User talk:Primefac/Archive 47

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 40

←

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

It was there

but subsequently deleted. I think I had finger trouble. Three identical versions of the same file were updated, two to en:wp, one to Commons. Mea culpa. There is now a correct deletion rationale at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 May 5#File:Vadim Kravchinsky.jpeg where you may wish to offer an opinion either way. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I wondered if it was something like that (noting that the various F criteria were likely more appropriate anyway). Thanks for the followup. Primefac (talk) 11:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Georgina Lara Booth

Hi Primefac, I have just seen the reverting of my edit. Very much open to having a discussion here with you, and I understand your point about some excessive info, but I will add some edits to the article again and we could have any further discussions about it here. Starting with that the subject is not just a "website editor" since she is a journalist / reporter / interviewer / writer / etc. for an international outlet. Thanks in advance and looking forward to any discussion for improvementsJanssenben (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Given that both I and Drmies are involved, please discuss the matter on the article's talk; it's not just a discussion 'twixt the two of us. Primefac (talk) 17:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Primefac, I have to say, I have seen a lot of BLP fluff, but this one really takes the cake. Janssenben, please explain on the talk page how "Booth received special permission to establish her foundation from a district court judge due to her young age as a minor under Dutch Law" is verified by the subject's own article on the death of Olivia de Havilland. Drmies (talk) 01:31, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Drmies and @Primefac, thanks for your feedback. As was mentioned to me by an editor, it would be great to have a friendly discussion here about how my edits in the article can be expanded and improve my contributions to the subject with both of you and @Primefac to resolve this edit discussion.

I have seen information (like what Drmies mentioned) around the internet on various links over time, which now might have been on some outdated links that may have been removed, I would have to look into that. However, I can see that Drmies has removed literally almost all of the details of the subject now anyway. I agree with the removal of some of the edits, but at least a sentence can be mentioned about some of the information that has been removed (point 3).

1) For starters, I think the template message from Primefac on top of the article can now be removed, since the article has been cleaned up by @Drmies who has made the latest edits to remove most information about the subject's career now.

2) From what I have read, it is allowed to expand an article on Wikipedia with good faith - especially about a female subject who has been recognized internationally by outlets and organizations for journalism and other work. Mentioning other work and personal life in someone's background seems to be found in a lot of articles.

I have seen this for example, as a reference, with other female journalists, Diana Award winners, Forbes 30 honourees, etc. that have also mentioned personal life and any other work they have done. Some random examples I have found for reference that contain very specific details about personal lives, other work, etc. and do not even have any refs for confirmation about women in comparable fields (none have template tabs added on their articles either for cleanup):

Female Journalists:

- Sophia Smith Galer (an almost identical subject that has recently been created with a larger section with very specific examples of her journalistic work) - Katherine Rosman (a lot of very specific private and irrelevant information about family life, namedropping, etc. aside from journalism that do not even have refs and a lot of paragraphs about the kinds of topics she has written about and covers).

Female Diana Award winners and other female figures:

- Christy Zakarias (refs about music used are on a personal self-confirmed music profile for her music contributions that can not be even been found online) - Aishwarya Sridhar (various specific anecdotal personal references and films without refs). - Sophia Kianni (excessive amount of details and puffery)

I would thus like to potentially expand the article again, but I agree with @Primefac that some information in the journalism section could have been shortened without mentioning too many names, etc. - but again I can see Drmies has removed all details now anyway. I would suggest at least expanding the sections that have just been removed about journalism and at least mentioning a line about acting/film work in her background that has also be confirmed, etc. (for example the Royal Society confirmed and referred to the subject as a filmmaker alongside being a journalist, writer and humanitarian and the subject has published interview films on Mashable and other platforms that have been referenced by other media outlets and forums).

To sum up: at least a sentence can be mentioned about the kinds of topics the subject covers/has written about and the many high profile interviews conducted as an interviewer (point 3), which can be confirmed and should be allowed to expand, just like in the other articles I have found as reference examples of women in comparable fields.

3) I would like to suggest expanding at least the Journalism section again - as it now just says "Booth leads the Social Good content and publications desk of Mashable (Benelux), writing about social good, sustainability, social entrepreneurship, charities, NGOs and humanitarian work." However, Booth has also written about other content, like Entertainment, Tech and Science and has interviewed a lot of public figures as an interviewer/journalist which seems to be a focus of the subject's work (at least Forbes has mentioned some of the high profile interviews), so a sentence can be added about that the subject interviews a lot of public figures and celebrities, which seem to be a specialty of the subject, without mentioning all of the specific names of the subjects' interviews again as @Primefac has previously discussed, in addition to mentioning that the subject also covers subjects in the field of Entertainment, Tech and Science in the Journalism paragraph of the Career section.

