Pppery is currently feeling discouraged about Wikipedia and is taking an off-and-on wikibreak due to loss of motivation. Your help in cheering this user up would be appreciated. He will return when his wikistress has dissipated and his confidence in the wikicommunity has been restored.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24

Just wanted to let you know that I'm sad to see you resign, and hope you will return to being an admin soon, though I can totally understand how Wikipedia may have been quite demotivating for you lately. Your contributions as an admin, particularly focus on typically-overlooked administrative areas, are things that the community will be worse off without. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. I saw you a lot on my watchlist doing interface admin stuff. A surprising resignation. I hope all is OK! –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto the ditto! This feels like a major loss. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to say the same thing. Your contributions to the admin corps, especially around out-of-process speedy deletions, will be missed. Hopefully this is just temporary and we'll be queueing up to say "welcome back" when you're in the the right head-space. Thryduulf (talk) 04:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh. Didn't realize I'd be joining a party down here, but I suppose I should have expected it. Thanks for all your hard work around the encyclopedia. -- asilvering (talk) 04:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My brain hasn't quite accepted it yet. I just actioned some of your speedy deletion nominations, and it took me about 30 seconds to get past "Why didn't Ppp just delete these himself?" Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:36, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I did not see this coming. Thank you for your service as an admin, and enjoy non-admin life, although I would love to see you back one day. Queen of Hearts (talk) 06:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessary to request desysop if you don't want/need the tools - just don't use them. Like all editors, admins are volunteers - you can't be forced to block/delete/protect: if you don't want to look at the requests for admin actions, just leave them for somebody else to pick up. Except that, to avoid somebody fifteen months down the line saying "this user hasn't used the tools in over a year - let's desysop them", I would dip into a speedy deletion category every 6-9 months and find something that can 100% uncontroversially be deleted - such as a CSD U1 with no edits by anybody else - and delete that. Hey presto, painless job security. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you are doing well. Your contributions on FPER and IPER areas would be greatly missed! – SD0001 (talk) 08:35, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• A sad day Pppery. I hope everything's OK where it matters. (IRL) Hopefully still see you around. SerialNumber54129 11:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work as an admin. I appreciate everything you’ve done and wish you the best going forward. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Echoing all of the above. Enjoy your time away from the toolkit; it is waiting for your return. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With this much-dreaded news, I shall commence with my planned weeping and gnashing of teeth. SilverLocust 💬 22:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I hope you have a productive time away from the toolkit, and hope to see you back with it! --qedk (t 愛 c) 23:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what led to this, but I hope you're well. And thanks for all the admin work. Guettarda (talk) 23:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Just stopping by to express confidence in you again. – Fayenatic London 08:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am only just seeing this and echo the above. Your admin contributions have been valuable and will be missed. Hope you'll feel positive about picking back up the mop and interface squeegee after a healing break 🙏🏽 Folly Mox (talk) 16:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

interface squeegee. I'm stealing that xD –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there's something amiss with User:Pppery/topicons. In some skins, it makes the page title read vertically instead of horizontally, pushing the text "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia", and everything after that, several inches down the page. I use Firefox 129.0.2 under Windows 10.

These skins show the problem:

• Cologne Blue
• MonoBook
• Vector (legacy)

These skins are fine:

• Minerva Neue
• Modern
• Timeless
• Vector 2022

The problem is also evident at any page that transcludes User:Pppery/topicons - such as this user talk page. See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pppery?useskin=vector --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Odd. That definitely wasn't the case before, and I've been using legacy vector for years. I can reproduce it now. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having this problem too, except for me it's with User:Bradv/Scripts/Superlinks, which places some links at the top in a floating div. WP:ITSTHURSDAY MediaWiki HTML change maybe? Skin: vector-2010. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I've had this style on my user page for years, and I can reproduce it too. Looks like someone needs to file a Phabricator ticket. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

