Special Barnstar
Short Description Barnstar
Special Barnstar
Articles for Creation Barnstar
Team Barnstar
Short Description Barnstar
Reviewer Barnstar
Team Barnstar
Hacker's Barnstar
This user has redirect autopatrolled pseudo-rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Qwerfjkl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discussions

Centralized discussions[edit]

Village pump[edit]


Administrative noticeboards[edit]


Editors requesting help[edit]


Requests for adminship[edit]

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this user asks you to take precautions:

1. Maintain social distancing by starting new posts in new sections, to avoid contaminating other users.

2. Follow the one-way system by putting new posts at the bottom.

3. Sign your comments to facilitate contact tracing.



Working on Wikidata statements for judges[edit]

Hey, I know I reverted your edits, but would like to extend an offer to work with you to get the statements correct. I've been working on Wikidata Every Politician which has similar succession and office holder boundaries.

For positions like the judges replacing another - on the position's talk page (or page of your own) you can create tables from the format I suggested with Template:PositionHolderHistory on Wikidata. Which Talk:Q5589680https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Talk:Q5589680 is a good example of the extra help it creates to check consistency of start/end and persons replaced or replaced by, but this may not work if there are more than one office holders for the Q (which might be split to seat if able to be distinguished by some differentiation consistently). If you have other questions if your format is correct, I encourage to ping me and/or post to Wikidata:Project_chat. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfgang8741: I ran the edits from OpenRefine, and I still have the files on PAWS (here, if you can view them). I'm not entirely sure what format you want the data in, but from your example at BOTREQ, it appears it needs data other than the successor and judge. By the way, please just ask me to revert my edits, because now I have about 500 notifications. Thanks for taking the time to clean up my mess! ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:25, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Qwerfjkl: Apologies for the excessive notices from the reverts, my first time catching something like this at scale. I do not have permission to view your openrefine, but an example schema config for a position would look more like the following screenshots from openrefine and based on creating this demo you may also need to create some of the positions and clean up some existing Qs for the judge positions. Yes, you probably need to create a few more columns to make a statement that fits both the established practice. I think most positions require a start time which if they were confirmed, but never started the start time would be no value I guess unless the start is at the point of appointment. That is not a nuance I know the answer. It may be that confirmation date needs a new property to represent given the difference between appointed, confirmed, and starting in the role.
Screenshot from 2022-03-17 15-04-19.png
Screenshot from 2022-03-17 15-04-42.png
Screenshot from 2022-03-17 15-03-55.png
A quick look for Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (or similar) didn't exist - now Q111274584 and Q23933765 wasn't linked to the court - checked by viewing What links here.
You can create the position name in plain text in a new column from the table to try to mach what the position should be called and if they don't resolve, create new positions which would be another schema to configure. I'd look to Q20706330 to know what should be added when creating any new instances of judge positions related to a court listed in the table. Ideally the death date column wouldn't include the age as it makes matching less effective.
The new position schema would be a different statement you can export together or do this in two rounds. The first round to create all missing positions then second to add all the statements for persons holding those positions. For each position adding their respective qualifier of "start time" and "end time" as well as "replaces" and "replaced by" qualifiers for the position, the confirmation date (which I don't know a good property to use as a qualifier so you might ask on wikidata project chat) and "appointed by" property also would be a qualifier for the position.
Two more columns are needed on to the table which would include the person the judge replaces for bidirectional movement through the statement and the position that they will hold which is part of the "Court" that you currently have in the table as mentioned above. I hope this helps to clarify a little? Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 19:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang8741:
clean up some existing Qs for the judge positions - What exactly do you mean by this? I used {{Get QID}}, which follows redirects, so might be inaccurate. I could ignore redirects if that would help.
I think most positions require a start time which if they were confirmed, but never started the start time would be no value I guess unless the start is at the point of appointment. - I have additional data where I initially got the data from, mentioned in the BOTREQ.
Ideally the death date column wouldn't include the age as it makes matching less effective. - I can easily use some regex to remove the template that gives the age (or just subst it and remove the age).
Two more columns are needed on to the table which would include the person the judge replaces for bidirectional movement - harder to do automatically, though maybe possible in OpenRefine? ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
clean up some existing Qs for the judge positions - not all existing positions link to their respective court Qid so to get the most out of the linked data, you may need to verify positions link to courts, have applies to jurisdiction values and other cleanup tasks to have consistent statements across the positions. I'm not aware of a model existing for judge positions, but basing off the example cited above it should be a good template of what statements should be on the judge's position.
I think most positions require a start time which if they were confirmed, but never started the start time would be no value I guess unless the start is at the point of appointment. - One the postion held statements require a start time for context of period of time the person was in the role. Though start time is subjective possibly to different interpretation based on the job. Defining what is the start time for a judge and if it is the same or different from when they are confirmed. I'm talking more about how to represent the data. Without a start time the position statement is flagged as missing that qualifier unless the value is set to unknown or no value.