In conclusion: I agree with your feedback and edits that you have made and the article now looks the same as comparable female subjects (although the other female subject examples do not even have references for a lot of personal details mentioned on their pages). However, I look forward to finalizing this discussion to improve the article on the following 2 points: 1) the expansion of the journalism section with a sentence or two about the fields and topics the subject has covered and 2) removing the template on top of the article now (in discussion with @Primefac who added this before Drmies' last cleanup edits) since literally all details and specifics about the subject have now been heavily removed / cleaned up in the last edits. Can I edit the article on these 2 points I have suggested to finalize this discussion to improve the article? Thanks in advance.Janssenben (talk) 07:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

If I skip over the "but this other article has that", is there anything to look at? And can you do this on the article talk page please? Drmies (talk) 13:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
tl;dr -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Dunno, I've been rather enjoying the 64 pings every few minutes today... Primefac (talk) 14:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Lennon-Picasso Basin

I see you redirected the article Lennon-Picasso Basin to List of geological features on Mercury, I assume because it has only one reference. But you didn't include the feature in the list. Jstuby (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Primefac (talk) 11:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Question about alternative accounts

Hi, I'm Neuropol. I'm starting up my CVU academy program, and as a module to training, I'd like to have "live" or "hands-on" training. For this, I was wondering if it would be within policy to create an account which could act as a "CPR dummy" for trainees to interact with. I would be the only one using it, and, of course, it would not be used to vandalize mainspace articles, only interacting on its own talk page and on designated training pages within my userspace. Thanks,Neuropol^Talk 15:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

As long as you're abiding by WP:LEGITSOCK I don't see any reason you can't create a second account. Primefac (talk) 15:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. Thanks,Neuropol^Talk 15:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... but why doesn't this show up in the article's text? SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Because the change is inside of a <ref>...</ref> tag, so it is in the references section. Primefac (talk) 13:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Test section >2<

Test section 2 Primefac (talk) 2<" class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">15:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, try that again. Primefac (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Test section <1>

Re-indent, yes these are out of order. So what. Primefac (talk) " class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">16:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Test section 1? Primefac (talk) 15:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Add new comment (see edit summary). Primefac (talk) 16:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Question about removal of RFC

Hi, I'm just wondering about this edit you made, what's the reason for the removal of the RFC template? Thanks. A Socialist Trans Girl 06:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

As I said in my reply, there hasn't really been a ton of discussion about his name, and what little discussion there has been has generally found consensus rather quickly. In other words, this is not an intractable issue (yet), so per WP:RFCBEFORE I removed the RFC tag as being unnecessary. Removal of the tag doesn't mean that discussion can't happen, just that it won't be broadcast around Wikipedia that all and sundry should come and give their opinions. Primefac (talk) 07:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh okay, so try regular discussion first, and if there's nobody/no consensus, then start an RfC? A Socialist Trans Girl 07:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Pretty much; you could also cross-post to Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics about the discussion to see if anyone there has opinions. Primefac (talk) 07:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks. A Socialist Trans Girl 07:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Captbloodrock

FYI, this user is an AfC reviewer. CNMall41 (talk) 18:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Huh... no reviews. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I saw them move a couple to mainspace but didn't use the AfC script. One of which went to AfD and with other socks and SPAs resulted in keep (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip Merlin) but have asked the admin to re-open. The others do not appear to be an issue from what I saw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CNMall41 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Template: Infobox Fraternity

When you have a chance, could you please work on the addition of the Status flag there, I don't have enough confidence in my template programming to pull it off. Everything that I can find, the tests are whether a parameter/value pair exists, not the value of the value half.I believe that what had been decided is if the value of Status = D, M, Defunct or Merged that the entry in Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing website would not be generated. Thank you.Naraht (talk) 18:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, been meaning to look at the latest discussion at WT:FRAT but haven't had the time. Will take a look in the next few days. Primefac (talk) 18:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank You. I *think* Template:WikiProject_Canada_Roads tests values to determine what to do (so that multiple provices can be displayed), but I'm not sure. Is [[Template:#invoke:If any equal]] the path to go down? Wish I could plagarize from an Infobox looking to do closer to what is desired. :)Naraht (talk) 18:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

ArbReq

I didn't know you were an arbitrator. But how did you konw -- in two minutes -- that my request was in the wrong venue? Also, I am currently banned from raising this issue in, as I understand it, all other fora, and I can't appeal at ANI, like you say, for six months. Surely, if I disagree with all of these decisions, then my only appeal is to ArbCom? Thomas B (talk) 16:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I am in the process of writing out a response to you on your own talk page, since that is where the primary discussion is happening. Please be patient. Primefac (talk) 16:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Error in Template:Infobox rugby biography

A duplicate parm error (label31/data31a/data31b/data31c) was introduced into Template:Infobox rugby biography by this edit, which affects Category:Articles using duplicate arguments in template calls. Who knew there were so many rugby players? Davemck (talk) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I think I have fixed this problem. It will take a bit for the articles to leave the category. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Ooft, thanks for the note and the fix. Genuinely can't believe I missed something that obvious. Primefac (talk) 06:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

FPER

Why are we replacing all these template transfusions with a redirect and an acronym that people are unlikely to know ? Was this decided somewhere ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I can replace them with the full template name. The original redirects are vague terms and I have retargeted them, meaning that the original uses (pointing at fprot requests) should be updated. If you are formally contesting my retargeting, please let me know. Primefac (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I am formally contesting it: WP:NOTBROKEN applies to template transclusions just as it does to page links. Unless the redirect Template:Editprotected is the subject of an ongoing TfD, it should be left alone. In addition, edits like this are compromising the structure of a page by changing intentional code demonstrations into invalid unclosed elements that were not intended. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Technically it would be RFD, since it's a redirect, but sure, I'll send them all to RFD. Fair point re: the formatting; when this eventually goes through again I'll make sure genfixes are turned off. Primefac (talk) 11:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Now at RFD. Feel free to vent your spleen there. Primefac (talk) 11:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