phab:T373617 is now open for business. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that was quick work. I was wondering whether to escalate it to VPT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see no namespace editnotice when I visit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MOS_talk:EM&action=edit. It appears that you have created the MOS talk namespace editnotice in the wrong namespace. Please fix this by moving Template talk:Editnotices/Namespace/MOS talk to Template:Editnotices/Namespace/MOS talk. GTrang (talk) 19:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery Hi there, as you're the one you denied history merge of Draft:Make Mate 1 and Make Make 1. Is this same situation with Draft:Bunny and Her Boys and Bunny and her Boys because both were edited by the same editor? 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 05:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no longer an admin so no longer have any say in the matter, but, assuming the deletion of the draft per G7 is correct, no history merge would be needed. But "both were edited by the same editor" is an oversimplification - "both were edited only by the same editor" would be more correct. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@98Tigerius: Butting in here to say that the G7 indeed was correct. You can actually verify that for yourself; non-admins can get a list of editors of deleted pages through the API (like this; API sandbox). Sometimes that's misleading since you can't see edit summaries unless you're an admin, but in this case nobody edited the draft at all except User:Aidillia. —Cryptic 17:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was just wondering why you marked the article Autopista Regional del Centro as unreviewed (see here). I am the user who originally marked it as reviewed after tagging it with the appropriate maintenance tags and ensuring the article met notability guidelines. harrz ^talk 17:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it cites no sources. It's very rarely appropriate to mark completely unsourced articles as reviewed. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:20, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I understand now. This is true and I did consider this however the topic is still certainly notable and I checked its corresponding article on the Spanish Wikipedia, which cites 7 sources that I can transfer over to this wiki - I will do this when I have a spare moment later today. harrz ^talk 17:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Pppery! I wanted to let you know that I declined the G4 for Marko Stout as the article is not sufficiently similar to the one previously deleted via discussion. If you feel that Stout's notability remains unchanged, you will need to open another discussion. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. I seem to have adpoted an idiosyncratic view of G4 and salting which frequently winds up in this situation. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:28, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Manual edit requests has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Survey_(dark_mode_reporting) you said this involves spending a lot of effort fixing something that isn't really broken. I responded on how the current system is broken. Would you mind clarifying how the system isn't broken? Thanks, —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 17:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to get the history of pages that were in a category? I would have liked to see such a thing for Category:Wikipedia Office-protected pages. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 06:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For recent (in the last 30 days) changes, you can use User:Nardog/CatChangesViewer, with various caveats. I don't think there's any way to look deeper into the past than that other than the Wayback Machine or database dumps, though.

A better way to get the information you are looking for is to look for protection log entries by WMF accounts. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the implied question, there have been a total of 17 uses of the protection tool by WMF accounts since 2016. 3 are related to this case. One was a mistake (a WMF staffer whose also a local admin accidentally using the staff account), 3 are related to tech stuff rather any kind of office action. One was part of WP:FRAM. 6 were apparent tests of the protection system. One (Senford High School) was a removal of an office action. One was fallout from WP:FLOW. So nothing like this has happened since at least then. Raw results at https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/36672. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent instance I can find of anything vaguely similar is Lois Lee, which was full-protected (with content) in 2015. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's very helpful; I didn't know of this site (Quarry). So, the last office action – concerning content - was about a decade ago. What was the OA concerning the High School? TrangaBellam (talk) 06:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted in March 2012, and then salted as an office action from April 2012 to September 2017. See the logs * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend. Do you think it's a good idea to mass remove links to Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation? It's still a blue link and it will be unlocked/undeleted at some point. And it may also be good from a strategy/awareness angle to bring some clicks/views/attention to this unusual situation. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:35, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not something I care a lot about, but I think it's better we try to heal into a self-consistent state involving that article not existing, rather than deliberately sending people to the memory hole. Reverts are cheap, so when it comes back it won't be hard to revert my edits. I likewise would prefer that the article on the individual case be a redirect to an appropriate section rather than a visible sore (assuming that's legally allowed). I totally get the other viewpoint, though. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:HouseBlaster submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Editor Pppery is the definition of a strong back-end contributor. You have probably seen some of his work without realizing it; a few highlights include expanding the functionality of Template:XFD backlog to cover all XfDs, improving Module:Bad title suggestion, modernizing The Wikipedia Adventure, and a significant rewrite of Module:Authority control. He frequently steps up to the plate to take care of tasks nobody else is doing, including single-handedly keeping down the backlog at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and for many months he was the only one processing the endless requests for assistance at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Working. They recently handed in the mop, and I speak for many people by saying I hope he finds editing without the tools rejuvenating, and I look forward to when you pick it back up . Your work is sincerely appreciated. This nomination was seconded by User:Novem Linguae, User:TechnoSquirrel69, Hey man im josh, User:Queen of Hearts, User:Sohom Datta and User:Theleekycauldron

