User talk:Paine Ellsworth

Best of everything to you and yours! and...
Spread the Good!

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia – its articles, redirects, templates – all your improvements, and have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable life – both on and off Jimbo's amazing reference work!

      'BE a member of the Wikipedia family!'

'Wikipedia is a community effort of staggering proportions!'

The Closer: non-admin reveal

Disclosure I am not an administrator on Wikipedia. I very much respect admins and have been helped by them many, many times over the years. I also respect the community vettings at RfA that often show the ultimate community respect and trust of an editor. I shall likely remain a non-admin doing the best I can to enjoy discussions with other editors. I sometimes participate, sometimes help with disagreements and sometimes close discussions when needed. I am no stranger to closing contentious discussions about controversial subjects. I sometimes close the easy talks, too, because if it's in the backlog, then it's fair game! Remember that WP is not a democracy, so discussions are not just a vote. The key factors in all good discussion closures are the arguments written by concerned editors, policy-based rationales, which count most toward an acceptable decision and closure. Anyway, if you have come to ask about one of my RfC, RM, MRV or other discussion closures, you are very welcome here! I am usually inclined to reopen a discussion if the outcome was "no consensus" and when I am specifically and intentionally asked to do so! (Not so much if I found a consensus – that doesn't mean I cannot be persuaded with a good, sound argument.) Please be very clear about your intentions and do not beat around the bush. That just means please don't expect me to read your mind; I have enough trouble reading my own mind sometimes. Thank you beyond words for your deeply respected concerns! – Paine

'to help us keep our minds sharp!'

'PHILOSOPHIE!'

Recently registered?

    Learn quickly how editors journey thru this awe-inspiring reference work! (and the people who build it!)

---

---

Older discussions and notifications... → click the section title in the Table of Contents (ToC) above, or click [show] to see all the discussions →