On another note, this edit and many like it replaced {{edit protected}} with {{FPER}}, but the template in question is template-protected. I think I would have used {{TPER}} or {{Edit template-protected}} for accuracy. It appears to render the same, but if people are counting transclusions, the data might be misleading. Or something. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I mentioned it in the RFD, but at the time these were used the templates were fully-protected, so if anything replacing them with FPER is keeping the historical accuracy; from my time at TFD I know that some folks just can't stand it when the historical record gets changed more than it has to. Primefac (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that replacing old closed FPER templates isn't really useful unless that template is being deleted - perhaps enjoin the RFD next. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Retargeting {{Editprotected}} without replacing the transclusions will result in {{request edit}} appearing in thousands of pages. I'm all for "not changing old discussions" but having a dab transclusion appearing all over the place is probably not what anyone is intending. Primefac (talk) 14:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Primefac's explanation makes sense to me. This looks like standard thankless post-TFD/RFD work, except for the bit where a redirect is being used instead of the canonical template name. No good deed goes unpunished. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Good revert

Thank you, sorry! Hahaha Zanahary (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Template:casenav and friends

Hi! {{ACA}} has sucked me down the rabbit hole of ArbCom templates. This message was going to be a quick note, but quickly turned into a wall of text—after which it occurred to me that you (or perhaps the clerk team?) would know these things better than I would. Therefore, I have opted for a list, and I'd appreciate it if you/another Arb/a clerk could take care of them, when you have a minute. The ones I found in a few minutes of searching include:

{{casenav}} and friends should probably be named something like {{case navigation}}? Of the subtemplates, {{casenav/PD}} should probably be further expanded to something like {{case navigation/proposed decision}} and {{casenav/Talk}} should probably be downcased to match the rest of the subtemplates.
{{ACA}} I really can't tell if this is still in use or not? The note Data on Arbitration Committee activity is now contained in {{Casenav/data}} sounds an awful lot like this is no longer used because we use {{Casenav/data}} instead, but it is transcluded on the current case... If it is in use currently, I can't tell what it does, so what it should be renamed to is left as an exercise for the reader!
{{ArbMotionNotice}} made me chuckle... SIX motions? Rename to {{Arbitration motion notice}}? The code also looks super ugly (defaulting to null is a thing; you don't need to force people to pass in empty parameters rather than simply omit them), but that is beyond the scope of this exercise :)

Thanks for coming to my TED talk, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 23:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I started a discussion at one point with the clerks on ArbCom's various templates, can't remember what we decided but I'll see if I can resurrect it. Primefac (talk) 06:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:THQ § Template dagger malfunctioning

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:THQ § Template dagger malfunctioning. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Primefac. Would you mind taking a look a this Teahouse question? It seems related to an edit you recently made to the template's page when you started a TfM discussion about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Update: This seems to have been resolved so I don't think anything else is needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Heaven forbid we let people know about deletion discussions... Primefac (talk) 06:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I posted as much in my reply, but apparently the end of the world was nigh at hand and the link needed to go asap. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:47, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback

Hey, I think you are good. Can you give me feedback on my edits, AfC reviewing, AfD, and CSDs? Am I going in the right direction to become a New Pages reviewer? Here is my previous request for The New Pages Reviewers right. It would be very helpful to get input from an experienced admin like you. Thanks. GrabUp - Talk 11:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

That is a very broad request! I've only given a brief look at things, but from a random sample of your AFC declines I'm not finding anything major (a couple of what appear to be borderline declines but I didn't check the sources). I'm not really involved in the NPR side of things any more, so I honestly couldn't give you any advice if you're working towards that; I would consider the feedback you received last time and maybe wait a bit before re-applying. Your last decline was less than a month ago. Primefac (talk) 15:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate you taking the time to look at my request. I'll make the necessary improvements. I'll also take your advice and wait a bit longer before reapplying. Thanks again for your help! GrabUp - Talk 15:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of User atmilt

Deletion of User atmilt
[edit] Hi I am atmilt, you were ref as the contact for my user deletion. I authored the pages "Effie Neal Jones" and contribute funds to Wiki, I'm not a avid user but I am wish to remain a user. Please explain how I may remain a user of this vital platform. I look forward to your advise and reply. Thank you, Atmilt Atmilt (talk) 15:58, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply] Atmilt, your user page may have been deleted but you are still most welcome to edit Wikipedia. If you would like to have your userpage restored to the Draft space for further work, you may request it at WP:REFUND (or here, since I'm watching this discussion). Primefac (talk) 16:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply] Primefac, Thank you for your reply and advise, I would like to have it restored, and I will complete it. Atmilt (talk) 16:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can do; the page is now at Draft:Effie Neal Jones. Since it has been a while since you've edited Wikipedia I have put a draft tag, and I would encourage you to submit the page for review. Please feel free to let me know if you have any further questions or issues (likely on my own talk page, since Plastikspork probably doesn't need the extra pings!). Primefac (talk) 17:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Primefac, I am so sorry That page could remain deleted as it was addressed some time ago. I am a little new to all of this, as it has evolved since my last written acticle. Please delete (Sorry), and advise (point me to the link) me on how to complete a users page. Atmilt (talk) 17:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Sure, no worries, I have re-deleted it per WP:G7. Apologies for not noticing that the article already existed, otherwise I would have given you totally different advice! Wikipedia:User pages has information on creating user pages. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request for 1917 film

