User talk:Cremastra/Archive 4

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

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

On 6 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jerrawangala National Park, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that police officers had to be flown in by helicopter to seize hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of cannabis plants found growing illegally in Jerrawangala National Park? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jerrawangala National Park. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jerrawangala National Park), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

On 7 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kooraban National Park, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kooraban National Park provides a habitat for more than twenty endangered animal species, including koalas? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kooraban National Park. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Kooraban National Park), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cremastra. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Fireaway".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 03:32, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello how do I create my biography --Asiimwe Edward councillor (talk) 12:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Asiimwe Edward councillor: The answer is you probably don't. Sorry.

Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself. Even if you are "notable" (which on Wikipedia means secondary sources have discussed you in-depth, like Prince William), you shouldn't be writing an article about yourself, because you have a conflict of interest (WP:COI).

See WP:Autobiography for more information: in short, writing an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. Maybe take a look at the task centre for other ideas on how to improve Wikipedia. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about my lack of work on setting up this backlog drive. Unfortunately, I've recently lost interest in running this drive, so I'm not going to be able to help organize or run it. Once again, sorry for this, and if you decide to continue with it, good luck! ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 03:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

No worries. I think I'll continue, since it looks like we have a schedule in place now. Cremastra (talk) 11:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in May! - Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear (DYK) and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old (OTD). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello! You've edited my user page but now there is a blank spot in the table. Please fix. Thanks. Big kush daddy 420 (talk) 18:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Template:CL Male is deleted anyway, so I'd advise you to find another userbox that isn't so hostile. I can't remember what the actual wording was, but users at the deletion discussion described it as "abusive", "insulting", "potentially sexist or transphobic", and "hostile not only to LGBTQ users but probably also to female users." So, yeah, bad choice of userbox. Cremastra (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cremastra. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Hey man im josh (talk) 12:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability/June 2024 Drive I signed up in this drive and updated my tally, but I ended up creating new section,so there are two sections with my name and there no edit button in the sections. How do I update my existing tally, like others are doing Redmyname31 (talk) 11:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Redmyname31 By clicking "Edit" at the top of the page, and then scrolling down to your tally section (a ctrl+f search should help you find it). I'll see if I can add "edit source" buttons, I don't know why they aren't showing up. Cremastra (talk) 11:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

edit button on the top is to edit introduction part only. Redmyname31 (talk) 16:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

That shouldn't be the case. Maybe you have some kind of gadget/script installed? Are you sure you're clicking the "Edit" tab next to "View History", and scrolling all the way down to the bottom? What happens if you follow this link? Cremastra (talk) 17:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any gadget or script installed. the link works fine, ty Redmyname31 (talk) 18:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't pretend to understand why you abruptly changed the awards thresholds (too many people are improving the encyclopedia too much, let's fix the incentive structure?), but I suspect that having two reward tiers with identical thresholds is not intentional. Could you take another look? Thanks. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 02:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed sorry about that. I changed it because I wildly underestimated how much people would score, and wanted to make the incentives a bit more incentivizing. I figured since it was the first day of the drive, there wouldn't be too much confusion. Cremastra (talk) 12:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you for setting up the drive! May I ask how we can find articles with cn tags or is it as we come across the articles? Also, are we allowed to place cn tags during this drive (I imagine it's cheating if we place them then correct it immediately)? Conyo14 (talk) 04:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Conyo14 Hi there, Category:All articles with unsourced statements usually tracks articles with the citation needed tags on them. For the later, it doesn’t seem right to just place citation needed tags and fix them immediately, it’s quite deceptive in my opinion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I mean if I place a tag for someone else to do, that's fine right? Conyo14 (talk) 06:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, we're not going to give you points for it, but I guess if you want to, you can. I'd focus my efforts on removing tags, though. You can search by topic from the category Vanderwaalforces linked to, or you can use Citation Hunt. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 12:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, another question. Would this: {unsourced section} be the same as a citation tag? Conyo14 (talk) 06:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Conyo14 No. This drive focuses only on {{citation needed}}, not on {{unsourced section}} or {{more sources needed}} or similar templates. See WP:FEB24, which was a drive for unsourced articles. Cremastra (talk) 12:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