Ideally the death date column wouldn't include the age as it makes matching less effective. - This is more of a comment of table and data design than something hard to cleanup with regex or openrefine split column.
Two more columns are needed on to the table which would include the person the judge replaces for bidirectional movement The infoboxes (if accuracte) could be one source to extract the value or if you have another source at your disposal with this information. This was more of a comment comparing the table to what might be needed to make a more useful statement for the position. Really its not critical, but the more complete the statement the easier it is to query, walk through the links in either direction, visualize, etc. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang8741: I think I'm going to re-generate the table, using updated data, so all rows have a successor. Then, I can get the predecessor, which is typically just above it in the infobox.
I think I've created most of the positions needed. Can you see any that are missing? (I wrote a QuickStatements batch to create a few.) ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It would help to provide to link(s) to resources you want me to review. I believe you wanted me to look at batch 79292? I don't have anything to compare to for a complete list off hand and courts are not my area of expertise. Format wise for the positions, it would be useful given the defined boundaries to add the position's the jurisdiction with P1001 as well as which court the position is affiliated via P361 of which court ie Q111295760 is part of Q7889771. A query for the list of courts to be part of: https://w.wiki/4yjB When you have the position statements ready, I'll check them out too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfgang8741 (talkcontribs) 21:43, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang8741: Am I right in saying that P1001 should always be Q30? If not, can you give an example of what it should be? ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:59, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, the US is too broad for jurisdiction as these courts either have jurisdiction of an entire state's geographic area or sub region of a state's geographic area. An example would be the Q111295760 the first sentence states the jurisdiction to the entire state of Delaware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Delaware and appeals to the 3rd circuit as this map shows (not sure if this is most current, but it would be a guide on what Qids might be named or need to be created). While in this case I think the jurisdiction and state area are the same it probably requires a separate Qid to represent the jurisdiction that is equivalent in area to the state of Delaware as it is instance of a jurisdiction rather than instance of a state (so the concepts are similar, but different on type). An example of a jurisdiction only of a portion of a state is the Western District of Washington Q111295799 which would be a part of the state of Washington and a second Qid would represent the Eastern District of Washington. The development of the model for representing the jurisdictions may be better suited for the Wikidata Project Chat discussion.
There would be a relation between the jurisdiction and the state as part of the state of Delaware with different Qids, instance of, and description similar to how electoral districts are sub components of the state, but part of the state. This is where creating new positions have a lot of inter dependencies and deciding how to model can enable teasing out the differences between concepts with the same name, but in doing so allows for much richer queries once the Qids exist. New Qid for the district jurisdictions would probably be an instance of Q5982983 or a subclass of this to specify US district jurisdictional areas as a group or something like this. You might query the instances of this Qid to find what jurisdictions exist and for those that do not, create the Qid for each of the district areas as Q5982983 named the same as Q7889771 (United States District Court for the District of Delaware), but has an instance of Q5982983 or a subclass of Q5982983 being "United States District Court Jurisdiction" which would allow for alternative naming of the jurisdictions as "District of Delaware" with description "jurisdiction of the District Court. I was thinking of the jurisdictions to be modeled similarly to how electoral districts ie Q192611 and modeled, but it may be this concept needs more eyes and would benefit from a modeling discussion on the Wikidata project chat or related Wikidata project. This all said, if this is getting too complex, the jurisdiction can be left off for a later person to complete or put on hold to further discuss how to model them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfgang8741 (talkcontribs) 01:32, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've created the positions (without P1001) with https://editgroups.toolforge.org/b/QSv2T/1648144978238/. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang8741 ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Great, just some cleanup of the duplicates created like Q106071810 and you should be good to add these to the people holding the position with the qualifiers you wanted to add for replaced and replaced by, etc.Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, are the judges you want to create District Court Judges or Court of Appeals Judges? I think the subclass is incorrect. The name of the position d:Q106071810 aka Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York would imply this is a district court judge ie subclass of d:Q58412318 not d:Q58412251. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 18:32, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang8741: Do you know how to replace the property using QuickStatements? I keep on getting errors, and I can't check them as I'm on a mobile device. (List at User:Qwerfjkl/sandbox). ― Qwerfjkltalk 19:44, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Have you looked at Help:QuickStatements#Removing_statements? I haven't batch removed statements before. I'd definitely run test removals on the sandbox first.Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang8741: I think this batch fixed everything. ― Qwerfjkltalk 16:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
┌───────────────────────────────────────┘
Preventing archiving. ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bot request[edit]