The plot currently reads "(Schofield) awakens at night and makes his way through the flare-lit ruins of the town. After evading a German soldier, he discovers a French woman hiding with a presumably orphaned infant." When he is making his way, he is fired upon by several unseen Germans, before he encounters and is chased by the one that charges him, the French woman says she doesn't know who the baby's mother is, so "presumably" could be irrelevant to use. so it could be rephrased to "He is fired upon by Germans and after invading one, find a French woman hiding with an orphan child". In addition, it could be added for this section, in which Cumberbatch's character says that Schofield's efforts might have been in vain in the end: "He forces his way in to meet Mackenzie, who reads the message and reluctantly calls off the attack, though Mackenzie also says that, while the cancellation offers a temporary reprieve, command will likely change its orders in a week. 2.100.74.138 (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what page this is, and I'm not going to try and find it. Either way, semi-protected edit requests belong on the article's talk page, not mine. Primefac (talk) 16:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Primefac. I think it's for 1917 (2019 film). You indefinitely protected the page at the end of March 2021 and it appears the IP has an issue with the plot summary. They probably mistakenly posted their "request" here since you're the admin who protected the page.

@IP 2.100.74.138: If that's the case, you should follow the guidance given in Wikipedia:Edit requests and post your request at Talk:1917 (2019 film) instead. I don't suggest, however, you post exactly what you posted above though because it's not clear what you're asking. Edit requests which are unclear tend to be declined (sometimes rather qucikly); for this reason, it's usually best to keep requests simple and clearly state what needs to be changed and why, and also provide some kind of link to a reliable source or relevant Wikipedia policy or guideline in support of the proposed change (i.e. change X to Y because of Z). One thing about WP:FILMPLOTs, though, is that they tend to be more of a general summary and aren't intended to go into too much detail; so, please keep that in mind when making the request. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

The O.P. is the banned person from Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/UK Kennedy–Lincoln–Titanic IP. Binksternet (talk) 18:41, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

R from gap in series TfD close

Regarding your close, WikiProject Redirect and WT:Redirect were both notified of the discussion. Does the lack of participation after those notifications changes your view of consensus? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

No, because the discussion was closed with no consensus; a further lack of input from the WikiProjects doesn't move that particular needle. Primefac (talk) 05:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Given that you're willing to overturn to delete if the WikiProject agrees, would you consider relisting with one more notification to the WikiProject? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:27, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

The intention of my comment was that if a discussion at the WikiProject determined that this is an unnecessary template, then I would consider that reason enough to overturn the no consensus; notifications about XfD don't always bring participants to the XfD pages. Primefac (talk) 05:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Started a discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect#Template:R from gap in series necessity. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:2026 films

Could you remove the creation block from Category:2026 films? Gonnym (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Done. Primefac (talk) 17:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Ruby line

Hi Primefac. Thanks to your observation I found out I introduced a bug in Module:Params yesterday (now reverted). I will try to understand what it was and adjust yesterday's code review in a sandbox. In the meanwhile we can use the previous version of Module:Params. --Grufo (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Ah, that would do it. Thanks for the attention. Primefac (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Found the bug. Yesterday in order to optimize the code I decided that it was faster to create a new smaller lua table instead of removing elements from the existing table. The problem is that I had left a reference to the previous table in a couple of functions. I think I fixed the bug now – for unrelated reasons I have gone back to “removing elements from the existing table”, but the bug could be fixed also keeping the other solution. --Grufo (talk) 15:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Deprecated parameter removal request

Hey Primefac, I hope you're well.

I wanted to see if you'd be willing to use PrimeBOT to remove five deprecated parameters from the infobox of just under 24,000 articles. I would be requesting the removal of |nfl=, |nflnew=, |nfl-new=, |nflwd=, and |nfl-wd= from {{Infobox NFL biography}} based on this discussion. The parameters have already been deleted from the template by Eagles247 here. This would save loads of manual work for us if you'd be able to lend a hand. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, can probably sort this out at some point. Primefac (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Fantastic, I appreciate it. Of course there's no rush at all. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Done. Nearly got caught out by the other parameter removal yesterday but that should be sorted as well. Looks like the cat is down to ~ 90 pages. Primefac (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you so much! I'll go through the rest soon since I do like to keep this category empty :) Hey man im josh (talk) 17:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Jack Churchill, and starting a mess

Hi Primefac, I made a post on WP:CCI about the old copyright issues we were talking about (resulting in the "record-breaking" RD1 at Jack Churchill). The list of affected articles keeps expanding rapidly, standing at over 1700 articles now. This was discussed twice at WP:AN in 2009, but people back then gave up after (heroically!) checking about 1000 of the roughly 3000 articles created or expanded by this user. What a mess. Renerpho (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Schmachtenberger page deletion

Daniel Schmachtenberger is an influential cultural commentator; he has appeared as a host or interviewee on numerous videos, some of which have received hundreds of thousands up to half a million views. Beside this he is also the founder of a research organisation, The Consilience Project, which publishes opinion pieces on global issues.