The following are closed discussions. Please do not modify them. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ⸎ ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC) Precious anniversary Precious Nine years! --Gerda Arendt (2talk) 11:08, 20 November 2024 (UTC) Thank you so much, Gerda! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 01:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC) "Wikipedia:Redirect assimilation" listed at Redirects for discussion The redirect Wikipedia:Redirect assimilation has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22 § Wikipedia:Redirect assimilation until a consensus is reached. Trovatore (talk) 03:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC) "WP:ASSIMILATION" listed at Redirects for discussion The redirect WP:ASSIMILATION has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22 § WP:ASSIMILATION until a consensus is reached. Trovatore (talk) 03:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC) Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Life Speaks to Me Template:Editnotices/Page/Life Speaks to Me has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC) Administrators' newsletter – December 2024 News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024). Administrator changes Ahecht DoubleGrazing Dr vulpes FOARP Peaceray Queen of Hearts Rsjaffe SD0001 SilverLocust Sohom Datta ThadeusOfNazereth Voorts Ajpolino Fathoms Below Pppery Tamzin Worm That Turned Aervanath Christopher Sundita Dank Dennis Brown Dragons flight Fastily Graham87 JaGa Kbh3rd Marine 69-71 Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington Yamamoto Ichiro Interface administrator changes SD0001 Sohom Datta Pppery CheckUser changes Spicy TheresNoTime Guideline and policy news Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity. Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used. Technical news Technical volunteers can now register for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon, which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. Application for travel and accommodation scholarships is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024. Arbitration The arbitration case Yasuke (formerly titled Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has been closed. An arbitration case titled Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December. Discuss this newsletter Subscribe Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC) Guild of Copy Editors December 2024 Newsletter Guild of Copy Editors December 2024 Newsletter Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you no longer want this newsletter, you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist. Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor to be a Guild coordinator (with their permission, of course) until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June. Drive: In our September Backlog Elimination Drive, 67 editors signed up, 39 completed at least one copy edit, and between them they edited 682,696 words comprising 507 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: The October Copy Editing Blitz saw 16 editors sign-up, 15 of whom completed at least one copy edit. They edited 76,776 words comprising 35 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Drive: In our November Backlog Elimination Drive, 432,320 words in 151 articles were copy edited. Of the 54 users who signed up, 33 copy edited at least one article. Barnstars awarded are posted here. Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 15 December (UTC) and will end on 21 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here. Progress report: As of 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 333 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,401 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking. To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message sent by Baffle_gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC). Speedy deletion nomination of Template:World War II/doc A tag has been placed on Template:World War II/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason: WP:T5 Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:09, 8 December 2024 (UTC) The Signpost: 12 December 2024 News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5 Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited Op-ed: On the backrooms by Tamzin In focus: Are Wikipedia articles representative of Western or world knowledge? In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody Opinion: Worm That Turned's reconfirmation RfA debriefing * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here. You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC) Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Twenty20 leagues/doc A tag has been placed on Template:Twenty20 leagues/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason: WP:T5 (template moved and then changed to use Template:navbox documentation) Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2024 (UTC) Glossary entry 'Malplaced' Hi, Paine. Thanks for your additions to the Wikipedia:Glossary. In the entry for WP:G#malplaced disambiguation page (added in rev. 1227250312), clicking the [[#base name|Foo]] link landed me at base name, which seemed surprising. Did you mean to add nowiki's around it? Either way, I am not sure I understand the relevance of that link; perhaps you could clarify the entry? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC) Hi, Mathglot, and welcome! The base name link is there to illustrate that the example title, "Foo", is a "base name" that redirects to a page where the base name is qualified with " (disambiguation)". The link was added to help editors, but if something should be done to make the text more clear, then please feel free to do so. Perhaps something like: When an ambiguous [[#base name|base name]] page title, such as "Foo", redirects to a page named "Foo (disambiguation)", the Foo page is said to be "malplaced". In this case, Foo (disambiguation) should be moved to the Foo title. See Wikipedia:Malplaced disambiguation pages. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 17:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC) To editor Mathglot: the text in the glossary for this entry has been clarified. I hope it is improved over its previous version. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 03:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC) Perhaps it is to some, but I find it confusing. For example, I see base name page title (1st sentence), and a Foo title (2nd); is this about pages that do, or don't have parenthetical disambiguation? If that is the case, I would just say that. If it's about something else, then what? Mathglot (talk) 03:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC) To editor Mathglot: this is good, because we both want it to be clear for other editors. We can work on it here, and feel free to clarify any part of it. If I understand you correctly, the confusing part is my trying to equate "base name" with the Foo title but not doing so quite well enough. I do think it's important to use the "base name" term, because it's sometimes used when editors discuss dab pages and primary topics. Maybe the following is better? When an ambiguous base name page title, such as "Foo", is a redirect to a target page titled "Foo (disambiguation)", there is no primary topic "Foo", and the Foo page is "malplaced". In this case, the Foo (disambiguation) page should be moved to the base name page title, Foo. See Wikipedia:Malplaced disambiguation pages. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 04:45, 21 December 2024 (UTC) To me, that seems identical to this: When an ambiguous page title, such as "Foo", is a redirect to a target page titled "Foo (disambiguation)", there is no primary topic "Foo", and the Foo page is "malplaced". If it is identical, then base name is superfluous or meaningless (and it can't be the second); if they are not identical, in what way does this sentence differ from the previous one? If find the latter sentence understandable, and don't know what base name is contributing to the definition. But since, as you say, it appears to be specialized vocabulary used in discussions about disambiguation, maybe you should just leave it if it's meaningful to others, and it doesn't matter if I understand it or not. Mathglot (talk) 05:39, 21 December 2024 (UTC) To editor Mathglot: I'm afraid I don't see "base name" as "superfluous or meaningless" or unnecessary. If it were those things, then it would not be in the glossary in the first place. It's an important enough term to be in the glossary, and it applies to "Foo" in the example, because "Foo" is a base name title. While it is unfortunate that you are confused by this usage, I think that we should find a way to use the term "base name" in this description and at the same time be sensitive to the fact that there are quite possibly others who would also be confused for the same reason. What exactly and precisely is confusing about calling a base name title, such as "Foo", exactly what it is – a "base name" title? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC) I don't doubt it has meaning and deserves a place in the glossary, I just don't see it in this case. However, the glossary doesn't need to be tailor-made to cater to my misunderstandings, and if it makes sense to you and most people, then that is good enough and it should remain, and I am content to just let this go. Thanks for taking the time to address my questions about it. Mathglot (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC) It's my pleasure and thank you for clarifying! This entry is about malplaced dab pages. It is about how a non-base name title, such as "Foo (disambiguation)", should be moved to its base name if the base name redirects to the non-base name. I regret if, while it seems clear as a bell to me, it results in any amount of misunderstanding. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 05:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Christmas/doc

A tag has been placed on Template:Christmas/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

WP:T5. Template changed to use better Template:Navbox documentation.