Hello Qwerfjkl, I wanted to ask you a question regarding my bot request for the removal of an undue weight statement form around 3,000 Poland related articles. At this point I'm not seeing that it's being picked up by any of the bot editors, thus can you advise if the reason for it is that this is not the correct venue for such a request or perhaps that I'm missing certain steps in the request process? --E-960 (talk) 22:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@E-960: The only issue is consensus, really. I do think there's enough consensus for these edits, so I'll file a BRFA as soon as I finish Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 8 (in under a week, probably). ― Qwerfjkltalk 22:49, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I see, thank you for the clarification. --E-960 (talk) 16:18, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for the ping on the BRFA. --E-960 (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Qwerfjkl, I just had a quick look on the bot request [1] page and it looks like the final approval was granted following the test run, so things should be good to go. --E-960 (talk) 11:22, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
E-960, Yes, I know (I was notified below). Unfortunately, I've been busy lately, and unable to complete the bot task. All the statements have.been removed now. Qwerfjkltalk 16:01, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is now very outragous.. There were multiple discussions about that, and there was no consensus (especially because there is nothing wrong about that correct sentence).. And now I see DESPITE ALL THIS E-960 still tries to erase this sentence, he willfully just ignored all this and waited some time and now he's doing the same even with a bot.. E-960 is obviously trying to vandalize Wikipedia long time and now he is doing it with the support of bots.. after he failed multiple times to try it manually. Besides that, some accounts got blocked for erasing that from many articles. This should stop right away. --Jonny84 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Jonny84, You are the only user who has objected, with no clear reason (several editors supported). That does not constitute no consensus. In addition, you did not object to the BRFA, even after I linked to it in the discussion. There was also a week left after the trial for any objections, yet there were none. Whilst there is indeed nothing wrong about that correct sentence, it has undue weight. You make a serious claim that @E-960 has been trying to vandalize Wikipedia for a long time. Could you please give any other cases/examples, or explain why you have not taken this to WP:ANI (although I don't recommend you do)? You say some accounts got blocked for erasing that from many articles - which accounts? Please try to remain civil and assume good faith. Qwerfjkltalk 20:04, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qwerfjkl, sounds good, thanks. Btw, I noticed that on some articles such as this on Mokre, Goleniów County, the phrase is still there, perhaps there is a punctuation variation or something that threw off the bot criteria. --E-960 (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just a human and I'm just occasionally here and I'm not contributing often here, so I can't observe every edit in here.. Also I'm not following every single edit by E-960.. I just realised today, that some pages on my watchlist got changed by bots. 1) There was also a bot or an author who put this information in before, so somebody thought this is important to the history and the articles. 2) Nobody had a problem with that for over 15 years besides some already blocked accounts and besides them only E-960.. So there was a consensus with that.. 3) There was also no Poland from 1795 till 1918... So missing this information, brings also a big undue weight to Wikipedia articles.. So I'm wishing there would be a mention of that fact to be put in. If we start with argumenting about undue weight, then we should go further and not just pick some selected passages. Erasing the mention of Germany, to places which belonged for centuries to Germany, brings also an even bigger undue weight to this articles, for me it's even faking history. 4) This discussions were just in March: [2]... Other users suggested to expand the articles for example. He didn't accepted the advice and didn't even tried to expand any of this articles.. He just did, what he tried before, to erase it, just on another wikipedia page. So how could there be a consensus? Also I'm related with the German minority of Poland, I'm still remembering how he tried to erase data about them once, so this current actions also have a very bad taste to me.. --Jonny84 (talk) 20:58, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to point out, that here was no "Germany" before 1871. Pls see German Reich and Legal status of Germany articles, when German actually became a nation state. Also, Pomerania was Polish, Danish and Swedish, before becoming Prussian and subsequently "German". So, please stop with the one-sided claims about eternal German lands. --E-960 (talk) 21:09, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @E-960, I'll finish this tomorrow (I missed insource:/Before 1945 the area was part of \[\[Germany/). @Jonny84, this has already been discussed in the previous discussion. While, yes, expanding the articles would be preferable, it would take a while to do to over 5000 articles. As other users have said, the statement on its own is WP:UNDUE. I don't think further argument is productive or helpful. ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:11, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a fact, that Silesia, East Prussia and Pomerania were part of the German Empire from 1871 till 1945, so erasing this sentence is just simple POV-pushing, which isn't wanted on Wikipedia. So this actions are just against Wikipedia policies. BTW. before 1871 there was the North German Confederation and the German Confederation. You can ignore that, but then this is just POV-pushing. With the same argument, there was also no Poland before 1918.. --Jonny84 (talk) 21:21, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #515[edit]