For these two reasons he has, in my opinion, surpassed the threshold needed to validate having a wikipedia page. Previously you had removed his page, could this decision be reviewed in light of his gain in cultural influence since this time? I am in favour of seeing his page reinstated. Lucasaw (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to Draft:Daniel Schmachtenberger, which was deleted because it was a copyright violation. If you think that he meets our inclusion criteria you are more than welcome to start a new draft, but I cannot restore the old page. Primefac (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Need IP block exempt

Wikipedia is blocked in China, and i used VPN. so I need an 【IP block exempt】 for editing , thank you! --Air7538 (talk) 08:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

PrimeBot and avoiding categories in Drafts

Courtesy link: User talk:Bearcat § Bots devoted to this (a subsection)
Courtesy link: User talk:DannyS712 bot § Task 3 – Draft categories

Hi, Primefac. With respect to bots that adjust, unlink, or remove categories in Drafts, do I understand correctly that PrimeBOT 2 has been deactivated because it was superseded by DannyS712 bot 3? If so, Apparently the latter runs off some report which confines the domain of operation to only those drafts having the Afc submit template, but per WP:DRAFTNOCAT it should be all drafts. This all started at this discussion subsection, and I've left a related message for DannyS712. Not sure if Danny's bot can be adjusted, but how hard would it be to adjust PrimeBOT to look at all Drafts, and instead of linking the categories, embed them in {{Draft categories}} instead, as illustrated at User talk:DannyS712 bot#Task 3 – Draft categories and fire it up again? I'm just trying to find some solution so that users like Bearcat don't have to manually remove categories anymore, as it seems like such a repetitive task that really ought to be handled by a bot. Mathglot (talk) 17:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I stopped running the bot because a) I am using AWB and while the task itself is automated I still have to manually start it, and b) because other bots such as Danny's came about. It probably makes more sense for Danny to get approval and adjust their bot than it would for me to restart my AWB task. Primefac (talk) 18:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Understood; thanks. Mathglot (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

How hard do you think it would it be to modify your AWB task per my suggestion here? Currently Bearcat is spending many hours processing Drafts manually, and reducing that to having to push a button on an AWB task and then sit back while it did its thing would be a clear win compared to that, until we got a bot version that can do it completely autonomously. Mathglot (talk) 01:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

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

Administrator changes

Graham Beards

Bureaucrat changes

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news

The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous

WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

laws

by queen Fiona Mary Macaskill FionaMacaskill (talk) 18:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

FionaMacaskill, not sure what you're asking (or why you're asking me). Primefac (talk) 19:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Block needed

92.40.205.153 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 92.40.201.27 (talk) 10:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I can just insert another SIM card (they are £1 each at every corner shop) or go to a shopping mall to find more open WiFi points. Primefac failed to stop my vandalism and just DDOS everyone using this IP range because of one vandal. I win you lose. 92.40.205.153 (talk) 11:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

That's not what "DDOS" means. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Mr. Six Figures Twice

I MADE 200,000 EDITS AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS STUPID T-SHIRT

jp×g 🗯️ 01:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Huh, cool. Thanks for the shirt! (Still waiting on my functionary cardigan...) Primefac (talk) 11:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

AfC reviewer issue

Several days after becoming an AfC reviewer, User:MKsLifeInANutshell approved the page Undisputed (video game). To put it simply the sources for this article are a mess, with almost all of them being either unreliable or dubious, which should have raised alarm bells or at least caused them to seek a second opinion. The game does have a source in a more reliable place, PC Gamer, but it wasn't even mentioned during the review or added to the article, which was approved as-is. I think this is indicative of a lack of knowledge of the notability criteria and the user may be jumping the gun in asking to approve articles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look this weekend. Primefac (talk) 13:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Eh... it's not the best article in the world, and even including the PC Gamer review looks to only barely pass GNG (if at all). For something that isn't even going to be released until October it probably should have been declined under "too soon" or similar, but for a new reviewer one or two bad reviews isn't necessarily something I would pull perms for. I suggest a note on their talk page expressing your concerns; they might be reasonably receptive to feedback. In other words, I do agree they're probably just looking at the number of references or not really jiving with what "significant coverage" actually entails. Primefac (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Template:Piccadilly

Hi Primefac. What's your take on Template:Piccadilly? It seems the sole reason it was created has to do with Wikipedia:Piccadilly and was intended to function as sort of WikiProject banner; however, the MfD for the Piccadilly page looks like it's leaning towards a "snow delete". Would the template be eligible for speedy deletion or would it need to go to TfD if the MfD is closed as "delete"? -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:11, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it's a simplified WikiProject banner. I would say that if the "Project" gets deleted, the template can reasonably by deleted under G8 (since there will be no project for it to notify people of). Primefac (talk) 11:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Someone else nominated it for deletion at TfD; so, it will be resolved one way or another. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:49, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Request for change in template: Top male singles tennis players by country - switch nationality from Germany to Lebanon