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Former Administrator

Pppery

Editor of the Week for the week beginning October 27, 2024

Pppery is the definition of a strong back-end line contributor. His work includes expanding the functionality of Template:XFD backlog to cover all XfDs, improving Module:Bad title suggestion, modernizing The Wikipedia Adventure, and a significant rewrite of Module:Authority control. He frequently steps up to the plate to take care of tasks nobody else is doing, including single-handedly keeping down the backlog at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and for many months he was the only one processing the endless requests for assistance at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Working. Recently he handed in the mop, and the hope is he finds editing without the tools rejuvenating,. His work is sincerely appreciated by all.

Recognized for

strong back-end contributions

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 12:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, what's with the removed hatnotes on FA and RM dab pages. Let me know asap. Thank you. ScarletViolet tc 12:38, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really think people are likely to look for either of those processes in mainspace, or that those who do are likely to be able to competently contribute to them? For featured articles the answer is "no" on both counts for both cases. RM is slightly more justifiable, and I didn't remove the hatnote (CFA did), but again the same logic applies. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits to Wikipedia talk:Queen Elizabeth slipped majestically into the water.

Uh-oh, did I misclick? I hope not. Awesome Aasim 01:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I think the XFDcloser tool broke. Awesome Aasim 02:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Can you please explain why you declined the history merge at Shenington Airfield?

The whole point of the history merge was to fix the attribution, at Wikipedia:HISTMERGE it says "A history merge is required for attribution purposes, as attribution is lost during a cut/paste page move where there are multiple editors at the old page. In the image shown, it appears as if the user Thegreatrebellion had created the entirety of the added text at Syed Saddiq, when the reality is that there were contributions from over 200 editors at the previous page name of Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman. While this is not an exhaustive list, any pages meeting the below criteria may be eligible for a histmerge: There are several editors in the page history at the original location"

In your edit summary you say " the author seems to intend these as two separate articles", where did you get this information from? The editor hasn't been active since they created the article by copying and pasting and hasn't responded to the message on their page.

The info at Shenington Gliding Club, only consists of 3 lines about the club? How is a gliding club notable enough for a separate article?