One thing that I'm somewhat concerned by with this drive is that in some cases, people may find resources that perpetuate citogenisis. I was wondering if it is possible to put a warning on the backlog drive page on how to avoid this (either finding resources that aren't susceptible to citogensis or trying to identify when the claim was added, and finding older sources). Kwkintegrator (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm particularly worried that the point structure, while good, might make people more careless. I've definitely noticed myself acting slightly faster than I otherwise would. Kwkintegrator (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, these concerns are unfortunately inherent to the competitive nature of backlog drives like this one. I've added a reminder for now, and if it looks to be a problem I'll go a little further. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 14:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

The article says up to 4.9 ft tall rather than up to 4.11 ft in the hook. No need to break down the measurements. SL93 (talk) 20:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I have responded at the DYK nom page. Basically, 4 ft 11 in ≠ 4.11 ft. Cremastra (talk) 20:31, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I saw your comment. It isn't just about promoting your hook. I'm done promoting all hooks. I hate being nitpicked about interestingness and image choice when I promote. It can really hurt. It's just unfortunate that my decision coincided with your nomination. I sometimes wonder why I still write for DYK, when I don't receive much thanks for them. Over 400 nominations later, and the main shit I hear about them is when editors hate something. Then I remember that I write on Wikipedia, and DYK, to improve the encyclopedia. SL93 (talk) 20:52, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Happy editing, Cremastra (talk) 20:55, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

...for a possible future essay on incivility: What the heck was this? Cremastra (talk) 19:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in June! - Today we have a centenarian story (documentation about it by Percy Adlon) and an article that had two sentences yesterday and was up for deletion, and needs a few more citations. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda. You're lucky to live in such a lovely area, albeit with introduced nutrias roaming at large :) . Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I am thankful for the blessed area! - You may want to add Gustav Mahler to your notes ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Goodness. (I tried Mahler, never really got into him. He's pretty popular though; perhaps I'll try again. I like another Gustav, so you never know.) Cremastra (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I meant the talk, matching the note linked above. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I know, hence the "goodness". Cremastra (talk) 22:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I missed the irony ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

On 22 June 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Schoenoplectus triqueter, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Schoenoplectus triqueter (pictured) can grow up to 1.5 metres (4 ft 11 in) tall on stems less than half a centimetre (0.20 in) wide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Schoenoplectus triqueter. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Schoenoplectus triqueter), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cremastra. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2024 American strikes in Iraq, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Please check out the Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Accepted nominations page, #545. I was panicky that I would soon run out of nominations. I saw your valid nomination (that was basically put on hold at the time) and decided to implement it. I will update the information later today. I hope this meets with your approval and nothing has changed except the passage of time. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 12:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! Thanks. Cremastra (talk) 15:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for participating in the June 2024 backlog drive! You scored 9 points while adding citations to articles during WikiProject Reliability's first {{citation needed}} backlog drive, earning you this cookie. Thanks for helping out!

Adam Black ^{talk • contribs} 10:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. :) Cremastra (talk) 19:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Per your revert, I'd ask you to reconsider my total. Yes, it was still June 30 in my local time. I was unaware that it was UTC. The drive instructions did not indicate that (although, I guess it could be argued that I should have known that). Most of the points taken off in that edit were actually completed prior to the UTC time, they just weren't added to the total prior. More importantly, I pushed really hard to make the 2000 point goal, which in my mind was actually accomplished - I started the drive on local time and completed it the same. It may sound whiny to complain over a stupid barnstar, but the fact is that it was a goal - and one I really worked hard for. Drives are supposed to be fun. Setting a goal, achieving it and having it taken away on a technicality makes it not fun (and makes it less likely I'll participate at that level of effort in another one.) ButlerBlog (talk) 11:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I saw your re-add of these. Thanks for the reconsideration. I hope I didn't come across as too curmudgeonly or whiny above. BTW, I made sure to have my timestamp settings display UTC from here on out. I'm not sure why I didn't have it that way before, but I do now for going forward. Anyway, thank you again and I appreciate it. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Cremastra (talk) 23:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cremastra, you replaced an orignial barnstar. Original barnstars are never replaced, only new versions can be added if there is none present. This particular barnstar template already has one, though not the greatest, this template can't be touched. Seek consensus to replace it @Wikipedia:WikiProject Socialism, thank you. Jerium (talk) 00:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I was just following the info at WP:WPWPA Cremastra (talk) 05:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in July! - Today's story is about a photographer who took iconic pictures, especially View from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Manhattan, 9/11, yesterday's was a great mezzo, and on Thursday we watched a sublime ballerina. If that's not enough my talk offers chamber music from two amazing concerts. - Could you update the WP:QAI with your curent name, perhaps? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cremastra. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2024 American strikes in Iraq".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I left a brief reply to your comment, but I assume that you will want a longer explanation, so here's a start. First, from the GNG:

• "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
  • The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.
  • Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton, that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.

I think the reference to NOR is confusing, but my past efforts to re-write it (not to change it, just to decrease the confusion) haven't worked. The usual example is that you can't SYNTH two tweets ("I'm in city" and "I got married today") to result in "He got married in city today". But it's really the rest of the definition that matters:

• SIGCOV "addresses the topic directly and in detail". Obviously, an autobiography will "address the topic" of its author "directly and in detail".
• SIGCOV "is more than a trivial mention". An autobiography is "more than a trivial mention" of its author.
• The author needn't "be the main topic of the source material", but it is.
• A "book-length history of" the subject (any subject) "is plainly non-trivial coverage of" that subject. That is, if someone's written an entire book about a subject, we have achieved SIGCOV for that subject.
• A single sentence, on the other hand, is a trivial mention and not SIGCOV.

There is nothing in SIGCOV that's about who wrote it, who published it, whether it's primary or secondary, etc. The reason that the GNG wants "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", instead of just saying that "SIGCOV" and stopping is because you need SIGCOV+RS+INDY, and not merely SIGCOV alone. SIGCOV gives you a volume of information to work with. SIGCOV does not give you anything except volume, and volume alone isn't enough. Ergo, RS and INDY are additional requirements. If SIGCOV included those other factors, then we would consider naming them separately to be a pointless redundancy, and we would have left them out. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:53, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Aah, I see. Thank-you for taking the time to write out an explanation to me. I was (quite foolishly) conflating WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 02:02, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in August! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:16, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

You removed them from both Crystallography and Alloy. The tag does not indicate that the article is not notable, it indicates that it needs sources. Both very definitely do, there are expanses of unsourced statements. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I have responded on your talk page. You are using the wrong tag, please use {{more sources needed}}. Cremastra (talk) 15:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

That one is OK but not the best; removing the tag was not. It is not as good as I know sources exist, but it would take time to search out all the best ones including page numbers (as many would be textbooks). The tag you are using would be appropriate if there might or might not be sources, i.e. for OR. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

So as far as I understand, you want a tag that says "there are sources that can be used to expand this article"? In that case, {{refideas}} is your answer. Unless you have concerns about the notability of the topic, and I think you don't, then please don't use {{sources exist}} because it is miscommunicating what you are trying to say. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 15:18, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Nope, that is not what I mean at all, the text that {{sources exist}} shows is exactly what I want. As an illustration take from Crystallography#Materials science

Crystallography is used by materials scientists to characterize different materials. In single crystals, the effects of the crystalline arrangement of atoms is often easy to see macroscopically because the natural shapes of crystals reflect the atomic structure. In addition, physical properties are often controlled by crystalline defects. The understanding of crystal structures is an important prerequisite for understanding crystallographic defects. Most materials do not occur as a single crystal, but are poly-crystalline in nature (they exist as an aggregate of small crystals with different orientations). As such, powder diffraction techniques, which take diffraction patterns of samples with a large number of crystals, play an important role in structural determination.