Hello, I have another request for switch of Nationalities. This time it is tennis player Benjamin Hassan switching officially from Germany to Lebanon as of 24 June 2024 according to the ATP website: https://www.atptour.com/en/players/benjamin-hassan/hg94/overview. Can you please remove him from the Germany list and add to Lebanon. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashona (talk • contribs) 22:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

That seems to have happened shortly before you posted here, see Special:Diff/1230801662. Primefac (talk) 22:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Regarding edit

Hi @Primefac:, Hope you're doing well. From last couple of days, I am not able to edit Wikipedia through my mobile data (Ncell) but edit works properly through wifi and VPN at safe DNS mode. I request you to address my issue, If you can. Please don't block me for the use of VPN. Best regards ! Fade258 (talk) 07:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

If you are logged in you should not be affected by an IP block. What sort of block notice are you getting? Primefac (talk) 13:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Primefac, Thank you for reaching it out. While using VPN, I face an IP block for edit for the period of 3 years. Fade258 (talk) 15:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

I guess my question is, why do you need to use a VPN? Primefac (talk) 16:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

To be honest, Without using VPN I am not able to open any Wikipedia page. So, I used VPN service. Fade258 (talk) 12:40, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Watchlist emails

The latest version of MediaWiki will have the fix for the api, so I'll implement that some time this week. — Qwerfjkl talk 15:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Super! Primefac (talk) 18:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

This has rolled out now. I've added the filters (only show edits by bots) and removed the previous bot filtering code. Let me know if there are any bugs. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hrm, BN still seems to not be getting flagged, but otherwise... I guess things are working? I've cleared out my watchlist and I'll let you know in a few days if anything doesn't get caught that should have. Primefac (talk) 21:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Things seem to be working as intended. Primefac (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl, just a quick question - is this triggering for all bot edits, or just bot edits where the bot edit is the "newest" edit to the page? I ask mainly because I got a regular watchlist notification and then a few hours later a bot edit notification (and I hadn't been to the page to clear the "views" yet. Primefac (talk) 15:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I believe it should trigger for all edits. The code checks the feed every minute, and sends an email for each entry. — Qwerfjkl talk 15:14, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, good to know. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Approving my bot

Hi, I recently posted a new bot function request here. All it does is add constituency numbers for Indian state assembly constituencies. I was wondering whether you, as a BAG editor, could provide your feedback. Thanks. C1MM (talk) 16:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

If someone doesn't get to it before me, I will likely do so. Primefac (talk) 16:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! C1MM (talk) 16:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I know you recently commented on multiple bot approval requests. Would you also be willing to comment on mine? C1MM (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

At some point, yes. Primefac (talk) 20:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Broken template doc transclusion

The page {{AfC submission/draftsubmit}} seems to me to have a broken transclusion, and the text contains your name. That said, the doc page itself is essentially empty. The code is too dense for me to reliably figure out the problem.

I'm a fairly experienced editor, and I'm happy with the completeness of the draft, so I think I'll (try to) move it now anyway. David Brooks (talk) 18:04, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

It is not broken, though it is a subst-only template; I'll update the documentation to make that more obvious. Primefac (talk) 20:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/James Moore200

Hi! You seem to be around. Mind having an eye on this given the Moore account's open unblock request? I blocked that account so don't necessarily want to duck block, although UPE is obvious. NO worries if you're not available and thanks either way Star Mississippi 23:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh goody... one of my least favourite locations to try to find socks in. Same general area, no direct match but I'll probably need a 2O. Primefac (talk) 23:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

if you don't have the time/bandwidth, truly no worries. I can see if someone else is around later. Thanks for the eyeballs and apologies for the headache. Star Mississippi 23:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

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

Administrator changes

Technical news

Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)

Miscellaneous

The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Template problem?

I'm not sure whether or not it's caused by your edit today to Template:PH brgy table lite, but the article Liloan is suddenly filled with ParserFunction errors. I'm ignorant of template coding; could you look into the situation and determine what the problem is? Deor (talk) 14:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I haven't edited that template in a year. I also do not see any parser issues on the article you indicate. If it still shows for you, it might be a user-side error, but if it's cleared up chances are that someone fixed whatever issue popped up. Primefac (talk) 15:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I clearly misread the timestamp of your edit. The article looks OK to me now, too. Deor (talk) 15:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

No worries, glad to hear it's resolved. Primefac (talk) 15:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Paracas Candelabra and Maria Reiche

I'm fine with your removal, frustrated that I am pretty certain that Maria Reiche studied and dated this but the only source I can access is [1] which probably isn't any good. One of these might have something [2][3] but maybe not. Doug Weller talk 12:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

No issues restoring it if there are sources; someone was complaining about bad intel so I figured removing anything unsourced was the best way to get quality control going forward. Primefac (talk) 14:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

The problem was several editors claiming it was a Hindu inscription. I see the author of the article in the World History Encyclopedia is Ana Maria Cogorno Mendoza so although I don't think it's a reliable source for everything, this article looks ok. Doug Weller talk 15:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Nested templates issue

Could you or another admin have a look at User:Pratikcr7 and rewrite their userpage to use the correct sockpuppet(er?) template? It's a visual mess throwing up garbage errors due to the nesting of the two templates in a non-compatible way within each other, and what little was written is rather lacking in explanation of what actually should be there. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 15:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I think I have fixed it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Damn, that was quick. Looks good to me. Thank you much. Zinnober9 (talk) 15:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Huh, surprised that lasted as long as it did. Cheers all. Primefac (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of List of star systems within 20–25 light-years for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of star systems within 20–25 light-years is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of star systems within 20–25 light-years (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Hekerui (talk) 12:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit requests