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Help talk:Footnotes on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2022-15[edit]

19:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl (bot) 9[edit]

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 9 has been approved. Happy editing! Face-smile.svg --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On this note, could you please limit it to mainspace to prevent the edit warring it's doing at Wikipedia:Bot requests? Thanks. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 15:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tol, sorry! I don't normally use JWB for bot editing, and forgot its generator isn't restricted to mainspace. The bot task is now complete, so should be fine now. (I did notice a discussion from ~12 years ago at Talk:Wielbark, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship#History, however.) Happy editing! Qwerfjkltalk 15:18, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries; thanks! Tol (talk | contribs) @ 15:22, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE April 2022 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2022 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello and welcome to the April newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2021.

Election results: Jonesey95 retired as lead coordinator. Reidgreg was approved to fill this role after an 18-month absence from the coordinator team, and Baffle gab1978 was chosen as an assistant coordinator following a one-year break. Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu continued on as long-standing assistant coordinators.

January Drive: Of the 22 editors who signed up, 16 editors claimed 146 copy edits including 45 requests. (details)

February Blitz: This one-week effort focused on requests and a theme of Africa and African diaspora history. Of the 12 editors who signed up, 6 editors recorded 21 copy edits, including 4 requests. (details)

March Drive: Of the 28 editors who signed up, 18 claimed 116 copy edits including 25 requests. (details)

April Blitz: This one-week copy editing event has been scheduled for 17–23 April, sign up now!

Progress report: As of 11 April, copy editors have removed approximately 500 articles from the backlog and completed 127 copy-editing requests during 2022. The backlog has been hovering at about 1,100 tagged articles for the past six months.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Scranley (19:04, 15 April 2022)[edit]

Conflict of interest when edited my own page? --Scranley (talk) 19:04, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scranley, you have declared a COI with Seamus Cranley (game designer) - a page that does not exist. If you plan to make a draft of this, that's fine, but there's no COI if the page doesn't exist. Do you have a specific question (or could you phrase it more clearly)? Qwerfjkltalk 20:11, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User talk:Qwerfjkl, Thank you, I thought it was an error and realized the page edit worked.. I am now creating the draft page.. Seamus Cranley (game designer). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scranley (talkcontribs) 20:17, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: WikiProjects and collaborations request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Did you know on a "WikiProjects and collaborations" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of ISO 639 talk:xghu[edit]

Hello, Qwerfjkl,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Yeeno, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged ISO 639 talk:xghu for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Yeeno}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Yeeno (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of ISO 639-6 talk:xghu[edit]

Hello, Qwerfjkl,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Yeeno, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged ISO 639-6 talk:xghu for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Yeeno}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Yeeno (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Looks like this and the above were a glitch in User:Enterprisey/AFCRHS.js. I've moved the pages to the correct locations without redirect. @Enterprisey: I think the issue is with L658; there should be a check in there as to whether the colon delineates a real namespace. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from AbuUbada on User:AbuUbada (02:25, 17 April 2022)[edit]

‌ --AbuUbada (talk) 02:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AbuUbada, do you have a question? Qwerfjkltalk 06:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #516[edit]

Tech News: 2022-16[edit]

23:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Question from Johnbaxter329 on Draft:Lu Castro (01:20, 19 April 2022)[edit]

How do I add picture? --Johnbaxter329 (talk) 01:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbaxter329, you can add [[File: + the file name + ]], with the file being from either the file nanespace, or from Commons. Qwerfjkltalk 06:22, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Visible anchor removal blowing away large portions of articles[edit]