Gavbadger (talk) 20:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Shenington Airfield explicitly says Currently, it is owned by Shenington Airfield Ltd, and leases use of the site to various organisations, predominatly the Shenington Gliding Club. is where I got that implication from. If what they intended was a move they wouldn't have done a circular link like that. What I'm seeing there looks like a bad attempt at a split (which should have been attributed per WP:CWW), not an attempt at a cut-paste move that needs repairing. If the eventual outcome is that the gliding club article is deleted or turned back into a redirect, resulting in only an article at the airfield title surviving, I will gladly move the history to the survivor, but right now that's not what I'm seeing. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response, i've tagged the gliding article for notability, i'll give editors a week to improve the article, otherwise i'll tag it for merging to the airfield article. Gavbadger (talk) 20:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I want to explain my merge history request. I created a page that is a redirect, "List of WWE Women's United States Championship", as it will be used later on, but I realized after the page's creation that I had made a typo in the name. The page was meant to be titled "List of WWE Women's United States Champions". I went to move the page to have the correct name, but when I did, I noticed that another page had been created after the original page with the name that I had intended. Thus, I wanted to merge the histories of the pages for archival purposes as the latter page was created after the former. I hope that this clears everything up. Thank you for your time. Obi-WanKenobi-2005 (talk) 21:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reason to merge the history of a creation of a redirect since nobody's attribution is being violated. I see no need to do anything other than delete the page with the typo if you want it deleted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought of a way to make use of the page. I moved it to a draft page with the correct titled so that myself and other editors could work on readying the page itself. Thank you for your time. Obi-WanKenobi-2005 (talk) 04:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you've been resysopped, you may want to change the userbox on your userpage that says you're a former administrator. Or maybe you don't want to. Whatever floats your boat. Just making you aware in case you forgot about it. Useight (talk) 17:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had forgotten, and may change it someday, but I technically still am a former admin in addition to a current one. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used to be a fan of Mitch Hedberg. I still am, but I used to, too. Useight (talk) 22:19, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you reconsider your G5 decline on GISB Holdings? PaleWhisper has also been blocked as a sock of Ibn Juferi. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's still borderline IMO. But I think discounting PaleWhisper puts it just on the other side of the border, so deleted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Trying to clean up after this sockmaster. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pppery,

I was running some queries on Quarry and saw that you just ran a lot of queries. I was wondering, would Admins without RfAs include admins who went through an election rather than an RFA? Just curious.

Since you are so adept at queries, I might come to you with a coding problem that keeps coming up if you have a second to look at it. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it checks for the existence of a "Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/<username>" page. And for admin election candidates that page was created as a redirect. So it only includes dinosaur admins these days.

That specific query is largely a relic from a period in 2019 where I created RfA redirects for every admin that had changed usernames since passing. But I've kept running it in my giant set of queries I run about once a week just because. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the page of New Pages Feed and have added some references into it. After that, i saw that it was edited by the IP 106.205.136.132, who removed redirect and added new information to the page. forgive if i made a mistake. TheChronikler7 (talk) 13:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I desysopped for a couple months a couple years ago. I'd realized one day that I hadn't edited in like two months (and I'm a daily editor), and I decided to try desysopping to see if it had something to do with being an admin. Turned out it had something to do with a particular admin task: moving preps to queues at DYK. This is an area in which plenty of admins work as editors, but almost none working in as admins. I'd felt obligated to perform the task -- it was one of the reasons I'd RfA'd -- even though I was feeling increasingly resentful. As soon as I desysopped, I started editing again, and I realized it had been the sense of obligation and accompanying resentment that had kept me from logging in. I didn't want to see that big pile of work I felt resentful of having to do. Figuring out what the problem was and how to deal with it (stop feeling obligated, it's not my responsibility) let me feel like I could resysop, and I did, deciding I was going to do my fair share of admin work at DYK, and that was it. When I create some work for admins there, I do some admin work there, too. Valereee (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have forgot the password for NGC 2736 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)} How can I log in to that account now or can recover password? CometVolcano (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you've forgotten the password (and don't have access to the email address so can't reset it) then there's no way you can. But we have to have some way of proving you're who you say you are.