+@Anomie: fyi, the changes to {{editrequested}}, {{editrequest}} are populating the tracker tables (e.g., User:AnomieBOT/SPERTable) with a hundred-some old completed requests. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 16:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Interesting. For the record the base template is {{edit protected}}. Primefac (talk) 16:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Hyphenation Expert, I'm pretty sure this is a cache issue; the table has been slowly decreasing in size since you posted. Primefac (talk) 17:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it was caused by the lack of declaring Template:Edit protected as a wrapper for Module:Arguments that Special:Diff/1234470812 fixed. Without that it ignored the |answered=yes and so rendered as an active request, which AnomieBOT dutifully listed in the tracker tables. Once it was fixed and MediaWiki reparsed the pages, AnomieBOT removed them from the tables. Anomie ⚔ 20:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Cite LSA

Do you have a list of articles that used to have it by chance? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I couldn't say for sure, I thought there were a bunch but all I know is the edits made by Jonesey95, listed here, but I suspect this is last-roundup cleanup rather than the sum total. They might know more though. Primefac (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

You'd probably have to look in a database dump. This page says that it was used in about 4,000 citations (I think that is what is being counted, rather than pages) as of the 1 July 2024 dump. I did a few dozen manual replacements of {{Cite LSA}} with {{cite journal}} and similar templates, as appropriate for what was being cited. All of the articles were in the realm of paleontology and geology, not anything to do with linguistics. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I'll go through the last dump. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Your controversial move of template:GBP

What ever made you think that that would be an uncontroversial move? "GBP" is the ISO 4217 code for the Pound Sterling (no such thing as "British pound", by the way, "adding insult to injury"). Specifically, {{GBP}} is used when an editor's keyboard doesn't have a pound sign. Thus {{GBP|1,000}} produces £1,000. What would make you believe that your long-winded version is an improvement on that?

Please revert your move and propose it properly if you seriously believe it has any merit whatever. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Chill. Primefac (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Afsaneh Salari

Hi Primefac. Would you mind taking a look at User talk:Mr.izadpanah#Draftification of Afsaneh Salari? I'm not going to draftify it again, but it does seem like it would've been better for the creator to re-submit it to AfC for another review given their declared COI, and the fact it was declined once and wasn't significantly improved thereafter. FWIW, I'm asking you about this after seeing your posts at ~~WP:ATC~~WT:AFC and thought you'd be a good person to ask about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC); edited -- 22:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

If they've "contested" the draftification by moving it back to the article space, then really the only venue left is to send it to AFD. Primefac (talk) 22:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Would AfD be warranted in your assessment? -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Probably, it looks like most of the sources are about her film, and there's not really even much in the prose to indicate notability (some nominations but no "big" wins). Primefac (talk) 12:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the assessment. I'm trying a bit more WP:BEFORE myself and also asking at some relevant WikiProjects just in case. If neither I nor anyone can find better sources, then I'll start a discussion about it at AfD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Request on 13:31:44, 22 July 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Keise004

Keise004 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Camden Heide (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for the consideration on the perhaps too soon submission on Camden Heide. I considered this when creating the submission but there are many similar players that are not playing on as prestigious or successful of teams that have been approved. Seeing that Heide is a key player on Purdue which made the national championship game, his submission seems appropriate. Similar pages of players in the same conference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Klesmit, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Tschetter, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braden_Smith_(basketball), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah_Hawkins.

There has been much significant coverage (all noted) of Heide and I will continue to edit the page. Thank you again for your consideration.

Keise004 (talk) 13:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean Houymet

Good morning,

I'm new with Wikipedia and would like some help with the soft delete of this page. Sorry if it took months before I reached out but It took a while for me to realize that we had trouble with the page. Could you help me in understand the exact reason behind the deletion?

The following reasons were written in the talk page of the article -

As near as I can tell, this person has no great significance other than being the "first of his name", i.e. someone who has a lot of descendents. I don't even know for sure if he was a farmer, or just someone who owned land. The provided references seem to indicate that the only research done into this individual was done by his family members; any non-relations giving reference are from primary documents directly connected to the subject. I will admit that I make this AFD after taking a hatchet to the article (see Special:Permalink/1222951438 for the previous version) but there is no usable content in the older version either (most of it is editorialising, OR, or speculation). Primefac (talk) 15:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete: A family biography project is not suitable for wikipedia. Interesting local history, but not meeting inclusion criteria here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm writing this on behalf of a friend who did all the research about Jean Houymet and all his descendants. If the main issue is that Jean Houymet is not an important figure, we have found that many famous people are related to this Jean Houymet, the most famous one being Francis Desales Ouimet, the father of amateur golf in the USA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Ouimet

I think it would be interesting to keep this Jean Houymet page and link it to all these famous people.

I do have to agree that a family biography project is not suitable for Wikipedia. If we rewrite this article in a more encyclopedic way and link it to all these famous Ouimet, would it be something accepted by Wikipedia?

