Jump to content

User talk:Michig

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Michig (talk | contribs) at 11:30, 25 April 2021 (→See this Uvais Raza Khan: re.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

World of Guns: Guns Disassembly

Hello, Michig. I wanted to discuss with you the possibility of re-creating the World of Guns: Gun Disassembly article. First of all, the previous deletion discussion was extremely civil and I agree with all the points made. Here, then, are my points for creating a small article anyway.

Besides being featured twice on Rock Paper Shotgun (the second time is here), World of Guns was covered very positively in one of the more popular (and, uniquely, politics-free) US firearm culture blogs, The Firearm Blog. This, I think, reflects its unique position: it lies somewhere between being a hardcore simulator, a casual game for proverbial CSGO fans, and a real, viable engineering reference and teaching aid (The Firearm Blog editor notes that he actually used the game as a reference for repairing old firearms). The effort put into the simulation library seems sizeable to say the least - developers list "150+ models with 19 000 individual parts".

Here is its Russian-language article - see the ref section, it got more coverage in the Russian-language gaming press, including a segment on a TV show about videogames: Link. Also, the game seems to be reasonably popular in terms of user base (Steam Spy lists around 2.2 million installs, and Google Store lists "1 to 5 million" installs for the earlier version of the app; plus about a million users total on VK.com and Facebook).

To be honest, being an avid firearm enthusiast, I personally used the app a lot over the years. And I think it's extremely unique, sort of like Microsoft Flight Simulator of firearms. Pity it has little coverage, again probably because of its awkward position between casual and niche markets.

So, these are my points for creating a stub / small article with a video game template. What do you think?

I'm not familiar enough with those sources to judge them, but blogs, even if popular, are unlikely to be accepted as reliable. --Michig (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Interstellar (band)

The article Interstellar (band) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article does not assert the importance or notability of the subject.

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. JayCodec (talk) 11:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Edi Fitzroy

On 6 March 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Edi Fitzroy, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ana da Silva
added links pointing to Rough Trade and DGC
The Lighthouse (Ana da Silva album)
added a link pointing to Sequencer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Liar (band)

I'd sure appreciate if you could all the supposed significant coverage of this supposed notable band... GiantSnowman 20:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Score (2Cellos album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classic FM. 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) 10:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies Regarding AfD for Parvardigar (Pete Townshend song)

I just wanted to apologize for the confusion on the AfD for Parvardigar (Pete Townshend song) as I intended to ping both of the users who provided "keep" votes, but I accidentally copied and pasted your username instead. I wanted to apologize directly to you regarding this matter. Aoba47 (talk) 18:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Please don't worry about it. --Michig (talk) 19:01, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental reverts

I was slightly amused to see your edit summary [1], because yesterday I had a very similar experience. a tiny slip of my finger as my mouse cursor was moving over the "rollback" link reverted 24 edits to an editor's user page, covering nearly six months. It just seems a funny coincidence that you should do almost the same to me such a short time after I did it to someone else, that's all. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Easily done with those instant rollback links on the Watchlist. When your mousepad starts scrolling for no apparent reason it doesn't help. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a setting in preferences to remove the rollback link - I never (normally) do rollbacks without going into the page history first anyway. --Michig (talk) 15:59, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Comprehensive List of Dizzy Games

Hi, Michig.

Thank you for editing my list!

However, I do not completely comprehend your comment: "declined speedy deletion - A7 does not cover computer games".

What is "A7"?

Best regards,

Dobrescumihai19 (talk) 10:57, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor tagged the article for speedy deletion, citing criterion A7 ("A7. No indication of importance (people, animals, organizations, web content, events)". Since this list is not dealing with one of the topics covered by that criterion, the speedy deletion was declined. --Michig (talk) 11:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

Can you add page protection to List of longest-running United States television series A user keeps using multiple IPs to add a made up show to the list of longest running shows.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 03:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a warning on the IP's talk page and added the page to my watchlist. If it continues I will look at protecting, but the level of activity on this article doesn't really suggest protection is needed at the moment. This has also been added to other articles so is a wider problem. --Michig (talk) 07:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

22-20s

Hi - noticed that you were an admin. A user called Duker22 repeatedly keeps adding in a fake band member into the infobox on 22-20s - they've been using this account since November last year for this sole purpose, but this has also been going on for several years, yet no one seems to pick up on it. They previously did the same under the name Piratofguitar in 2014 adding the same names. Very odd/sad. Surely they should be banned as it clearly a vandalism-only account - and maybe the page protected somehow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.106.190 (talk) 13:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the page to my watchlist. There's not enough disruptive activity at the moment to justify page protection, but I'll try to keep an eye on it. --Michig (talk) 20:53, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done it again - it's a vandalism account, so surely at least the account should be blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.207.97 (talk) 23:24, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chidera Okolie for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chidera Okolie 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/Chidera Okolie (2nd nomination) 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.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 07:31, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback needed: a tweak to professional boxing records

This is a message I am leaving for users who regularly edit the record tables for boxers, or at least those keeping an eye on them. I have proposed to ditch "Professional debut" from the #1 fight slot on most contemporary records, and it would be appreciated if you could comment at the WikiProject Boxing talk page. Much thanks. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:08, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Black Art or The Black Ark?

Hi, looking at Perry's article, I see a section about a studio named The Black Ark, but not Black Art. Did he have another not yet discussed in the article, or was that a misreading? LadyofShalott 15:09, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The studio was the Black Ark, but his record label was named 'Black Art' - see here. --Michig (talk) 15:12, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Since that is not clear (and not my forte at all), would you mind making that explicit in the article. As it stands, it is only in the infobox, hence my confusion. LadyofShalott 15:19, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, will do. --Michig (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! LadyofShalott 15:24, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heathcote Williams

Are you off, Michig? Another unverified bucket-kicker. Bound to be plenty of obits. Wwwhatsup (talk) 04:28, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sourced now, although the article needs a lot of work. --Michig (talk) 18:30, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI regarding a user you previously blocked

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. LibStar (talk) 00:45, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding notability

Hello, I was wondering if I could have your opinion on this song "All These Kisses". Are the chart listings it mentions reputable? Clearly, the topic fails to meet GNG but typically a placement on a notable chart usually overrules that. I do not want to waste time AfDing it if the charts are notable, and I consider you an inclusionist. With that being said, if you think it fails to meet our standards, I'll feel more confident in AfDing it.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:35, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The sourcing in the article is poor, and I didn't find anything better (this seems to be the best coverage out there and is pretty awful), and as a 2017 release if there's coverage out there I would expect to find it from a Google search. The charts are, in my opinion, garbage, and don't confer any sort of notability. As a single-track download only, I would argue that it isn't even a single, but that's a separate issue. I don't see anything there that's worth saving - I guess it could be redirected as an alternative to deletion (although if that's contested it may need to go to AfD anyway). --Michig (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:James

Please note that the articles for Jimone and James II state that these are EPs. The template should reflect the articles, not set its own agenda. Therefore, they belong in the "EP" section, not the "Singles" section, unless there is consensus to change the articles. Please discuss at Template talk:James#EPs. --woodensuperman 10:52, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You made an edit without explaining it using an edit summary. I reverted it with an explanation in the edit summary. Per WP:BRD your next step should have been to discuss it, not revert it. The articles do not show that those releases are EPs - they have just been edited to appear that way by Wikipedia editors, who are not reliable sources. --Michig (talk) 10:54, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seven years of adminship, today.

Wishing Michig a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 01:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It feels like it's been longer. --Michig (talk) 17:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations! Popular music is my main WP interest, and you are the most important admin in this area, IMHO. Keep on keepin' on. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:03, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Michig (talk) 06:54, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thread on my talk

I responded to you and then immediately archived it, which was silly. If you need me, please {{ping}} me here and I'll see. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:46, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Admin confidence survey

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Calton

Remember this? Apparently the user in question perceives that a bit of civility would indeed hurt him. 113.210.183.18 (talk) 11:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Abbas (actor)

Hi, the above article has just been renominated at AFD despite the previous AFD resulting in keep on 2 September. Three weeks doesn't seem long enough. Its the same nominator, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 17:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

I have closed the Afd for Skytap so it ca nbe relisted it in a simpler and clearer way, as requested in the discussion. If it is, please enter your comment again. DGG ( talk ) 22:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Radio 1 Sessions (Inspiral Carpets album)

Hi Michig, I'm sure you remember the discussion we had at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio 1 Sessions (Inspiral Carpets album), about whether there would be reviews in the music press at the time, and I said I would look in the British Library when I was back in the UK. Well, I was in there last week, and had a good look through the music mags and this is what I found:

  • NME, Mojo, Uncut – nothing
  • Melody Maker – included in the weekly "Bits & Bobs" round-up, which means one or two lines on the rest of the week's releases... rated 3/5 and the review says "the Hammond-heavy Inspirals sound a tad dated these days".
  • Q – also 3/5... "This collection confirms that the pure feral belligerence of 'I Want You' and the magical 'This Is How It Feels' have aged surprisingly well. However, most of these sessions sound curiously hollow, like a donut with an unnaturally large hole."