Every sentence is a true statement, but there is not a single source for any of them. Rather than going through and adding ^{[citation needed]} everywhere the whole article needs them. For certain {{refideas}} would be inappropriate. It is not "please add from this list" it is "almost everything needs a source, they exist but are not being used".

As I find time I have been adding here and elsewhere that lie within my expertise, but it takes time. In some cases such as Electron microscope I have been able to enlist others to help. If you are help to please do, that is what the tag is for. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, thanks for all your work; you certainly have the subject expertise that I don't.

Based on your description above, {{more sources needed}} is what you need, not {{refideas}}. Sorry for the misunderstanding – but {{sources exist}} is, I assure you, the wrong tag, because it turns it into a notability issue. You can ask at WP:HD, but they'll give you the same answer there. Cremastra (talk) 15:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

OK. If it does get flagged as a notability issue then I will suggest changing the text that is printed. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cremastra! Thank you for your help at CFD, sincerely. Every little bit helps!

I was wondering if you are aware of User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/CFDlister.js? It is a very handy tool: It makes it easy to add discussions you closed to WT:CFDW, where admins can make use of a bot to do the leg work for you. You are, of course, welcome to continue doing things manually—but I would feel bad if I neglected to mention this life-changing script :)

Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I was vaguely aware of it, thanks. I still prefer to do it manually if I'm able to; using Cat-a-lot is frankly fun, and I figure there's no need to create work for the bot if I'm able to merge it manually. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Updates & Schedule
Administrator elections are in the WMF Trust & Safety SecurePoll calendar and are all set to proceed. We plan to use the following schedule: Oct 8 – Oct 14: Candidate sign-up Oct 22 – Oct 24: Discussion phase Oct 25 – Oct 31: SecurePoll voting phase If you have any questions, concerns, or thoughts before we get started, please post at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections. If you are interested in helping out, please post at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections § Ways to help. There are many redlinked subpages that can be created.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The Half Barnstar

This barnstar is given to Cremastra and Timrollpickering for jointly taking care of the category moves from Category:Fair use Analog Science Fiction and Fact magazine covers to Category:Non-free Analog Science Fiction and Fact magazine covers and Category:Fair use images of video game posters to Category:Non-free images of video game posters. Thank you, both :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for closing the RM, but please also close the associated § Proposed moratorium discussion. Preferably, you would've closed it as part of the larger RM, but since you did not do so, please close it separately or amend your close. (Please note that if you do find consensus for a moratorium but no consensus for a specific timeframe, you should perform a WP:BARTENDER close.) Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus: I was under the impression that the moratorium discussion was basically independent and should be closed separately. But if a close from me is necessary, I will do it shortly. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 20:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Not to rush you, but is this close still forthcoming? If you are unable to close this, that's OK, just let me know and I can make a request at WP:RFCL. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I was waiting for a confirmation that a close is necessary. To be totally honest, I don't really want to close the sub-discussion; I'd rather leave it to a more experienced closer or admin (RMs I'm used to, but more general RfC-like things I'm not). I've made a request at CR. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 11:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in September! - Ach, lieben Christen, seid getrost, BWV 114, is one of the pieces in my topic of this year. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Femke. :) Cremastra (talk) 21:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Did you know that your nickname, in Greek, means hanger? Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 16:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

@Pallikari No, I didn't! Interesting... I picked it from Cremastra because I liked the way it sounded. :) Cremastra (talk) 23:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I didn't know about this plant!!! Nice to meet you... Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 00:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I think this move was not in the best interest of Wikipedia: 1. The City Hamm is by far the largest and most important muncipality or community with this name, the City does not use any additions to the official name.

2. There are at least another three, in numbers 3 places within North Rhine-Westpalia called Hamm and another 10 in Germany as far as i know of, so by creating a Lemma with "Hamm, North Rhine-Westphalia" the Lemma became less correct as it was in the first place.

3. Many people have names deriving from their families places of origin, that should not be a reason to move a near 800 year old city with 180.000 inhabitants to a simply wrong Lemma.