Please get back to me on what's the best way to un-delete this page and modify it ton a Wikipedia worthy article. Thank you very much for the help you will give me,

Pierre-Alexandre Planglois012 (talk) 14:17, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

We have a phrase on Wikipedia called "notability is not inherited", which basically means that being related or otherwise connected to a notable individual does not make that original individual notable themselves (see also WP:INHERITED and WP:INVALIDBIO). You state If the main issue is that Jean Houymet is not an important figure... - yes, that is the main issue. I think it would be interesting to keep this Jean Houymet page is also not a valid argument to make for keeping an article on Wikipedia.

The long and the short of it, as I said in the original nomination, is that if the only people who have done any extensive research into the individual are his family members during the course of a genealogy project, he will not meet our requirements for inclusion, no matter how many bluelinked/notable relations he has on Wikipedia. It's not about linking to other Wikipedia articles, it is about linking to reliable, independent sources that talk about the subject. Primefac (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back to me quickly with this. I forgot to subscribe to my message and never saw your reply.

I will consult with the writer of this article but unfortunately, I think this is the end of Jean Houymet on Wikipiédia.

Thanks again,

PA Planglois012 (talk) 10:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

You could possibly have an article about the Ouimet family, but you'd need sources discussing the family as a whole first to establish the notability of the family Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

AIV helperbot14

Hi Primefac. Thanks for your work approving AIV helperbot14. I was just wondering whether you perhaps intended to also add the bot flag? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks not sure why I thought it had the flag already. Primefac (talk) 16:56, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Comparing editors

P, I understand there's a better tool to compare editor interactions and/or similarities, available only to CUs (admins?). Do you know if using that requires probable cause like CU does? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Better than what? Not being snarky, just trying to figure out where your baseline is sitting. Personally I find the Editor Interaction Analyser to be quite useful. Primefac (talk) 10:32, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh, no worries at all. Better than that interaction analyser, yeah. Some years ago, I'd come across another tool, perhaps cos it was being developed then, which could be used to compare actual content of the contributions, check stylistic similarities and such. To the best of my knowledge, no such thing is available publicly, but I remember reading about something like that recently, apparently in use among functionaries. I just can't remember at this moment where I read that. So, wondering if you know. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I think @Usedtobecool might be talking about Masz which Moneytrees references here at an ANI discussion in his response to Star Mississippi. I had never heard of it until then. S0091 (talk) 16:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, masz. At the moment it is (as far as I am aware) only available to CUs, but it does not require quite as much probable cause as running an IP check. Primefac (talk) 16:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

S0091, wow, yup, that's it. I guess I didn't take in any beyond thinking, "hey, I'd heard of that thing before". Thanks! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Primefac, I have a case that I have good reasons to want checked sooner rather than later, but of course not enough for an SPI. I'll mail you the details if you'd be interested. I don't expect to be told the results; I'd feel better just knowing it's been checked. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack yourself, as you did on WT:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. Please comment on the contributions and not yourself. If you make any further self-attacks you may have to report yourself to yourself, which may result in a self-block. Thank you. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 17:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

RichardHornsby

Hi Primefac,

Would you mind checking out Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RichardHornsby again if you have the time? You performed a check a few days ago but there have been more added since. I'm wondering if checks on these accounts could find others.

Thanks, C F A 💬 21:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

When I have time. Primefac (talk) 22:46, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Automated tool

Hi Primefac, I hope you are doing well. I have a question about an automated tool. Is the tool at [4] compliant with enwiki policies? It allows anyone to make replacements and carry out other automated tasks. This tool uses its operator’s main account to edit pages and we can’t check who is actually making the edits. I have tested it here. – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@Discospinster, you'll probably be interested in this conversation, given your conversation with that tool's creator two weeks ago. Zinnober9 (talk) 20:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Jesus fuck. Absolutely not a good thing. Primefac (talk) 22:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, can I just check that you made Special:Diff/1237001770? Primefac (talk) 22:21, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Some tools are available for MdWiki and others, like fixing references, infoboxes, and translations, for Wikimedia wikis. These tools don’t require login authentication, making it impossible to track who made a particular edit. – DreamRimmer (talk) 04:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

+1 here, I used the tools after DR showed them to me, [5] and [6] were caused by me. Sohom (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Ooft. Blocked. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 16:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't know that it allowed others to edit under a different account, or I wouldn't have unblocked it! ... discospinster _talk 17:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, this is no longer work in enwiki. And in other wikis it will use OAuth and the edits will be under who ever use it username. Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 02:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

1977 WUHO Karate Championship Page

Thank you for maintaining this page. My request is that you add the FORMS (Kata) winners to the grid as shown in the original source from Black Belt Magazine (May 1978). The original source lists the following:

Gary Tsutsui, a 31-year-old photographer from Irvine, California, placed third in forms competition for the United States. He scored 25.6 to Keiji Okada, who won the forms title for Japan. Second place went to Japan's Hiromasa Miyomo.

Can you add a forms section to the page as this was a major accomplishment by a US athlete. 2601:282:1880:5BC0:58AB:E98C:7847:1A7D (talk) 19:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you referring to 1977 World Karate Championships? If so, I have never edited that page; you might want to put in an edit request on the article's talk page. Primefac (talk) 19:42, 30 July 2024 (UTC)