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Post move review summary

Friend Andrewa, perhaps when you are able to find the time, the following has given me pause. I am now perplexed by the whole NAMECHANGES policy situation, and I will not attempt to close another similar RM until I can figure this out. Please help when you can. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 00:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Distressing indeed. A blatant and unprovoked personal attack didn't help I am sure. Looking at it... may take a little while as I am frantic IRL and it's now quite involved. Wikipedia is not perfect. Andrewa (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for that! Please, take your time. The problems challenges aren't going anywhere. I never seek perfection, just excellence. Thanks again, my friend! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 10:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Post move review summary thoughts about Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2024 July#Fairfield Metro station: Fairfield Metro station (RM) – overturned

I am compelled to wonder about how to go forward. What happened here is that a local consensus at RM was not sufficient to override the WP:NAMECHANGES article title policy, and yet another local consensus at MRV did override that policy and had the article moved to the new "official" name before it has become the WP:COMMONNAME as prescribed by the NAMECHANGES section of the policy. Was I not using "common sense", as at least one editor at MRV suggested? Well, that's done and in the past, so my question now must be: how should we go forward?

Should we ignore the plural "sources" that the NAMECHANGES policy requires? That policy requires "sources" that use the new name "routinely". When I closed that move request, there had been no – zero – independent sources given that used the new name routinely. There were several primary sources that noted the name change, and there were some secondary sources before the name change that announced there would be an expected name change, but there were no independent, secondary sources found after the name change that used the new name routinely. After I closed the RM, an editor was able to produce one independent source, patch.com, published the same day, 1 July 2024, that I closed the RM, that used the new name routinely. One independent, secondary source. To date, that is the only independent source that uses the new name routinely. Our policy says "sources". I've run into editors who think there should be 10 or 12 good, independent, secondary sources that use the new name routinely before that new name becomes the common name. In the past, I've been happy with 3 or 4 of those sources. Now I just don't know. The policy isn't specific as to the number of those sources needed, it just says "sources" – plural, more than one. Yet in this case, a page was moved to a new, official name based upon only one independent source that used the new name routinely.

I should also note my respect for WP:IAR, but I've always thought that to ignore a policy or guideline, and the community agreements that built them, requires very good reason. Nobody, not in the RM nor in the MRV, nobody gave a good reason to ignore the NAMECHANGES article title policy. Yet they did ignore it. So...

I don't know how we should go forward with move requests that have proposed a title change to a new, official name when there are no independent sources, or only one source, that uses the new name routinely, when there should be at the very least two "sources" as prescribed by the NAMECHANGES article title policy. Can anyone see this dilemma clearly and give me guidance as to how we should go forward?

After rereading [this other policy] about primary and secondary sources, maybe I was being too restrictive about using specifically secondary sources that used the new name routinely? I'm still at a loss to understand how to go forward. We are still supposed to give "due consideration to the relevant consensus of the Wikipedia community in general as reflected in applicable policy, guidelines and naming conventions", aren't we?

One last thought... there is no way I would take this to the next level that would follow a MRV decision with which I disagree. Not my style. Worst comes to worst, I will just refrain from closing this type of RM and hope that whoever does close them will do a better job than I have done. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 00:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

References

The Signpost: 24 December 2024

• News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform"

• Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything

• Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject

• In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case

• From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting?

• Recent research: "Wikipedia editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality

• Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Wikipedia article intensifies

• Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols

• Traffic report: Was a long and dark December

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Malaysian language

The actual pronunciation is Malaysian language (Bahasa Malaysia) not Malaysian Malay. Ahmad Shazlan (talk) 07:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello editor Ahmad Shazlan, and thank you for coming to my talk page! Looking at the article's talk page and especially at the move request I closed back in 2022, this seems to be a contentious issue, with some editors agreeing with you and some editors not agreeing with you. I suggest that you continue to discuss this issue with other involved editors on the language's talk page. I sincerely hope this helps. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 21:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)