The library don't have copies of Select, and Vox had ceased publication by this time (their last issue was June 1998).

I haven't yet checked the four likely newspapers for music reviews (Times, Telegraph, Guardian and Independent) but I still think it's unlikely they would have reviewed the album – they normally only have space to review four or five albums per week, and this album wouldn't have been one of the week's major releases.

But anyway, we now have two (short) reviews from reliable sources, albeit lukewarm ones – enough to ask for a WP:REFUND and restore the article? Richard3120 (talk) 14:46, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking. Difficult one - a couple of reviews from decent sources added to the article would likely have been enough to stop it getting deleted, but there's probably limited scope for expanding the content beyond what was there before. --Michig (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's pretty much what I think – there might just not be enough to make a decent article just yet. I'll have a look in the newspapers and see if there is anywhere else that might provide something. But for now I'll put it on the back-burner – I have the citations noted down so I can provide them whenever necessary. Richard3120 (talk) 17:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Michig:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – North America1000 14:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Thanks! --Michig (talk) 14:42, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

M1717

The contributor have launched the first speedy deletion, but for that case the AfD is more suitable. So, I have replaced the template by a better. I haven't made a point. I challenge Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi's clausure. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GB fan explained me that. --Panam2014 (talk) 14:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Marley

Could you kindly explain why you reverted my caption of Bob Marley's photo at Reggae? You don't agree that he is a legend?--DanJazzy (talk) 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We need to write with a neutral point of view. Superlatives such as 'legend' are not appropriate. --Michig (talk) 20:58, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting. Elvis Presley is described in Wikipedia as "one of the most significant cultural icons of the 20th century". Michael Jackson is the "King of Pop". Why is describing them in superlatives OK but not Bob Marley?--DanJazzy (talk) 00:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first is fact, not a superlative. The second was Jackson's nickname - the article doesn't say that he was actually the King of pop. --Michig (talk) 07:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Bob Marley is described as an "international icon" right here at Wikipedia. can we therefore use the caption "iconic reggae artist Bob Marley"?--DanJazzy (talk) 23:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you start a discussion on the article's talk page to try to reach consensus for a change. --Michig (talk) 07:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quesiton

Why close the Electronic Arts Studios AfD before anybody had a chance to comment? Do I have to officially nominate it for deletion only and mention merging as an alternative? If not, then I'll just renominate it, so I fail to see how your actions were helpful at all. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:26, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you think a merge is appropriate, you shouldn't take an article to AfD. AfD is only for articles that you believe should be deleted. You stated 'it should just be merged with Electronic Arts', so you clearly didn't believe outright deletion was appropriate. If you think an article should be merged you need to add mergeto and mergefrom tags to the articles and start a discussion on the target article's talk page. This is spelled out quite clearly at WP:AfD. --Michig (talk) 22:34, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Michig. 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)[reply]

RfC: location of Foxwoods Resort Casino (MOS:BOXING)

Greetings. There has been extensive discussion at Talk:WikiProject Boxing regarding the location of Foxwoods Resort Casino, and how it should be specified in MOS:BOXING. To form a consensus on this, your opinion as an active member of the Project is essential and highly welcome. The current discussion can be found here. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:16, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Drunken Boxing

Hello Michig, You mentioned that the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunken_boxing was not very good. Could you please give me some issues I could improve? Thank you, Tomehr

The main issue is sourcing - most of the article content is not supported by citations. --Michig (talk) 16:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ChicaneChilled.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ana del Rey

Hallo, when you add a bolded alternative name, like Anita del Rey here, please remember to provide access from that name - a redirect (as here, now done), or a hatnote, or a dab page entry as appropriate. It helps the readers, and helps avoid a future careless editor creating a duplicate article at the other name. Thanks. PamD 10:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fighting back against Johnpacklambert

He has become an exceedingly zealous over delete and is harming the spirit and ease of functionality of Wikipedia and is being highly disruptive.

I have fought back and beat him back on two article deletion pushes, and I will continue to fight him.

Thanks for your efforts. Rsarlls (talk) 23:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas Patrick Ward, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newcastle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott A. Lewis

Is it your opinion that WP:NOTNEWS means that newspapers are not used to support GNG?  Does GNG say that "local and routine sourcing" should be discounted?  I'm seeing consensus (where consensus is a function of the WP:N "generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow") that the evidence is that this topic passes GNG.  Editors agreed, while trying to discount it, that "local coverage exists".  Editors objected that "this is a county sheriff", but we have no WP:NOT guideline to exclude county sheriffs.  Where and how have we ended up with a loss of content contributions?  Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 14:26, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your first two questions - no, and no. My close merely reflected consensus, and should not be taken as an endorsement of any of the views expressed in the discussion. Inclusion of subjects with primarily local coverage (that is, local to the subject) will always be subject to differences of opinions. As closer of the discussion I had to go with the consensus that was apparent. --Michig (talk) 14:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jack Moran (boxer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Johnson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail re Andy Diagram

Hello, Michig. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. 78.148.198.89 (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michig - thanks for your edits - I rarely edit on Wikipedia and so am not up to speed on etiquette, my apologies. The photograph in question is jointly owned by myself and my friend Alan Gregson as he took it on my Olympus Stylus at the gig and I was next to him. So it belongs to me but he took it. He is happy for me to have uploaded it as mine but I just wanted to give him a credit for it too. We are both actually personal friends of Andy Diagram and really disliked the photo that was previously uploaded but only just figured out how to change it. I've also added a lot of little bits and pieces on this page too that were out of date or just wrong. Andy doesn't want his real name or full date of birth up there though. Kay Dickinson 78.148.198.89 (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun Golden

Can you migrate the deleted article, including references, on Shaun Golden to the list at Sheriff of Monmouth County, New Jersey. You have to add something in the comment field about where you moved it from to maintain the edit history. Thanks. --RAN (talk) 22:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the article, merged sourced content to Sheriff of Monmouth County, New Jersey, and redirected it there. If any of the unsourced content can usefully be incorporate (with appropriate sources added) it's there in the article history. --Michig (talk) 15:03, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When there are only a few sentences, it doesn't make sense to have full articles, when they can be handled in a chart for the position they held. We do the same thing for television episodes. Sum up each episode in a few sentences. Thanks! --RAN (talk) 15:55, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mark E. Smith

I'm too lazy to type it all out again, in one form or another. I have commented on the ANI thread but also at the talk pages of Ceoil and Ghmyrtle before I realised that thread had been opened. Can we please drop the thread and get back to talking: this seems mostly to be a case of "big beasts" clashing antlers or tusks or whatever but we all know that it is ultimately a content dispute and both can and should be resolved at the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 01:06, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a content dispute. I tried to discuss it with him, and he started throwing insults around. His behaviour is the issue here. --Michig (talk) 08:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kem Cetinay

Hi, Michig - your closing statement for the above AfD indicates that you may have misunderstood my suggestion to merge a single sentence about the album before deleting the not notable as a standalone BLP. Regardless, delete and merge is done all the time. I was not suggesting to merge Kem Cetinay, I felt it should be deleted and still do, and so did another editor. I'm not sure why you decided against 2 valid arguments to delete in favor of the single questionable argument to keep in light of the substance of the delete arguments. It seems to me that at the very least, a no-consensus decision would have been more appropriate than keep. Please reconsider your close now that I've explained my intention for nominating was to delete the standalone. Atsme📞📧 15:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where in your nomination ("Fails WP:N (music) as a stand alone biography, but as Chris & Kem duo, was #15 on UK singles music chart, so merge") you indicated that only a single sentence should be merged. Merge is incompatible with deletion as any content merged to another article would require the original article history to be retained for attribution, and if anyone is merging then deleting, they shouldn't be. After three weeks of discussion with only one editor expressing an opinion in favour of outright deletion I don't feel the close was inappropriate. No consensus wouldn't be unreasonable but would have the same end result. You are of course still free to propose a merge on the article's talk page. --Michig (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think the following supplement may explain it...Wikipedia:Delete_or_merge. Thank you. Atsme📞📧 15:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Atsme asked me to review this discussion. We have been working together in trying to clarify merging in AFDs. My understanding is that she wanted to delete the article first, but would have been willing to accept a merge if that was the consensus. To be fair that wasn't terribly obvious from her opening statement, it perhaps should have said Delete as it fails WP:N (music) as a stand alone biography, but as Chris & Kem duo, was #15 on UK singles music chart, so there may be potential for a merge or something a little clearer. As to your close it seems valid to me, the only comment I would make is that a no consensus close would make it easier to open a merge discussion on the talk page as it doesn't require consensus to change. AIRcorn (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Wayne Lee