I would suggest to reconsider the move alone by the said above reasons, but i would like you to think of this peace of mind, you surely would not move "London" to "London, Great Britain" or any other region that might fit more or less because their are several other smaler less important places in the World with the same name or at that because their are people living or dead with the surname "London" like for instance Micheal London, would you? No, you would most certainly not, i think you would make a note template in the article like the one there is in the Lemma London stating:"This article is about the capital city of England and the United Kingdom. For other uses, see London (disambiguation)." That would have been the most proper way to deal with the proposal for moving the Lemma to such a wrong Lemma, so please reconsider the move you approved.

As i'am a more or less inactive author by now, in the german and english wikipedia, i haven't noticed this move by know, otherwise i would have strongly opposed it.

Yours sincerely Gabriel-Royce (talk) 10:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

@Gabriel-Royce, in response to your points:

1. Please see the requested move discussion. I moved it according to my interpretation of WP:CONSENSUS. If you think my interpretation of consensus was wrong, you are welcome to start a move review. This move was not my own personal decision, it was the implementation of consensus. I honestly don't care very much either way, I was just closing the discussion.
2. As regards 2 and 3: please consider reading WP:At and WP:Ptopic for the relevant guidance.
3. you surely would not move "London" to "London, Great Britain" of course not. Again, please see our policies on article titling and primary topics.

In short: this was not my own move, as you seem to be assuming, it was just my implementation of consensus. I want to make that clear, because otherwise we'll be talking past each other. My move, was, I believe, in line with Wikipedia's article titling policies.

Since the requested move discussion is now closed, you can start a move review if you disagree with my close. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 19:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Cremastra for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE September 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 08:00, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Cremastra for accumulating at least 50 points during the September 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 19,000+ articles and 35,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 26,884.6 points) completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Cremastra (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Call for Candidates

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Call for candidates.

Here is the schedule:

• October 8–14 - Candidate sign-up (we are here)
• October 22–24 - Discussion phase
• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

• The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
• Prospective candidates are advised to become familar with the community's expectations of adminstrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful and unsuccessful RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing.
• The process will have a one week call for candidates phase, a one week pause to set up SecurePoll, a three-day period of public discussion, followed by 7 days of no public discussion and a private vote using SecurePoll.
• The outcomes of this process are identical to making requests for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA or administrator elections.
• Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. A separate user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

To avoid sending too many messages, this will be the last mass message sent about administrator elections. If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Similar to Neath, New South Wales Eltham, New South Wales is missing but I did create Draft:Eltham, New South Wales which we could ask to be restored which may be of interest to you. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Eltham looks good, and I'll see if I can do that next. Thanks. Cremastra (talk) 17:52, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I've just requested the draft to be undeleted. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Okay, cheers. Cremastra (talk) 18:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Restored. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Neath, New South Wales at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edwardx (talk) 19:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest in the Knowledge Equity Program. I am writing to invite you to outline a Signpost article on the topic, anywhere from your own views in an opinion piece to a neutral presentation of the publicly available info as a journalistic review. Ping me if I can support. I can also talk off-wiki by voice or video if that helps to organize. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I was considering writing a short opinion piece for the Signpost. Thanks for your encouragement. (I'd like to keep things on-wiki though, please). Cheers, Cremastra (u — c) 15:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving articles on October! - My story today is a cantata 300 years old, based on a hymn 200 years old when the cantata was composed, based on a psalm some thousand years old, - so said the 2015 DYK hook. I had forgotten the discussion on the talk. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 22–24 - Discussion phase
• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Already voted! :) Cremastra (u — c) 00:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for closing that. May I ask you to add a "Moratorium is in effect until [date]" or somesuch to the closing statement? Counted from end of RM or end of moratorium discussion, whatever you think best. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Sure. I had added that to the FAQ, but it makes sense to state it in the close as well. Cremastra (u — c) 20:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

That I missed, thanks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Welcome, welcome, welcome Cremastra! I'm glad that you are joining the November 2024 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Cielquiparle (talk) 12:04, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey Cremastra,