Whatever tool you are using for 'Visible anchor removal' has blown away large portions of at least 3 articles: User:Essare Mazur/sandbox; Coaching stock of Ireland; Sedum. --Bamyers99 (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article for Pueblo, Colorado appears to have had a large portion cut off as well. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]
@Jeffrey Beall, @Bamyers99, I think this is a problem with JWB (@Joeytje50) Qwerfjkltalk 06:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Justbizzsisko (05:46, 21 April 2022)[edit]

Hello, good day to you. I’m an artist and am trying to create a a Wikipedia page profile for myself. How do I do that ? --Justbizzsisko (talk) 05:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Justbizzsisko, Welcome! Creating a new article from scratch is extremely challenging, and new editors are strongly recommended to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works, by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles before trying it. When you do decide to have a go at a new article, you are highly encouraged to read WP:Your first article. If you haven't already also check out WP:TUTORIAL; it's a lot of fun! See WP:AUTOBIO as well. Happy editing! Qwerfjkltalk 06:04, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop immediately[edit]

Wikipedia:RedWarn is left at its current location since it is the name of the legacy script. It is also used by the current RedWarn script for default data. Do NOT move any more pages. Chlod (say hi!) 13:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chlod: Sorry, that was an accident, my bad. I think I've reverted all the moves. Qwerfjkltalk 13:39, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trouted[edit]

Rainbow trout transparent.png

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

You have been trouted ―sportzpikachu my talkcontribs 13:39, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 22nd Quebec Cinema Awards (disambiguation)[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on 22nd Quebec Cinema Awards (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 April 2022[edit]

Thank you![edit]

Hello, again, Qwerfjkl,

I see you are doing some closures at CFD and that area could really use some extra help. There are some very experienced non-admin closers at CFD so if you have questions, I'm sure they could be of some assistance to you. Nice to run into your work again! Hope you are well. Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Liz,
I had watchlisted Marcocapelle's talk page, and I noticed a discussion about CfD, so I thought I might give it a try. Happy editing! ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It can be a little tricky getting the CSD tags correct but everything looks fine. I think we have more non-admins closing CFD discussions than admins right now. We can always use more admins though, maybe a thought you can keep in the back of your mind for the future. Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, there is a problem with Category:Fishing in the European Union. Categories need to be emptied before they can be deleted or else we end up with red link categories on pages which, according to WP:REDNO, must be avoided. So this one isn't ready for deletion yet. Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, thanks, I must have been tired when I closed that one. Emptied now. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:07, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #517[edit]

Tech News: 2022-17[edit]

22:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Albums mastered by Vlado Meller[edit]

Hey, Qwerfjkl,

Did you mean to tag this category for deletion? I noticed that it was empty and then saw the CFD had been closed but I wanted to confirm it with you before deleting the page. Take care. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I meant to tag it for deletion. Thanks for checking, Liz. ― Qwerfjkltalk 19:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This also happened with Category:Wikipedia extended confirmed users. There is not point in closing a deletion discussion if you don't follow through and take action on the consensus decision. Do you know what to do if the decision is to merge or rename categories? Liz Read! Talk! 23:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, sorry, I'm not sure what happened. I'm sure I tagged that category; I'll try to double-check. I think this was caused by inputting the link (in Twinkle) to the CfD with [[...]], and then clicking off the message warning against this.
Regarding renaming categories, I can't move category pages. If the decision is merge, then all of the pages in the merged category should be moved into the category.being merged into. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:09, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #518[edit]

Tech News: 2022-18[edit]

19:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Twinkle and Redirects[edit]

Hi Qwerfjkl, I'm having issues adding templates to redirect's with twinkle. Can you help? Maybe with some screenshots or photos. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 21:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Idoghor Melody, To use rcats with Twinkle, when on a redirect, select TW → Tag, and then select any rcats to tag the redirect with. ―  Qwerfjkltalk 06:05, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I haven't tried that... Thank you Qwerfjkl Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 11:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Short desc bot is doing great work![edit]

Thanks again for helping erase the tens of thousands of "Wiki(p/m)edia list article" descriptions. I think it was such a success that we should expand the bot's scope to remaining articles not beginning with "List", and maybe even expand the strings it searches for (looking at you, "Aspect of history"). And I'm sure you noticed that there's a steady flow of editors adding back the removed descriptions. What do you think? Thrakkx (talk) 01:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thrakkx, to expand the bot's scope, there first needs to be a discussion (probably at WT:SD) in support of the idea. As for editors adding back these short descriptions, it would be simple to just run the bot again on the pages. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2022-19[edit]

15:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #519[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]