We had edited down the page Jordan Wayne Lee based on all of the comments in the discussion. The sources and credibility and content was edited down and revised. Then you went in and deleted it but those who were involved had made edits and changes to maintain the credibility of the article. I am not sure why you decided to delete it. The sources were all credible and everyone seemed to agree with that after multiple edits. Can you please explain why you deleted the article? I would very much appreciate it if you would repost. Jwl220d (talk) 01:15, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted because there was consensus to do so in the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Wayne Lee. --Michig (talk) 07:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

added Lourdes†
removed AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about deleted page

Hi,

I'm not a Wikipedia expert but had a quick question about Keiana Cave's deleted page. I was watching Good Morning America yesterday morning and saw Keiana being interviewed by Robin Roberts (one of the most influential news anchors). Keiana was being honored by abc for her tremendous scientific research for Black History Month, and running a multimillion dollar research lab at 19. Not accusing of deleting the page because she is a black female trailblazer in STEM, just noticed that you deleted her page right around the time she was on national television. She is clearly notable, otherwise I wouldn't have googled her immediately after seeing her making national headlines. She needs to have an advocate as a black female trying to make a name for herself.

In terms of notability, she definitely has it, so on behalf of the entire black female community, could you put her page back up? I support Keiana, as will thousands of others. She didn't deserve to have her page taken down. As a viewer of Good Morning America, I certainly want to learn more about Keiana through her Wikipedia page.

Thank you.

Emily

EmilySanders1990 (talk) 21:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The page was deleted because the Articles for Deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keiana Cavé) had run for its full 7 days and there was clear consensus to delete based on failure to satisfy our accepted notability criteria. If you can identify evidence of satisfying those criteria I would be happy to look into it further. --Michig (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thomas_Bond_House

You closed this with no explanation of how you arrived at keep. Can you provide your reasoning? There is no known coverage to meet GNG and just vague claims that it is "historic". MB 15:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

per clear consensus in the AfD. --Michig (talk) 15:31, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Glad this is the only COI il ever have!

Good evening, just wanted to say thanks for sticking up for the draft Pat O'Keeffe article im attempting to implement via the COI process, completely agree with the points you made on the talk page, but i know voicing my opinion on this is just going to get other editors backs up, due to the COI angle and my inexperience. It's certainly getting rather tedious now, fortunately im drafting other articles, improving all the time and learning how Wikipedia works now. Kind regards Okeeffemarc (talk) 22:10, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Evening, i left you a message on the Talk page. Seeing as you have said you think my draft would be better than whats already on the main space and don't share the other editors reservations, would you be happy to publish it? It would be much appreciated. If not, please let me know. Kind regards, Okeeffemarc (talk) 19:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, must have missed that, Is your latest version at Draft:Pat O'Keeffe? Might have to look at doing a history merge with the current article, which isn't something I've done before, but I can take a look tomorrow (busy watching boxing and football this evening). --Michig (talk) 20:05, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, yeah it is. That would be much appreciated! Enjoy your evening 👍🏻 Okeeffemarc (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't get round to it yesterday - your version is now at Pat O'Keeffe. --Michig (talk) 19:48, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Special Barnstar
Thank you for helping me with this Long running COI marathon. you're a star! 🤟🏻 Okeeffemarc (talk) 20:01, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Krzysztof_Kapulkin

Hi there,

I unfortunately was not able to participate in the above deletion discussion as I was out of the country with limited access to internet. I strongly disagree with the comments made in the deletion discussion and I firmly believe the page should be restored. Here are my reasons:

1) David Eppstein acknowledges that Dr. Kapulkin is "off to a promising start" but claims that WP:PROF#C1 is not satisfied. However, pure mathematics is a discipline where publications and citations are generally much fewer than Dr. Eppstein's field of computer science (http://www.ams.org/profession/leaders/culture/CultureStatement06.pdf). Despite this, Dr. Kapulkin has numerous publications with a total of nearly 300 citations (https://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=0Wkji3IAAAAJ&hl=en).

2) As stated in the deleted article, Dr. Kapulkin was a member of the Special Year on Univalent Foundations at the Institute for Advanced Study (https://www.math.ias.edu/sp/univalent/participants). In the IAS link, it can be seen that he was one of only 13 mathematicians in the world to participate in both terms of the Special Year. This, along with several subsequent publications of his (also listed in the deleted article), makes him one of the early pioneers of an entirely new approach to the foundations of mathematics.

3) Also stated in the deleted article, is the work Dr. Kapulkin has done in crytography (https://www.cosic.esat.kuleuven.be/ct-rsa2018/AcceptedPapers.html). Getting a paper accepted at the RSA conference is "highly competitive, with thousands of submissions for a few hundred speaking positions" as noted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_Conference#cite_ref-Barnes_2014_12-1.

4) Finally, Nsk92 writes "WP:TOOSOON, a very recent PhD, nothing to indicate passing WP:PROF yet." The remark of "a very recent PhD" is inaccurate, as Dr. Kapulkin completed his PhD four years ago in 2014, enough time to write another dissertation. It is more appropriate to say "a recent professor", as he joined the full-time faculty at the University of Western Ontario in 2017 (also stated in the deleted article). Regarding the claim that there is "nothing to indicate passing WP:PROF yet", I trust that reasons 1-3 above demonstrate this claim to be false.

In conclusion, Dr. Kapulkin is certainly notable and the Wikipedia article should be restored. The entire deletion discussion came about when Dr. Eppstein put a WP:TOOSOON tag on the page I created. I believe that this was due to his misunderstanding of the culture of publication in mathematics. As explained above in the AMS note, publication and citation rates in mathematics are very different from other fields. Mobequ (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROF#C1 can be satisfied by showing sufficiently-cited work. Working in an area with fewer publications and citations does not change this criterion, so consensus within the AfD discussion will need to be respected. I would recommend that you wait until one or more criteria of WP:PROF can be shown to be satisfied and then look at having an article. --Michig (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I Putu Pager Wirajaya

Hello Michig. I want to recreate I Putu Pager Wirajaya page that deleted before. I already collected the source that provide it and also not fails WP:NFOOTY because he had played 14 games with Persikad Depok in 2017 Liga 2 on loan from Bali United. Can't I recreate the page? Or I must wait until he has a debut in Liga 1? Regards Wira rhea (talk) 23:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that he would need to have played in a fully professional league to satisfy the notability guidelines - is Liga 2 fully professional? --Michig (talk) 18:38, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think so. Because, as mentioned here, Liga 1 and Liga 2 were professional and Liga 3 was amateur league. What do you think? If you think it's not fully professional, then I'll wait until he make debut in Liga 1. Regards Wira rhea (talk) 22:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The football project maintains a list of leagues considered fully professional at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues - it appears that Liga 1 is considered fully professional, but not Liga 2. --Michig (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, I guess I'll have to wait until he get a debut in Liga 1. Thank you. Regards Wira rhea (talk) 00:06, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kyle Newman (speedway rider), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gorican (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

added 331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG
removed Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

  • Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
  • Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
  • The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
  • The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

  • A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing SNG

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the DRN regarding Resolution on edits for the WP:NBOX criterion #3. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Wikipedia:Notability (sports)".The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Notability (sports). Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --RonSigPi (talk) 23:15, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Linkspam for an article needing deletion

Hello, Michig. I wanted to mention Kaif Raza Khan Qadri. The article was nominated for AfD twice, and both results were delete (see here and here), but a user who claims to be the son of the article subject has continued spamming the wikilink for the article on other articles. It technically should have been deleted already, but I guess nobody has gotten around to it.
For reference, could you direct me to a more appropriate noticeboard to ask that articles for deletion are deleted? Or is a talkpage message to individual admins (like what I'm doing now) sufficient? MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:40, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted as a recreation of an article deleted at AfD and salted it. For a speedy response WP:AN would be your best bet - I'm often busy doing other things so may not be able to respond quickly. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 16:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

  • The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
  • A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

  • AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
  • When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
  • The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
  • There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
  • There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
  • It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

  • A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:00, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).

Administrator changes

added Pbsouthwood • TheSandDoctor
readded Gogo Dodo
removed Andrevan • Doug • EVula • KaisaL • Tony Fox • WilyD

Bureaucrat changes

removed Andrevan • EVula

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.

Technical news

  • Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
  • Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon () in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.

