wherever you are, Merry Christmas, and Happy Kittens!

Drmies (talk) 23:32, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

"Anti-white" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anti-white. Since you had some involvement with the Anti-white redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Wikinewshas

Template:Wikinewshas has been nominated for merging with Template:Wikinews. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 22:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back!

I was going through a list of missing Wikipedians and saw your name on it. However, I also saw that you were active recently! It’s great to have you back, I will remove you from the missing list. If you ever decide to go dormant again or retire (I hope you don’t!) you can leave a message on your user page. Glad to have you back! Happy editing, Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Lima Bean Farmer, unfortunately Uncle G is more like Meaulnes than like Mathilde. He toys with our emotions and makes us think that life can be whole again--and before you know it he's gone, again. Drmies (talk) 02:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
• Very good to see you back! Hobit (talk) 09:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Glad to see you around these days Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Controversial topic area alerts

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. — Newslinger talk 07:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. — Newslinger talk 07:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Post offices

I don't think it would hurt anything to add post offices from a reliable directory of post offices to the various USA stubs. I've run into a few instances where the site turned out to be only a post office and needed to be judged by GNG (not unheard-of before Rural Free Delivery for somebody to just apply to have one in their barn or store to drum up business), but the post office ones have a higher rate of notability than those that don't. At any rate, it's worth mentioning in the article. Hog Farm _Talk 00:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Reformatting discussion

You seem to be an experienced editor, so I'm completely puzzled by your repeated reformatting of Talk:Tantamount to election#Change to redirect. This is in violation of WP:TPO as well as of standard discussion format. The second time I edited the discussion I left the bullets on your entries and another editor removed them, so there's a clear consensus on this. This is a discussion, not a vote. Let me know if I'm missing something. Regards, Dan Bloch (talk) 03:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• You have just pointed at a page that says in boldface that list markup is not someone's comment, and another page that says that that asterisks are used as well. ☺ I fix up discussion out of habit. I've been tidying discussions doing AFD Patrol for over a decade and a half at this point. Relax. There isn't the consensus that you think, and there has also been push-back from people over the years about mis-using things that turn into <dl><dd><dl><dd><dl><dd><dl><dd> in the HTML. A colon in wikitext isn't actually an indent or a blockquote. It's one half of a ;: pair for a definition list, and the <dd> part doesn't vanish if one only uses the colon. Whereas an asterisk is only a <li>. Yes, some people do care about lists that come out right in screen-readers and unusual WWW browsers, and about the semantics of the HTML. We're not writing definitions, you and I. Uncle G (talk) 03:44, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Your comment

• [2]

Just wanted to say that I saw the above and that it seemed to be nicely said : ) - jc37 04:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Apologies for the pings

Forgot to remove it when posting the rationale on the other AfDs. Fixed now. Vaticidalprophet 11:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

40 years of arguing about bitedness?

(Posted here because ANI does not issue rulings on content disputes).

Back when the PDP-8 "Straight-8" started to be replaced with the PDP-8/S (the one with the one-bit serial arithmetic logic unit) people were arguing about whether it was still a 12-bit computer. This was in 1966, so at least 55 years of arguing about bitedness. Maybe more.

Re: too much arguing and not enough citing sources, I cited the following and was completely ignored:

• "Motorola 68000 (MC68000) is the first member of 680x0 line of microprocessors. Internally the 68000 is a 32-bit microprocessor - it has 32-bit data and address registers. Externally the processor has 16-bit data bus and 24-bit address bus, which limits the size of addressable memory to 16 MB. Motorola also made 68008 - a version of 68000 CPU with 8-bit external data bus."[3]
• "The industry's lowest cost 32-bit microprocessor, the MC68000 offers an excellent low cost entry point to the M68000 Family. The MC68HC000 is a CMOS version of the original MC68000. The MC68HC001 is also a CMOS version of the original MC68000 with 8-/16-bit selectable data bus."[4]
• "The Atari ST was a home computer released by Atari in June 1985. The letter "S" and "T" were short for "Sixteen/Thirty-Two," a reference to its 16-bit bus and 32-bit CPU; the Motorola 68000."[5]

But again, even if Vapourmile is completely right on the technical question, the consensus is overwhelmingly against them and their behavior is completely unacceptable. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

• Definitely 40 years for this one specifically, though. ☺ I saw that. Definitely the better approach. If you have old computer magazines in that bedroom of yours that other people were talking about, you could probably dig up contemporary articles making the arguments and indeed discussing the processor in general. I'll start you off. It would be good if everything in that article had a source.
  • Swaine, Michael (1981-11-30). "16-bit revolution, pt. 1: Defining/confining terms". Infoworld. Vol. 3, no. 28. pp. 38–39. ISSN 0199-6649.
  • Comer, Douglas; Munson, Steven (1989). "An overview of the machine". Operating System Design: The Xinu approach (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780136385295.
• Uncle G (talk) 01:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Boozefighters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Army Air Corps.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)