You recently closed the discussion about whether the current article of perspiration should retain its title or be moved to 'sweat'. You closed the discussion with 'no consensus', which I respectfully disagree with. When counting everyone, including those who didn't directly choose a side, the result was evenly split at 50/50. However, WP:RMCI requires an evaluation of the arguments, so let's briefly review them: The opposers stated that they prefer one term to describes both the fluid and the process, and they rejected 'sweat' as too ambiguous, because it can also have several meanings based on its context. They also felt that 'perspiration' sounded more encyclopedic in line with WP:TONE to them. On the other hand, the supporters referred WP:COMMONNAME and WP:MEDTITLE, backed by Google Ngram, and argued for specifying the article either to the fluid or the process and not both at the same time, and aligning it with other articles that bear similar titles like 'sweat gland' and 'night sweats'. The deciding point is in my opinion the more personal feeling in contrast with clear rules and statistics.

Maybe you can explain your thinking. If you prefer not to change the decision, I would accept that and proceed with a move review unless you have another or better idea. –Tobias (talk) 21:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tobiasi0 I'm a little busy right now, but I'll reply to this soon in full. Basically, I feel that the ambiguity argument is actually just as good as the MEDTITLE-based one – note that the article discusses both in the lead: is the fluid secreted by and In humans, sweating is primarily...

However, I am willing to re-think this close, so no need to take it to move review just yet. I'll get back to you in a bit. (If you don't get a further response in the next couple days, you're welcome take it to MR.) Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 21:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I am confident in my close. You are welcome to proceed with a move review so that this can be subject to wider discussion/scrutiny. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 00:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tobiasi0 Pinging again in case they want to take this further? No pressure, just checking in. Cremastra (u — c) 23:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I just started the move review - we'll see where this takes us. –Tobias (talk) 13:04, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Link for people peering through my archives in future: Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2024 November Cremastra (u — c) 13:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

On 9 November 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Neath, New South Wales, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the rural village of Neath, New South Wales, had a population of three Tok Pisin speakers in 2021? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Neath, New South Wales. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Neath, New South Wales), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Times that 600 Wikipedians supported something indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Times that 800 Wikipedians supported something indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cremastra,

Please stop creating these categories. Within a day, they are obsolete and we just end up tagging them for speedy deletion as empty categories. You at 900 Wikipedians and the highest category is 1000 Wikipedians, please do not make categories for 1100, 1200, 1300, etc. etc. Just let the page stay in 1000 and after a month or two, when the numbers have settled down, you can form a category for whatever the final number is. But you don't have to create a new category every time the number goes up by 100. No one is keeping track of these categories but you and the admins who end up deleting these categories. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright, sure. I don't necessarily why the categories need to be immediately deleted– why not just tag them with {{pec}}, since it could fill up again in the future? – but I'll stop creating them.

Thanks, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 13:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank-you for the reminder. :) Cremastra ‹ u — c › 12:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi i men i just want to know why you reverting my intelligible edit on purpose regardless of my genuine and optimistic comment edit summary, honestly this article doesn't sphere any notable assertion but unfold the representation of WP:CASTEID sanction 2.126.189.56 (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this comment is completely incomprehensible to me. I'm guessing that English is not your first language, and that you're using Google Translate.

Your edit redirected a disambiguation page about a surname to an article about a caste. There was no reason to do that. WP:CASTEID is about whether peoples' caste should be listed in their biography articles; it is completely irrelevant here. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 17:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

ok captain america, the way you criticising my english speaking is totally unacceptable if you don't know it's strictly opt able in WP:NOPA i been around in this field for more than two year and don't feel abducted till this date thanks to you so straightforwardly come to the topic@Cremastra Harmonicraid (talk) 17:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Cremastra, Hope you are fine. I came across the link to the "Wikipedia Open Letter 2024" on your user page, and I really liked it. With your permission, may I copy and paste it onto my own user page? Baqi:) (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Of course, since my user page and everything is freely licensed. It just uses {{blue button}}. Cheers, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 13:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you:) Cheers! Baqi:) (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cremastra, you posted this message to my talk page. Yes, you are right, this redirect should be deleted. I checked all youth national basketball team redirects and realized that there were a lot of redirects to deletion. I wrote them down here: User:Maiō T./sandbox/list of unnecessary redirects. They are all unnecessary because those teams play only in one age category, not two. So I want to ask you to delete them all. Thanks, Maiō T. (talk) 18:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Great work compiling the list.