Miscellaneous

  • Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tom the Great Sebastian

I had so much fun writing that and a few related articles, and I learned a lot from it. One of these things that makes one love Wikipedia and the opportunity it provides to publish information. I showed my kids the article, and some pictures of sound systems, and then we listened to Dillinger, haha--now they now how to spell "New York". Drmies (talk) 01:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I find writing about a subject is the best way to learn about it, as researching sources finds a lot of interesting detail. Sounds systems are a key part of Jamaican music, but relatively under-documented, so it's great to have that article. Unfortunately my time has been very limited recently, but I hope to get back onto creating more articles when I can (there's always more that I want to learn). --Michig (talk) 15:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of animals of The Edge Chronicles

Hey, it looks like List of animals of The Edge Chronicles didn't get deleted when you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of plants of The Edge Chronicles yesterday. Something about the bundled nom probably. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - now fixed. --Michig (talk) 14:25, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

added Sro23
readded KaisaL • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
  • Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Freddie Mills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bruce Woodcock (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Fu

I wanted to add a recent news article from an artist Frank Fu, but found that I could not create a page as the page was apparently deleted in the past. There is a message saying to contact you, so here I am. I am a contemporary arts historian and would like to work on this page. Would you mind undoing the deletion? Happy to work with you. Yours, CuriousBone (talk) 11:55, 17 August 2018 (PST)

@CuriousBone: I've had a look, and there is a new draft article at Draft:Frank Fu - it may be better for you to contribute to that rather than start from scratch. --Michig (talk) 06:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Michig: Thanks for your directions. How do I make a draft into a regular page? Sorry to sound like a newbie, as I did not grow up in the digital age, but can edit a physical manuscript much better. I appreciate your time - --CuriousBone (talk) 08:57, 19 August 2018 (PST)
Please see the instructions at Wikipedia:Drafts#Publishing_a_draft. If it doesn't look obvious what to do, feel free to get back to me. --Michig (talk) 16:07, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Michig: The instructions are confusing as I am having trouble visualizing what is happening. Is there a YouTube video I can learn to do this by? - --CuriousBone (talk) 09:36, 19 August 2018 (PST)
I've had a look at the draft article and it isn't significantly different to the version that was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. As it stands, if the draft was moved to article space it would be eligible for speedy deletion, so it could really do with more work to show that Fu is notable before it's ready to go back into mainspace. --Michig (talk) 06:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary

Wishing Michig a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Kpgjhpjm 01:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Administrators' newsletter – September 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz
renamed Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

added Amorymeltzer • Mr. Stradivarius • MusikAnimal • MSGJ • TheDJ • Xaosflux

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

Technical news

  • Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
  • Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
  • Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:23, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfroCine: Join us for the Months of African Cinema in October!

Greetings!

You are receiving this message because your username or portal was listed as a participant of a WikiProject that is related to Africa, the Carribean, Cinema or theatre.

This is to introduce you to a new Wikiproject called AfroCine. This new project is dedicated to improving the Wikipedia coverage of the history, works, people, places, events, etc, that are associated with the cinema, theatre and arts of Africa, African countries, the carribbean, and the diaspora. If you would love to be part of this or you're already contributing in this area, kindly list your name as a participant on the project page here.

Furthermore, In the months of October and November, the WikiProject is organizing a global on-wiki contest and edit-a-thon tagged: The Months of African Cinema. If you would love to join us for this exciting event, also list your username as a participant for this event here. In preparation for the contest, please do suggest relevant articles that need to be created or expanded in different countries, during this event!

If you have any questions, complaints, suggestions, etc., please reach out to me personally on my talkpage! Cheers!--Jamie Tubers (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Page - Keiana Cave

Hi, sorry if this is the wrong format- I’m new to Wikipedia. I made an account because I’m writing an article on Systemic Bias around young black female scientists. I’ll start by saying that I’m not accusing you of anything, and I read the Verifiability and Notability Criteria. Keiana Cave meets all of the Notability Criteria, as she has been (and continues to be) covered by dozens of reputable sources and has a major following. I was actually planning on writing another article about Keiana for Forbes when I noticed her page deleted. I read through the deletion discussion, and yes- it is irrefutable that at least 4 people voted for deletion. However, their reasoning was generally “she’s only notable because of Forbes.” Anyone who googles her will know that she was recognized for raising $1.2 million from Chevron to save the world from oil spills. At 16. They claimed that she is a one-hit wonder, but Entrepreneur Magazine just recently put her on their Young Millionaires List for selling that company. She was just In Glamour Magazine’s College Woman of the Year for her excellent work fighting for gender and diversity rights. I just saw her on Good Morning America fighting, again, for diversity. If this amazing woman’s page needs to be deleted, then so does Ann Makosinski, Olivia Hallisey, Deepika Kurup, and Eesha Khare (since all they’re known for is “winning science fairs and being in Forbes”). Again, I’m not accusing of anything. Can you honestly say that being in Forbes, MTV, Glamour, Good Morning America, MIT news, Entrepreneur Mag, UPenn Wharton, ABC news, (dozens more you get the point) isn’t notable enough? If not, please provide reasoning outside of “all she did was win a science fair and get into Forbes” since there are clearly dozens of other “science fair burnouts” with Wikipedia Pages. 

Natsportelli12 (talk) 08:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keiana Cavé - I only closed the AfD discussion, where there was a clear consensus for deletion. In the absence of any arguments for keeping there, deletion was the only possible outcome. If the situation has changed and you believe that she now meets our accepted notability criteria, if you could put forward some examples of coverage to evidence this I would be happy to restore the article to draft space for you to work on. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 08:47, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick response, and for reading my long message. I understand now that you only closed the discussion, I just wish that I would’ve found this while the discussion was still active. I linked what I have seen of her recently (again, sorry if the formatting is wrong). these don’t include the articles that were cited to her deleted page.

Entrepreneur Mag, sold her company this year, using the acquisition money for next venture in pharmaceutical industry

Glamour Woman of the Year (she’s #5)

another Glamour article, speaking about Women’s Rights and “me too”

Latest TEDx Talk

ABC Good Morning America Feature- Diversity Advocate

Referred to as a notable University of Michigan Student

Thanks again for taking the time. Also, if you can’t access the older articles (6+ months ago) from her deleted page, feel free to ask and I’ll link those. Natsportelli12 (talk) 10:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the deleted article to Draft:Keiana Cavé for you to work on. Given the previous deletion it might be worth going through WP:AFC when you feel it's ready to return to mainspace. Regards. --Michig (talk) 17:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note from dcw2003

I have no problems with keeping the headings simpler and fewer if you prefer, though I believe longer headings give the reader an overview of important content which they would ordinarily have to struggle through paragraphs of text to find. The loss and regaining of titles is the single most important index in a boxer's timeline, so I include this information as well as the date this occurs. Sorry about not using British dates, I realized I was doing that, and appreciate your corrections. The "travelled" and "defence" changes are words that appear red for misspellings in the English wiki, and I grasped quickly I was respelling legitimate English spellings, though of course they look wrong to an American eye and with the red spelling filter, the impulse to change them is automatic. I included the BBofC in titles, because, in some instances, Mason lost his BBofC title, but retained his EBU title, at least according to the newspaper articles I found. I appreciate your use of British newspaper archives, but I added some detail to his American fights as I have American newspaper archives, and Mason's matches in America drew an important, if disappointingly small audience due to the depression. I realize you did a good job on the article, but believe at least some of my additions, particularly Mason's place of death add information important to the reader. I need to look through "History" more often, and will try to do that in the future. Good luck to you! Thank-you for your changes. dcw2003 ~~

ITN recognition for Chas Hodges

On 23 September 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Chas Hodges, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 10:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ebersson/Zanussi/Lofthus

I noticed you removed the proposed deletion of Ebersson/Zanussi/Lofthus. The reason you gave was "deproded - several notable members so satisfies WP:NMUSIC". Is it your understanding that notability is inherited? Do you believe that if individuals are notable, then the bands they join are therefore necessarily notable?
Vmavanti (talk) 23:30, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NMUSIC states: "Musicians or ensembles may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria...6. Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.". This is an accepted community guideline. Proposed deletion is for uncontroversial deletion candidates only - an article that satisfies an accepted notability guideline is not a suitable candidate for proposed deletion. --Michig (talk) 05:54, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But you didn't answer my question. Is it your argument that because one of those people is notable, then the group must be notable and the article must be kept?
Vmavanti (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My argument is that an ensemble comprising three notable musicians satisfies WP:NMUSIC and therefore is clearly not suitable for proposed deletion. Whether it should be kept as a standalone article or merged somewhere is another matter. --Michig (talk) 13:58, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't find enough coverage to justify keeping this, and have now added a mention of this album to the Jon Eberson article, which I think makes this article redundant, so I have listed it at AfD. --Michig (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

dcw2003 responds to edits to Sid Smith

Dcw2003 (talk)BoxRec is certainly a reliable source for major bouts, and I only use it for those bouts, particularly when it quotes the newspapers from which it took the boxing information it recorded. I only quote it for dates and places of bouts. You delete my work before I complete it, please wait till I complete it. My headings highlight major events in the boxer's bio, particularly when they took or lost titles, which are difficult to find otherwise, but essential to any reader familiar with boxing. I have over twenty years as a professional writer, and wish you would learn a bit from my edits, as I try to learn from yours. Sorry about the date format, I fixed it quickly, before you deleted it. Jimmy Wilde was the most talented boxer Smith fought. Please don't delete my small paragraph on him or his photo.