And even if you were able to I would still decline for the reasons I explained at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pppery! It's great to see you're back on the sysop bit again :) While I do not want this page again User:Vanderwaalforces/Benin moat (revised), I want its history to be merged to Benin Moat first before deletion. I'm sure you can help with that. Many thanks! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:31, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do phabricator. Have no developer skill. Perhaps you ca help AmmandaNP fix UTRS. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS isn't broken in the software development sense. It has a deliberate feature to limit the number of comments being given. And JayCubby is resorting to an unorthodox workaround to get around it I guess. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that. And, I think, unique. Whatever works. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anyway I can stop getting emails about the dramaz unfolding on Phabricator? I think you carrying appellant's messages over to UTRS is great, but I don't need these emails. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've unsubscribed you from that task (which you could have done yourself - click "unsubscribe"). But I think they've been told to stop doing that already so it wouldn't happen anymore anyway. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed you declined my WP:U2 tag and draftifed User:/Blaise Reuterswärd to Draft:Blaise Reuterswärd. I chose to tag for CSD since the user also made an identical version of the page at User:Roxane CANSALAS/Blaise Reuterswärd at nearly the same time. I assumed the one at the malformed username was an actual accident and not an attempt to main space it. (Although I could see how tagging the incorrect user U2 and potentially moving the other user draft to draft space, although I prefer not to do that unless a user has put an AFC template on their userspace draft. So, no big deal, of course, and if this outcome is what you think is best, that's fine. But I do wonder/wish there was an easy way to explain a bit more background in CSDs, potentially. Thanks. Skynxnex (talk) 17:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see that, and might have acted differently if I had, but now that I've done that U2 doesn't apply so there's nothing I can do. Most likely the draft version will be G13-ed in six months and the userspace version will languish forever. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Thanks for the reply; I'll try to figure out how to better signal such context. Skynxnex (talk) 18:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, you're not an idiot. After all, just a few days prior, I did this. JJP_Master (she/they) 15:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who among us has not had a "meh" moment. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	Barnstar of Motivation
	Thank you for being my motivation to keep going with Wikipedia! After seeing all of your edits I strive to aim for more effort not just in Wikipedia but also in life! Midpour (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the double-CSD at Template:Editnotices/Group/Wikipedia talk:Friendly. I was working down a list and didn't notice that you had declined the first CSD. Strangely, I didn't get a notification the first time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted. I think manual reverts don't send notifications, and my usual style when declining is to just remove the CSD tag with no further notice. I declined ~20 other G7s you nominated that are the same situation, which you may want to bundle into that TfD.

Personally I think these should be speedy deletable, and I would have deleted them under the proposed T5, but you were stretching G7 in a way I don't think it will go. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I have since TFD'd these, and I'm glad to see that T5 was accepted. I admit that I do stretch the CSD criteria sometimes, but people do so much weird stuff in template space, and it is nice to keep the reports somewhat manageable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:57, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have mistakenly deleted the talk page for the squash player. Please fix this by first moving Talk:Abhay Singh to a temporary title, then undeleting the mistakenly deleted talk page, moving it to Talk:Abhay Singh (squash player), and finally moving the page with the temporary title back to its original location. GTrang (talk) 17:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. There was also an earlier untidy history merge I could have cleaned up, but it would have been a total pain and isn't my fault so I just left it as is. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon thinking your response over, I'm going to slow down with editing. I don't know what I was thinking, but I'm definitely not ready to have that level of power again. I'm sorry for all the trouble I caused with AutoWikiBrowser in the past. Also, happy almost 100k edits! - OpalYosutebito (talk) 16:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Pppery. I notice that you fully-protected Module:Portal to the admin level. I've been the main editor maintaining the module for the past 2 years, but I'm only a templateeditor not a full admin (since I don't want to deal with wikidrama). It's fine to keep it at admin-level protection, because the module is relatively stable, but wanted to let you know we're going to lose my direct maintenance (i.e., I will have to pester admins now). IMO we don't gain much protection by going from templateeditor to admin level. — hike395 (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a well-established principle that a template's dependencies should be protected at least as well as the base template. Module:WikiProject banner, which a different admin fully protected, calls Module:Portal on almost all uses, and hence the protection must flow. I'm happy to review edit requests. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this, then how about moving Draft:CaseOh1 to Draft:CaseOh? It was intentionally misnamed by the mover because mainspace CaseOh is protected from this nincompoopery. Thanks for any feedback. JFHJr (㊟) 02:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I wonder if it's possible to protect all main space creations beginning with "CaseOh" ...the back-and-forth to draft space is longstanding and now someone found a workaround for the creation protection. JFHJr (㊟) 02:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's possible using MediaWiki:Titleblacklist. You aren't quite at the point where I would think that warranted yet, though. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again. Your perspective is helpful. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 02:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar for the Oops
		Did not know that Ragpicking was a thing, thanks for linking that page. --Thebirdlover (talk) 10:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Articles with wikipuffery progress has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Monthly clean-up category (Articles with wikipuffery) counter has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that. It was indeed a mouse slip. I immediately undid but you were faster. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, when you have time, would you mind taking a look at your recent edit of List of mayors and lord mayors of Perth? It contained some partial/broken formatting, which I removed in this edit. Those numbers looked important, but I couldn't figure out what they indicated, so I removed them for now, so the rest of that election box would display correctly. Could you flesh that out and re-add?