I'm not an administrator, and even if I was, I wouldn't delete them out-of-process. However, I can nominate bunches of them at RfD. I won't do them all at once, since that's too many for people to consider, but in smaller batches over multiple days. Cheers, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 18:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cremastra! Thank you for helping out at CFD; we really appreciate it. Two notes about Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 18#Category:Intersex. First, when placing discussions at WT:CFDW, we place them outside of the {{cot}}/{{cob}} bit (we collapse nominations which have been processed). The other thing is that none of those categories were tagged, meaning that the discussion should be relisted and tags placed on them. I would be happy to take care of that for you; also happy to let you do it. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

To editor HouseBlaster: Thank-you for your guidance. I've fixed the listing at WT:CFDW.

However, the pages were all tagged (example revision); the tags were removed when I closed the discussion in preparation of the renaming. Thanks, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 22:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

 Self-trout for not looking closer. In that case, different note: We generally leave things tagged, because the bot will de-tag them for us. It also helps catch times when they are not processed for whatever reason (by way of populating e.g. Category:Categories for discussion from November 2024). Sorry for the trouble, Cremastra. And thank you again for helping out :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

No worries, and my mistake for detagging them. Cheers, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 22:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving articles in November! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I uploaded pics of a trip that was a 10-day celebration of a 16 November event, but the day was also when a dear friend died. We sang Hevenu shalom aleichem at his funeral yesterday, and it was good. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Macrobdella decora, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eversion.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:51, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cremastra, I saw this and wondered why you think it isn't a copyright violation. Nobody (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@1AmNobody24 Because although it claims it's 98% match, the match is just a rather long book title that's cited in the references section. I may be missing something here, but I don't think there's any copyvio. Cheers, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 13:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I think you got that wrong. The book title is "Warfare, State and Society on the Black Sea Steppe, 1500-1700" not the whole section. Nobody (talk) 13:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand this comment – which section? Copypatrol [1] shows five matches: the first four are the phrase "Warfare, State and Society on the Black Sea Steppe, 1500-1700", which appears once in the article and four times in the source; the fifth match is the generic short phrase "on the Black Sea steppe". An earwig check returns nothing over 10%. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 13:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

This shows better what i mean. Nobody (talk) 14:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@1AmNobody24 Yes, that's my bad. I didn't see the "iThenticate report" link and was going only off the comparison in copypatrol. I guess the text is somewhere in the book we don't have access to. I'll take the necessary steps to remove the copyvio.

Sorry for the confusion,

Cremastra ‹ u — c › 20:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

You are a remarkable editor in many ways. You would be a good administrator, in my opinion, and appear to be well qualified. You personify an administrator without tools and have gained my support already!

Maliner (talk) 22:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, thank you. :) I'm not looking for the mop just yet, but I will bear your support in mind if I decide to go that way next year. Happy editing, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 22:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Best of luck! Maliner (talk) 22:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cremastra, you closed the RfD as Keep, but did not remove the RfD tags from the redirect. Jay 💬 22:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed thank you very much for telling me. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 22:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Cremastra for collecting more than 3.0 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's NOV24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 8,000 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer Alt (talk) 18:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Haha, thanks. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 20:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		For creating {{dabr}} and {{setr}} to address a common problem at RfD. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I had the idea a little while ago but didn't act on it until now.

Hopefully it gets used. :) Cremastra ‹ u — c › 21:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance! Because I recently brought up copyvio issues on the article page, I brusquely removed my talk page message when you were clearly referring to a different thing. Silly me. Thanks again for looking out!Plasticwonder (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for the brownie. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 01:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

File:Statues of Three Wise Men in the Philippines 06.jpg

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you today for improving article quality in December! - Today is a woman poet's centenary. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025!  ♦ Maliner (talk) 09:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

No

187.148.94.39 (talk) 22:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)