If you are making a major edit to an article, please use the Inuse template, otherwise nobody will know that you're in the middle of an edit. Your headings often contain too much detail. Boxrec is not a reliable source as, like Wikipedia, it is sourced from user contributions (and often contains incorrect information) - start a discussion on the Boxing WikiProject talk page if you need confirmation of this as it has been discussed in the past. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 16:22, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which has been dedicated to improving contents that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora.

This is a global online edit-a-thon, which is happening in at least 5 language editions of Wikipedia, including the English Wikipedia! Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section, if you haven't done so already.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing Users who are able to achieve the following:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Country Winners
  • Diversity winner
  • High quality contributors
  • Gender-gap fillers
  • Page improvers
  • Wikidata Translators

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:50, 03 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

Administrator changes

added Justlettersandnumbers • L235
removed Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes

added Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes

removed Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
  • Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
  • The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
  • Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
  • Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Component Library for Cross Platform

Please restore Component Library for Cross Platform. The article had had a previously contested prod and prod should have been declined per WP:PROD. You may note my edits on this page have previously been vandalised by anon IPs. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:39, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. Thanks for pointing it out. --Michig (talk) 09:56, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Malkawi

Hello, I wish you are good. For the deletion request of the page Ali Malkawi, I think the person the page have been written about does not match the standards of notability of persons of Academic career which are followed here in English Wikipedia. هارون الرشيد العربي (talk) 14:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Please specify a deletion rationale when placing a prod tag on an article. If you still wish to pursue deletion, you will need to take this to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Codie award AfD

Hey there. You were the closing admin on the recent AfD for the Codie award, and per this discussion, I wanted to bring up an argument for notability that wasn't made during the nomination. The Codie was, back in the '80s and early '90s, the premier award in the game industry. See coverage like this, without even digging into old magazines or newspaper archiving services: [2], [3], [4]. In addition, the Software Publishers Association—one of the most important industry bodies during the '80s and early '90s—has now been left without even a redirect page. This is a real loss for WikiProject Video Games. If possible, I'd like to see the Codie award's page restored. Thanks for your time. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:58, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a real shame that nobody in WikiProject Video Games had it on their watchlist and noticed that it had been nominated for deletion in the two weeks the AfD was open, during which there was unanimous consensus to delete among participants in the discussion. I think it may need more than the three sources you have identified, but I have restored it to Draft:Codie award for you to work on. --Michig (talk) 06:24, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I agree that it's a shame—I would've mentioned it myself had I known, but I only noticed it once the redlink removals hit my watchlist. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:05, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Per a suggestion on the WPVG talk page, I decided to convert the CODiE page into a section of a new article for the Software and Information Association (formerly Software Publishers Association) as a whole. It's now at Draft:Software and Information Industry Association. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Does it look ready to be mainspaced? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:34, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly looks better than the article that was deleted. If you want to move it to mainspace, I have no objection. --Michig (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome. Thanks again for your help. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I also come here because I saw red links to Software and Information Industry Association being mass-removed. Not your fault, Michig, but as the SIIA is very obviously notable this was a clear misnomination - unfortunately, this is not the first time I see this happening and it is really worrying me, because it shows that our procedures are not fully up to the task if a few delete votes by clueless or careless editors and the temporary absence of more knowledgeable editors are enough to let articles about notable topics slip through... In this case, even the fact that the topic is also covered in other Wikipedias and that there were many incoming links should have given a clue that this might be notable and worth some further investigation...
Wouldn't it make sense to strongly remind the nominator of this AfD to do his homework per WP:BEFORE, otherwise he might make more such nominations in the future?
Anyway, it's good that the article has been restored and is being worked on now.
Michig, as you have the tools to carry out mass-changes, could you please go through the list of edits, where you unlinked the article and related redirects, and reactivate all those links? Given the huge amount of such links (hundreds?), this action would be very tiresome for another editor to perform manually. Thanks and greetings. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware of any tool that would make it easier for me to do this than anyone else. --Michig (talk) 07:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's bad news, I assumed that admins would have tools for batch-processing.
If they don't exist the easiest way to reestablish the links I see would by to revert all your edits where you unlinked them. Given the large amount, are you okay with another editor doing this or wouldn't it be better if you self-revert them? What do you think? --Matthiaspaul (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I just saw that there is a related discussion at Talk:Software and Information Industry Association --Matthiaspaul (talk) 11:24, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy for other editors to add links back. It was a bit of a mess before with the award and the awarding body referred to inconsistently and sometimes multiple links to the same thing within an article, so I don't think all of the links that were there before should be restored.
I've started re-linking. I'm using AWB, I'm building up replacement patterns as I go, which will speed the process up as I get nearer the end. - X201 (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Why are you editing anything other than the list of science fiction short stories? You said it certainly needs work to make it useful. I assume you know what work it needs. Why aren't you doing it? DS (talk) 23:11, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll edit whatever the hell I want to edit. I hope that answers your question. --Michig (talk) 07:30, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jacob's Mouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rough Trade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
  • A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
  • The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

  • Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
  • The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Transcription (novel) - thanks

Thanks for improving the page I created, Transcription (novel)! I really enjoyed the book and I think I need to read it again to really understand what's going on. I thought it should have a page on Wikipedia, a place where people can go for reference while reading the book. I know the page I created wasn't very good but was hoping people would improve it once it was there, just like you did. I'll also try to improve it over time. Cheers, Lena Key (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I would always advise adding a reference to at least one reliable source to any new article you might create, as otherwise they tend to get jumped on by editors looking for unsourced articles to tag for deletion. --Michig (talk) 19:25, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Michig. 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)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Castlecomer (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M83 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Wanderers (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lords of the New Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hey Michig, I see you do a lot of de-wikilinking of deleted articles, which is very important IMO; thanks so much for that good work. I highly recommend you install Twinkle, an automated tool that, among other capabilities, completely automates that process: I have been a heavy user since I installed it. Cheers! UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:14, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do use Twinkle for some things. I'm a little wary of using automated tools to do things like delinking, but I'll consider it next time. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 22:19, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

readded Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz
removed Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

removedDeryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
  • A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
  • A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
  • Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury fight card section

Feel free to answer the fight card question at Talk:Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury. Naue7 (talk) 00:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mishika Chourasia

Greetings. It appears that as soon as you decided to close this AfD with a decision to Delete, someone put up the article again. Perhaps, a bit of salt is needed before things turn tasteless. -The Gnome (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted and salted. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 17:28, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Christian persecution complex

Hi Thank you for closing the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian persecution complex (2nd nomination). There was a merge discussion started at talk page, in the middle of which folks realized it is better to go for a wider discussion at AfD. Now I believe the merger thread should have been closed as moved to other venue but it was kept open, probably no one bothered to close the merger thread that time. Now the afD is closed and the merger thread is still open. What is your opinion on this thread, and if you agree, can you also close this thread, since you had closed this AfD. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:51, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look like there is clear consensus there. It might be better for a fresh pair of eyes to look at it. --Michig (talk) 08:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dingonek deletion discussion