Second issue: that election box is missing a title. Could you add that in as well? Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 03:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. What I was intending to do was copy from Results of the 2023 Western Australian local elections#Mayoral elections 3 since the template wasn't working, but instead I ended up copying only half of the wikitext and causing a mess. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that you are discouraged. Have some strawberries! Maliner (talk) 15:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious about the rationale for "keep" on this TFD. Nobody was able to provide a single example of how this template is actually useful in providing guidance to editors. I'm just confused.

Also, thanks for being an admin and closing discussions and processing speedy deletions and everything else you do that I don't even know about. I do not have the temperament to be a good admin, and I am grateful for people like you who do. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This looks to me like a clear WP:1AM situation to me, where you made your case but failed to convince any of the other participants.

You've made an assumption here which pervaded all of your comments, that the existence of this template necessarily implies the existence of a distinct "Ugandan English" variety that would be used in articles. Other participants have not necessarily made that assumption, and indeed it seems to me like Amakuru and Docentation are explicitly challenging it. Your refutations to them are reasonable, but not so strong as to warrant discounting either side entirely, and there's no clear policy on the matter either way that I'm aware of. And the keep side had a near 3:1 majority, which defaults to a consensus to keep unless there's a really good reason otherwise, which I'm frankly not seeing. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I will drop this particular stick and see if anyone else cares to pick it up. These templates appear to have been a mess since their creation; every discussion I find about them is a morass of muddy reasoning, and I should clearly include my own reasoning in that morass. I suspect that we are all discussing the templates while standing on wobbly tussocks instead of on solid ground, so there may not be hope for sensible discussions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I ever create a band, it'll be called "Wobbly Tussocks." -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, please display both language because Star Awards is a Mandarin speaking event, while Singapore uses English as their national language, do not argue again, this will lead to unresolved issue. Thank you for your corporation. (Unknown152438 (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC))[reply]

I reverted your attempt to turn the article into a blatant advertisement several months ago. I have had no involvement in this dispute. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those pages (User talk:235.0.0.1, User talk:230.92.7.64 & User talk:0.24.105.24) clearly satisfy WP:U2 as the IPs has no any edits, both active and deleted, those pages should be deleted per U2. 219.76.15.133 (talk) 04:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the last one, since I don't think 0.* IPs are even routable. I still see no value in deleting the first two, so am declining to do so. And I think that part of U2 should exclude all valid IP addresses even ones that happen to have made no edits. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to leave a message here saying that I liked your signature, but I saw the message at the top and wanted to leave my thanks for all the work you do around the encyclopedia! JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 05:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed the article for pump.fun. Yes it was re-created after it was removed, but the sourcing was completely re-done to address the issues brought up in the first deletion discussion, mainly WP:NCRYPTO and notability.

It doesn't look like there was any discussion on the contents of the article this time around? Was just removed and salted because it was re-created shortly after the initial deletion? Chiffre01 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You're showing willful contempt of our processes by refusing to respect the outcome of that AfD. And I'm not required to treat that contempt with any kindness. Take it to WP:Deletion review if you insist. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if there was any hostility, it was not intended. But here's the discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2024_December_9 Chiffre01 (talk) 19:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You gave me my first (and only) barnstar when I just began editing here. I came back to thank you and offer you holiday wishes, but I see you're discouraged, and I can understand that. But why can't we harness the power of artificial intelligence to monitor and maintain quality of articles already published? Why should lazy buggers be the only ones using it to create self-promotional articles or worse? Yeah. You've probably thought of that yonks ago. But still, why not? Why should the lazy buggers have all the fun? Well, here: have a nice buche de noël. You can bite the head off the moose if it'll make you feel better.

Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 03:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ppery - hope you are de-stressing fast: we all need confidence, especially when encountering "surprises" on WP - as happened to me when encountering "Candace" (see discussion). I have restored content (origin all mine) on the Candace (bug) page because (1) there is uninamity for it in the discussion (2) the links involved and (3) wish to further develop content. I think there may have been an error in the move request: the move debate - and history - surely is about placement of the disambiguation page(s). Brgds. Roy Bateman (talk) 07:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your refusal to follow proper processes here is just creating makework for everyone. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that (cock-up not conspiracy - or "refusal") - I also regret getting involved with the enthusiastic editors of Kandake. Brgds. Roy Bateman (talk) 01:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I wasn't intending to accuse you of some kind of conspiracy. Anyway I've cleaned things up now. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't that a strange request? The page clearly appeared to pass GNG for me... BusterD (talk) 01:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It did seem odd to me, but I saw no reason not to grant it since they were the only substantive contributor. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you indulge me and look at this? They've done this once before. Two reasonably well created stubs on potentially notable subjects which both appear to meet GNG (based on applied sources), and they're both G7'd months later? I'd call it unlikely. BusterD (talk) 03:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see. I'm not sure what you're expecting me to do about it, though. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:39, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking for confirmation of what I saw. Thanks. BusterD (talk) 03:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Bkissin has asked how to proceed with Draft:Northern Ireland Act 2000 following your decline of the G5 nomination. I wanted to get your thoughts on the matter. I'm not giving away any CU secrets here, the block was sufficiently long ago for me to have no recollection of the IPs involved, but the creation/editing history of the draft is sufficiently ducky to leave no doubt that this was a creation of the sockmaster. I don't like rewarding LOUTSOCK gaming of our deletion rules by socks, and would personally have accepted the G5, but I'm not going to arbitrarily reverse your decision without discussing it with you.

The sockmaster's original block by Blablubbs was for copyvio. I would suggest that, if the draft is not to be deleted per G5, someone needs to give it a particularly thorough going over to look for copied prose. Girth Summit _(blether) 05:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're sufficiently convinced that the IP address a sockpuppet to press the G5 button, I have no objection. As an admin reviewing the deletion queue who has no familiarity with that sockmaster I wasn't, but you clearly know more. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I've gone ahead and deleted it. Girth Summit _(blether) 07:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about your delete. Don't you see a problem here? (that problem section was my explanation) And if the problem you see is the expert tag, what would you recommend? --Louis P. Boog (talk) 19:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding {{Expert}} with no parameters and no useful edit summary is not helpful. See Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_February_9#Template:Expert_needed. I would not have removed that if you had linked to the talk page somehow, and ideally also associated it with a WikiProject. See Template:Expert needed#How to use. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:46, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. KMaster888 (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wut? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See KMaster888's contributions, they should speak for themselves as to what this is about. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