I have a concern about your close at the Dingonek AfD. Evaluating consensus (or lack thereof) involves weighing the strength of the arguments, and I do not feel that the "Keep" !votes adequately addressed the fringe sourcing issues. The WP:NFRINGE guideline states that "A fringe subject (a fringe theory, organization or aspect of a fringe theory) is considered notable enough for a dedicated article if it has been referenced extensively, and in a serious and reliable manner, by major publications that are independent of their promulgators and popularizers". The given sources do not appear independent to be of the subject (the early 1900s sources, as well as the various Cryptid compendiums, appear to be promoting the Dingonek's existence), nor are they "major publications". It is often argued that cryptozoologists are reliable sources for defining and describing cryptids, however this argument conflicts with WP:FRINGE and should be discounted. –dlthewave ☎ 16:04, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimately it comes down to interpretation of the sources and the arguments put forward in the discussion, and there was a real split between people who agreed with your view and people who disagreed - a guideline doesn't override consensus. I think the way to progress this issue as it keeps coming up at AfD may be to try to get agreement on notability guidelines for these sort of subjects. Clearly there are cryptids (and we have a similar problem with paranormal topics) that have been written about a lot, have been the subject of expeditions to try to find them, and are a significant part of different cultures, and at the other end of the spectrum there are cryptids that hardly anyone has written about, nobody has searched for, and have little cultural significance. There seems to be a common argument along the lines that sources discussing cryptids are not reliable sources because they're discussing cryptids, and we would need other sources to establish notability, which is obviously problematic. --Michig (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would disagree with your point that a guideline cannot override local consensus; isn't it the other way around? The WP:FRINGE guideline represents something that the community had already discussed and reached agreement on. If editors would like to change or deprecate that guideline, a deletion discussion is not the place to do it. –dlthewave ☎ 17:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A guideline is a rule of thumb and should only ever be treated as such. It doesn't carry the same weight as a policy. An interpretation of a guideline even less so. --Michig (talk) 17:32, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Now at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 January 9. —Cryptic 23:03, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Dingonek

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Dingonek. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

I'd like to get a few more opinions on this, as a step toward a larger discussion about cryptozoology sourcing. Please don't take this personally. I think that your reading of the arguments was fairly reasonable, but there's a deep difference of opinion in how the guideline should be applied. –dlthewave ☎ 23:04, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well the DRV discussion appears to have descended into an even worse version of the AfD, which I'm not blaming you for, but it's probably not going to result in anything positive. Whether the AfD close gets overturned or not, ideally a reasonable, open-minded and civil discussion would take place to establish at least some rough guidelines for notability of 'cryptids' and creatures of myth and folklore (for which there is clearly some overlap). Hopefully everyone will concede that some of these topics should have articles and that some should not, we really just need to determine where it is appropriate to draw the line, and whether or not the fact that some people might regard some of these as animals that they believe to exist, means that the whole topic falls under WP:FRINGE, which should really be reserved for fringe science theories rather than the stuff of legends and folklore. Unfortunately, looking at the tone and arguments put forward by some of the contributors, and the failure of some to assume that others have acted in good faith, I'm not optimistic that such a discussion is ever likely to achieve a positive outcome. --Michig (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grebo

Grebo
I don't know how to message you otherwise than this?

The edit made to the Grebo page is accurate. the 'grebo' scene did not come about in the late 80s but the late 90s and early 2000s, with nu metal and post punk bands taking the charge of that subculture 

Mikeol1987 (talk) 20:00, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No it didn't. I know some of the people from the original Grebo bands, as half of them were from the same area as me, and the sources contradict your claims. --Michig (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

D/S Alert

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 recently shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. 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 any 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.

Template:Z33

Please be aware that your comments at Deletion Review may be viewed as a violation of the civility requirements that are in place for this topic, which are also standard expectations for any page. Editors should refrain from personal attacks and accusations of POV-pushing. If you have a concern with another user's conduct, please address it on their talk page or at the appropriate noticeboard. –dlthewave ☎ 23:07, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, no, I haven't recently shown an interest in pseudoscience and fringe science, I simply closed an AfD discussion. I'm alarmed that some people apparently can't tell the difference. And while I have clearly been the subject of personal attacks in the DRV discussion:

  • totally unfounded accusation that I was "arguing that cryptozoology source should be treated by Wikipedia as reliable. This is bizarre behavior". I haven't argued for any source to be treated as reliable
  • totally unfounded accusation that I am "a user who edits the dictionary entry they present to back their POV". You can click on the link provided to see that the dictionary definition I referred to was not in any way edited by me
  • accused of being "deep in your trench and squarely aimed at getting these fringe sources on the site", not having argued for a single fringe source to be included on the site
  • accusation of "his own philosophical beliefs have traversed into his closer's hat", despite having expressed no philosphical belief re. cryptozoology or pseudoscience, I merely closed a discussion that had already been relisted twice because there wasn't a consensus, as 'no consensus'
  • accusation of "putting my thumbs on the scale", whatever that means, but it sure sounds like a personal attack

I have merely defended myself against the ridiculous accusations above, as I have every right to, without resorting to incivility. I reject any assertion that I have made any personal attacks and would ask that you provide diffs to evidence this claim or retract it. --Michig (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also notice that you have issued these warnings to editors who have a different view to your own, but not to any of the pro-deletion editors who clearly have made personal attacks and bad faith accusations in that discussion. Perhaps you could explain this too? --Michig (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A few examples:
The last one in particular is an example of you prolonging a bout of name-calling instead of being the bigger person, moving on and limiting discussion to the topic at hand. If the other editor said something off-topic that needed to be addressed, you should have done so on their talk page instead of drawing the DRV discusstion further off-topic. There is no excuse for continuing such a discussion, regardless of how others may have acted. I didn't feel that the conduct of other editors rose to the level of a warning, however you may certainly open a discussion with them if you feel that it has.
I'm sorry that the wording of the template is so dreadful, but you should be aware that you have indeed been participating in a discussion that is under discretionary sanctions. –dlthewave ☎ 13:10, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If an editor expresses a point of view in a discussion, there's no reason not to refer to that as their point of view - a DRV discussion should be all about editors expressing their point of view on the closure of an AfD. This is a totally different situation to accusing someone of editing articles according a POV. The second was an honest observation on someone who brought holocaust denial and creationism into the argument, and made claims about me that were patently not true (see above), which clearly is not an objective or reasonable way to behave. The third is asking an editor who had resorted to personal criticism, unrelated to the AfD discussion in question, to behave better. You seem to want me to let other editors misrepresent my actions and intentions and make unfounded allegations without allowing me to respond to them. I would suggest that since you are involved in the DRV you step back from issuing warnings to people, particularly when you are only issuing them to people who do not support the deletion that you are looking for, while ignoring some exceptionally poor behaviour from people who agree with you, as it could be construed as an attempt to dissuade editors who don't agree with you from contributing to the discussion. --Michig (talk) 13:35, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Either take it to ANI or stop, but please do not derail the deletion discussion with conversation but who said what. If you think a user is making PA's report themSlatersteven (talk) 10:50, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review for Michael Tyrell (poet)

Dear Michig, Would it be possible to considering undeleting the page for Michael Tyrell (poet)? For evidence of notability, please consider that the poet's work has appeared in over 50 journals and numerous anthologies, including some of the most prestigious in America, such as Agni [5], The Paris Review [6], The Yale Review [7], The New Republic [8], the Iowa Review [9] and Ploughshares [10]. Tyrell's poem "Delicatessen" appeared in The Best American Poetry 2015, edited by Sherman Alexie and David Lehman [11], and his first book of poems was reviewed in Publishers Weekly [12] and the Huffington Post [13]. The book received advance praise from noted poets Michael Collier and Elizabeth Spires. Tyrell's poems have been set to music by the Emmy-winner composer Glen Roven, [14], and he edited, with Julia Kasdorf, a well-received and influential anthology of poems called Broken Land: Poems of Brooklyn [[http://www.ralphmag.org/GD/12-poetry-books.html ]], for which he also did a blog column for the "City Room" of The New York Times [https://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/ask-about-poetry-in-brooklyn/ ]. He has been a recipient of the James Merrill House residency fellowship [15] and has biography pages up at the Poetry Foundation website [16] and at [17]. He has read at many venues across the country, including Amherst College [18] twice at his alma mater, the Iowa Writers Workshop: [19] and [20]. He is listed as a notable alumnus of the Iowa Writers' Workshop at [21] and at [22]. Thank you for your kind consideration. Poetreeguide12 (talk) 07:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether any of this would address the issues that led to the article being deleted, but if you feel that it can improved to satisfy the relevant notability guidelines, in particular identification of significant independent coverage in reliable sources, I would be happy to restore the article to draft space for you to work on. Let me know. --Michig (talk) 07:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt reply. It would be great if you could restore the article to draft space so that it can be worked on. I can then attempt to improve the identification of significant independent sources. Poetreeguide12 Poetreeguide12 (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Given that this is a biography of a living person, I would be happier restoring it if you could identify significant independent coverage first. --Michig (talk) 17:32, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).

Administrator changes

added Enterprisey • JJMC89
readded BorgQueen
removed Harro5 • Jenks24 • Graft • R. Baley

Interface administrator changes

removedEnterprisey

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
  • Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

Technical news

  • A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:15, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SupernaturalsPressPhoto.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:57, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SupernaturalsPressPhoto.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:51, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting

Why are you reverting my edits to specific bands' Infoboxes? The Supernaturals are not significant enough to have any images on their article and the Boo Radleys should have an image in their Infobox that does not have a white frame with the band's name on the bottom of it. If no one can find an image for the Boo Radleys that fits the description of what I just said, then it is best to just leave the Infobox without an image. Dean12065 (talk) 12:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Every subject that has an article should have an image if possible. If you believe there should be criteria for which images we do and don't use, you should start a discussion to get consensus on it rather than just removing images based on your personal opinions of bands. Maybe you should take some time to understand what you're doing, and take note of all the warnings on your talk page, rather than ignoring them and continuing to make the same sort of edits. --Michig (talk) 13:00, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your comments on the AfDs, I've closed the majority of them per WP:EARLY, I admit I was probably going a bit fast yesterday. I'll add the sources you brought up, I think a lot of this came from my misunderstanding of the use of AllMusic as a source. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 14:18, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Anderson (drummer)

Another man down. No RS as yet, but there appears consensus. Sure to be something soon. Wwwhatsup (talk) 00:14, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now confirmed [23]. --Michig (talk) 07:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Boxfresh company logo.png

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Categorizing all songs by an artist by genre

Do you have any sense of where I might take this conversation next? I still feel strongly that a change needs to be made, but I'm not sure WikiProject Songs is the right space for getting anything done. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a better venue to be honest. --Michig (talk) 09:38, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Michig, No problem. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About this edit

RE: [24]. I agree. I just proposed others for deletion, maybe soft del by redirect would be best. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Highlands Water. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFD

An article you created or have contributed to has been nominated for deletion
Hello!
Click the image for an important message.
Like, it's April Fools' Day today, you know?
So...
 

Keep

 

on

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review for Dragonchain

Hello, may I request a deletion review for the Dragonchain Dragonchain page? I did not start, write or contribute, but would like to do so and improve to hopefully prevent this situation in the future. Opinions in that discussion are in my own opinion, not correct. Dragonchain originates from The Walt Disney Company and got open-sourced from there. Other than that, it's main focus is not being a cryptocurrency, but a blockchain company. Therefor I think comments such as no mainstream coverage and ;;non-notable cryptocurrency are irrelevant. I would greatly appreciate if I can improve the page as a draft and have it reviewed again when I believe it does fit on Wikipedia and adds enough value. In addition to that it would help to know what was the main reason for you to decide to delete the page. G4 or G11, a combination or other? Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffreyDutch (talk • contribs) 12:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC) [reply]

The page was deleted because after a 7 day discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragonchain, there was unanimous consensus among the particpants that it should be deleted because it isn't notable. Not because of any specific speedy deletion criterion (it wasn't speedy deleted), and not, as you suggested, because I have "a strong preference against Dragonchain". If you can provide evidence of the topic's notability, I would happy to restore the article to draft space for you to work on. --Michig (talk) 18:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I apologize for that statement, I agreed on that page that my comment was not correct. Some of the comments gave me the feeling of a strong preference against. But there was no such comment made by you. Also, even though I highly disagree with the comments there, I have no idea what the state of the article was at that time. So it could very well be that it was created in a way that made them make such comments. In terms of the topic's notability, that it was created and tested inside The Walt Disney Company is significant. There are various sources such as the World Wide Web Consurtium that supports this claim. W3org Github documentation Forbes, Big Blockchain top 50 companies exploring blockchain . However, for me personally, what I'm much more interested in, is their hybrid architecture, meaning they are not a private blockchain or a public blockchain. Each application built is it's own blockchain and interoperable with both legacy systems and any other blockchain such as Bitcoin or Ethereum. Dragonchain has working Interchain with Bitcoin (and others), meaning posting the hash of a transaction from a private blockchain, on to Bitcoin's public blockchain. Keeping sensitive business data private, while also allowing immutable proof of existence. Last year they were granted the US Interchain patent for this innovation. And those are some of the topics that should be described thoroughly. I am not that much interested in the crypto side of things. Blockchain is my interest. And hybrid blockchain(s) even more so. There is no mention of hybrid blockchain in the blockchain article, even though that should be considered a separate type of blockchains as well. Because of my new account, it requires me to wait at least 4 days before I can make edits on that blockchain page. So then I decided working on a hybrid blockchain draft and also came across what happened to the Dragonchain article. And eventually ended up here, amazed that I even got to you, partially thanks to the help on the page you list here in your reply. In terms of topic's notability, I hope that the history and patent is sufficient to let me work on the draft version. There is of course, a lot more I want to contribute to that page, even though I will not spend all my time on just that page, as I've found I can hopefully contribute to more blockchain related pages. JeffreyDutch (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It really comes down to whether you can find indepoendent reliable sources providing significant coverage specifically of Dragonchain. --Michig (talk) 06:58, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I should have listed more sources in that reply. Yahoo on the Interchain patent, The Trust Technology Book by Mark Mueller-Eberstein mentions Dragonchain a dozen times. Yahoo on Dragonchain fights Malaria with blockchain Other sources wrote about it too, in partnership with M2030, a Singapore-based humanitarian group created by Asia Pacific Leaders Malaria Alliance (APLMA). Dragonchain awarded Small business of the year, March 2019, covered by 425business and Bellevue reporter. Interchain patent news coverage by Hacked.com Not sure if this is considered a notable source nowadays, but Coindesk wrote about the 13,7M that was raised. Builtin.com lists Dragonchain first as 13 companies to offer Blockchain as a Service. I found an article from Geekwire, Inc.com, Enterprise Times UK, Futurism, IBtimes, ZDnet, Business Insider, Calvinayre, bring blockchain tech to social gaming with Flowplay. AlJazeera mentions Dragonchain in an article that cryptocurrencies are here to stay. Ticbeat, Infoworld, Dinsey's best open source best releases. Nasdaq Tradetalks March 7 2019, interview with CEO on enterprise blockchain. Nasdaq Tradetalks with Dragonchain CMO, March 7 2019. Joe roets presentation at the DC Blockchain Summit, the Chamber of Digital Commerce, March 2019. I've never seen a lot of this before, there's probably more if I search longer. Small Business of the Year award from last month in Seattle is something I'd add to the page for sure. JeffreyDutch (talk) 13:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whether they would be sufficient for the article to be kept at AfD I'm not sure, but I have restored it to Draft:Dragonchain for you to work on. --Michig (talk) 07:10, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I appreciate it. Edit: I know also see just how bad the articles state is. JeffreyDutch (talk) 10:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Template:Z152[reply]

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) Template:Z83[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

removed Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

removed Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

removed 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Irvington, New York

Please read WP:NNC:

The criteria applied to the creation or retention of an article are not the same as those applied to the content inside it. The notability guidelines do not apply to contents of articles or lists (with the exception of lists which restrict inclusion to notable items or people). Content coverage within a given article or list (i.e. whether something is noteworthy enough to be mentioned within the article or list) is governed by the principle of due weight and other content policies. For additional information about list articles, see Notability of lists and List selection criteria.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:46, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The applicable part here is "with the exception of lists which restrict inclusion to notable items or people", which a "list of notable residents" clearly falls into. --Michig (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And edit-warring is a bad idea. --Michig (talk) 11:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Revert of short description.

I was importing the short description from Wikidata. If the description was incorrect, you could have edited the {{short description}} rather than reverting. Thank you for your time. • Gene93k (talk) 11:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The description was clearly wrong, so I removed it. I then tried to find where this had been imported from, but it wasn't obvious, so I replaced it with a correct short description. I am not seeing what you are complaining about here. --Michig (talk) 12:10, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have now also corrected the Wikidata description. --Michig (talk) 12:21, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to project revival

Dear user, I, with Willbb234, are a attempting to revive the Wikiproject Requested Articles, of which you are a member. If you wish to be a part of our effort, feel free to add your signature in it's talk page. Best regards, Eni vak (speak) 16:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Well said. Uncle G (talk) 18:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think AfD is getting any better. --Michig (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:09, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

added Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
readded Floquenbeam • Lectonar
removed DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

removed Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

removed Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jim McMillan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jim McMillan 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/Jim McMillan 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. Onel5969 TT me 14:28, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Alan Scudder

Hello! Could you have an administrative look into the archives to see if the new version of Jeffrey Alan Scudder is significantly improved from the one deleted at AFD last December? Thanks.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While there are obviously similarities to the deleted article, the new article is different enough that a G4 speedy deletion wouldn't be appropriate. Whether the additional sources that have been added represent sufficient coverage of the subject may be a different matter. --Michig (talk) 07:09, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:00, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
For discovering difficult to find sources that proved the English musician Ed Case was notable. Well done. scope_creepTalk 13:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit on lineal list article

I think there is nothing wrong with my additional edit ″The TBRB champion is recognized as the true champion of a weight class and holds the lineal reign to the throne, the man who beat the man″ and this a fact. And also Tyson Fury's lineal claim has nothing to do with my edit so why mention him here? Did you see my edits promoting him as the lineal champion? Anyway Im ok with the current edit version of the lead. Regards Prettyboy361 (talk) 05:01, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't WP:NPOV to state that "The TBRB champion is recognized as the true champion". Many people in boxing are very dismissive of the idea of lineal champions in the modern era. The only boxer that I am aware of who has made a big deal of being the "lineal champion" (even though he isn't any more according to the TBRB) is Fury. It isn't generally recognized as being a real championship these days. --Michig (talk) 05:30, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Diversity winner
  • Gender-gap fillers

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Movies (band) (2nd nomination)

The Old Grey Whistle Test performance may be an assertation of notability, but the only proof I could find was a YouTube upload. I did a deep dig on AmericanRadioHistory.com which includes several British publications, and could only find two reviews of any of their works, both only a paragraph long. Despite multiple major-label albums, there seems to have been zero attention given to any of them. Newspapers.com gave me nothing, Google Books gave me only false positives and directory listings, and Allmusic is completely blank. Have you found something I missed? WP:NMUSIC is a good barometer but not foolproof or ironclad. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:18, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The band's name doesn't make searching easy, and given the time they were around, it wouldn't surprise me if there isn't much online, but being featured on the OGWT (three times - [25]) and In Concert, it's pretty inconceivable that they didn't receive any coverage. --Michig (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did find a review of their first album in Hi-fi News & Record Review from 1976. Unfortunately virtually all the UK music press from that era is not available online. --Michig (talk) 18:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry for how confrontational I came across. The lack of sources is my main concern above all else, and is something I think should be addressed. That still leaves us with just two or three reviews of their work, which I don't feel is enough. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:53, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for stepping up to the plate on this one. Fewer things frustrate me more than people arguing "Keep, it's notable, there are sources out there" and then either not proving that the sources exist, or finding them but not adding them to the article. You did a good job here. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:52, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you vandalising the page of the late Split Waterman?

Several times people have updated the death of the late Split Waterman (speedway rider) on his wiki page. Every time you have vandalised it. This is very upsetting for people. The death has been updated by the highly respected speedway author Norman Jacobs (Norbold) several times, and by other speedway historians, including myself, who want to see the information correct. Each time you have destoryed it.

I have no idea what your motives are, but you are being very disrespectful and clealy know nothing about speedway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidspeed (talk • contribs) 18:16, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) This is really basic stuff: you need a source that shows he died. If we allowed death reports without sources, then we would have live people being sometimes reported as dead. Also, accusing a long-time good faith editor (an admin, no less!) of being vandal is just silly.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, accusing me of vandalism for removing an unsourced claim is ridiculous. Secondly, you claim not to understand why it has been removed, but I have left two messages on your talk page explaining to you that to add such information, you would need to cite a reliable source to back it up. Finally, if you want to believe I know nothing about speedway, that's entirely up to you, but I think you'll find that much of the content of the Split Waterman article, including citations, was added by me. If you want to show respect, you should limit yourself to only adding content about people that appears in reliable published sources, not hearsay from a web forum. --Michig (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

There is a merge request here to merge Guitjo (double-neck) and Banjo guitar. Please participate in discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:03, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Author of Ronnie Clayton

Dcw2003 (talk)Thank-you for your edits! Unfortunately we were working on the same file simultaneously and had a minor editing conflict. I've resolved the issue. I was just making some minor changes to the table. I hope you are pleased with the final result. I love the work of editors!!!! I'll be glad not to capitalize the word champion, and use the full word featherweight instead of feather if you think thats best, but would prefer to save space in the headers and use the word feather.

Thank you!!!!

Please note that it's the BBBofC (British Boxing Board of Control), not the BBofC - I corrected all these but you've changed them back. We also wouldn't normally use capitals in 'world champion' or for weight classes, unless they are starting sentences. --Michig (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You should also take a look at the boxing project guidelines on how boxing articles should look - the career record should list fights in reverse chronological order, for example. --Michig (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

added EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
removed Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

readded Beeblebrox
removed Deskana

Interface administrator changes

readded Evad37

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Need an admin

Hi Michig, Long time. I need an independent view on [26] this. If too busy perhaps you could point someone else? Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's already been dealt with, but if I can still help, let me know. --Michig (talk) 19:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I didn't realize the Leicester Lion Cubs had a separate article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 16:27, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
  • The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

  • Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
  • When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [27]

Arbitration

  • Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Bob Andy

On 28 March 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Bob Andy, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 05:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Judah Eskender Tafari - new article

Hi Michig, Regretfully, another goner! I've created a page Judah Eskender Tafari. Feel free to rearrange. Fortunately I had shot video so was able to post a pic. Wwwhatsup (talk) 02:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, haven't been editing much recently, but I finally got round to looking at it this morning. --Michig (talk) 09:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Eckstine

I came across this article almost by chance. I have placed a tag or three at the top, but then noticed this largely promotional piece seems to be composed largely by Eckstine himself. This in despite of warnings from other editors regarding WP:COI etc. My feeling is that he is not heeding advice, nor has been for some while. Would you care to take a look and see if you agree - is another shot across the bows necessary ? Thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look tomorrow - at first glance it does look very promotional. --Michig (talk) 19:32, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Having had a closer, look, yes I agree with the COI, but since he hasn't edited the article since May, it doesn't seem appropriate to issue a warning at the moment. I've added the page to my watchlist, and will act if there's a need to in the future. If you spot further issues with his edits before I do, please drop me a message and I'll take another look. --Michig (talk) 15:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that's fine by me. Thanks for your prompt attention and reply. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 06:50, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary 6

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:36, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded Euryalus • SQL
removed Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Thanks! --Michig (talk) 19:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship from the Birthday Committee

Wishing Michig a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!

-- 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 09:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. --Michig (talk) 19:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

added Eddie891
removed Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

readded SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project invites you to join us again this October and November, the two months which are dedicated to improving content about the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora.

Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand contents in Wikimedia projects which are connected to this scope. Kindly list your username under the participants section to indicate your interest in participating in this contest.

We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

  • Overall winner
    • 1st - $500
    • 2nd - $200
    • 3rd - $100
  • Diversity winner - $100
  • Gender-gap fillers - $100
  • Language Winners - up to $100*

We would be adding additional categories as the contest progresses, along with local prizes from affiliates in your countries. For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. Looking forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 19:22, 22nd September 2020 (UTC)

Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

added Ajpolino • LuK3
readded Jackmcbarn
removed Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
renamed There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!

Greetings,

Thank you very much for participating in the Months of African Cinema global contest/edit-a-thon, and thank you for your contributions so far.

It is already the middle of the contest and a lot have been achieved already! We have been able to get over 1,500 articles created in over fifteen (15) languages! This would not have been possible without your support and we want to thank you. If you have not yet listed your name as a participant in the contest page please do so.

Please make sure to list the articles you have created or improved in the article achievements' section of the contest page, so that they can be easily tracked. To be able to claim prizes, please also ensure to list your articles on the users by articles page. We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

  • Overall winner
    • 1st - $500
    • 2nd - $200
    • 3rd - $100
  • Diversity winner - $100
  • Gender-gap filler - $100
  • Language Winners - up to $100*

We are very excited about what has been achieved so far, but your contributions are still needed to further exceed all expectations! Let’s create more articles before the end of this contest, which is this November!!!

Thank you once again for being part of this global event! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 10:30, 06 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great Leap Forward (band)

Hey there, I see you were the creator of this article. A user has just created a second article for the band at The Great Leap Forward (band). I can't work out which name is actually the more commonly used one and have temporarily redirected the older page to the newer one, mainly because the creator of the newer page resisted my attempts to redirect it the other way. Please could you take a look? Spiderone 23:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. Another editor has now merged the history of the two articles, so it looks ok now.--Michig (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Great Leap Forward (band) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Great Leap Forward (band), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Great Leap Forward (band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing Article - Boxxer

Hello, Michig. I noticed that you had previously made an edit to the Boxxer submission. Unfortunately it still hasn't been approved and wondered if you could provide any feedback or assistance. I am an avid boxing fan and new Wiki writer. I have seen Ultimate Boxxer / BOXXER mentioned on other Wikipedia articles with no links, so have given a submission a go after following numerous Submission articles.

Any feedback on the latest submission welcome. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlieh10 (talk • contribs) 09:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See this Uvais Raza Khan

See this article Uvais Raza Khan. Kaifraza786 (talk) 11:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's the issue here? Thanks. --Michig (talk) 11:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Michig&oldid=1019783629"