eeeewww -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fast, meaningless edits? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That, and those edits are breaking things and they're edit warring with me when I try to fix them (i.e. the history of Parks–McClellan filter design algorithm). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think User:KMaster888 is overly adept at receiving and responding to criticism. Odd. SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 11:50, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher){@Serial Number 54129: Never saw it put that way before.😜 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:03, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was the politest way I could think of, Deepfriedokra  ;) SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 12:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to request that the Sabang, Aceh page be moved back to "Sabang" which was moved by someone in 2012. Ariankntl (talk) 03:05, 14 December 2024 Ariankntl (talk) 04:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The city of Sabang in Aceh is a major topic that is more widely known than other entities with similar names. Per Wikipedia policy, disambiguation pages may be moved to "Sabang (disambiguation)" if needed. Please help, thank you Ariankntl (talk) 04:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:Requested moves#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know what G14 is actually. But I do think Sir Frank redirecting to Frank Gordon is unnecessary. Since you are an admin, I would like you to propose to delete the page or redirect please. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:27, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to WP:Redirects for discussion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I take it there? Servite et contribuere (talk) 06:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Redirects for discussion#How to list a redirect for discussion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What on Earth Makes Me Think G14 Applies here? I was just looking for a simple way to delete the redirect because I don’t think Sir Frank redirecting to Frank Gordon is realistic Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It just seems weird that “Sir Frank” would redirect to “Frank Gordon”, also, what does “it has begun…” mean? Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:58, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1263778577: I'm getting tired of cleaning up after you people. I think a kind note to the editor in question would be more effective than a rude comment in the edit history, especially coming from an administrator. Mackensen (talk) 17:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	You deserve it! 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 22:37, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:38, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Crafterstar, I had made a request for AWB tools, but you asked Dr Vulpes for opinion about it. It has been 7 days since his comment, nad he has yet to make a comment. I was somewhat waiting for a response from him, and yet, it seems he has not made any contribution since that edit. Is there a possibility that you just to deciding whether you grant or deny the request? Thank you for your response. Crafterstar (talk) 14:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also trying to take a break right now (albeit not very successfully). If this idles out for ever longer I may be convinced to grant, but not yet. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy holidays and a prosperous 2025!	2025 has begun... (Or, at least, it will begin soon.)
	Pppery, thank you for everything you have done over the past year. I know you don't normally leave an extended comment at RfAs, so the fact you did at my RfA (and even reaffirmed your support) meant a lot to me. In discussions, sometimes we take the polar opposite point of view, sometimes I cannot agree more strongly with what you have to say. But I know that you have put a great deal of careful thought into what you are saying :) Wishing the best to you and yours in 2025, and happy holidays! Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Pppery, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~

Hello Pppery: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas3}} to send this message.

--Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ppperymerry Christmas! So sorry for posting here. I can't stop my own thread for some reason. Respectfully, why did you reinstate an edit made by someone who admitted to publicly attacking Li as an "opportunistic grifter"? This is egregious malpractice and a violation of Wikipedia standards. Can you please uphold our standards?! https://x.com/Laurence1084/status/1870496100 Thank you so much! Happy holidays! Napoleonjosephine2020 (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because the consensus of the community is clearly against you. And that twitter link doesn't work for me anyway.

You are very close to an indef block as WP:NOTHERE. I would strongly suggest disengaging. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:12, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(redact WP:outing)

He even pondered out loud whether this should be grounds for removing his edit. I have a screenshot of the tweet he just deleted a few minutes ago. Happy to send it to you. But I can't upload images. Napoleonjosephine2020 (talk) 23:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Napoleonjosephine2020: Might consider emailing off-Wiki evidence to ArbCom. We don't link users to off-Wiki identity -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! How do I email ArbCom? I screenshotted on his public posts against Li because I assumed he would delete them. Definitely saved all the evidence, though, and am happy to provide. Thanks so much! There is clear animus and bias against her. Extremely upsetting that the editors fell for it and let it stand :( Napoleonjosephine2020 (talk) 23:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Arbitration Committee#Contacting the Committee. And I assure you I am not at all biased. I had never ever heard her name until a few days ago. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:40, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! Really appreciate you pointing me in the right direction. May I send you the screenshots as well so you can see the clear bias against her? I tried to link to his Reddit post but it was removed above (I understand why). Thanks again. Merry Christmas and happy Hanukkah! Napoleonjosephine2020 (talk) 03:59, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an admin so can see the link you posted before that was removed. But I'm not interested in discussing this with you any further. This isn't about bias, it's about you refusing to accept when consensus is against you. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy Holidays
	Happy Holidays, and here's to the new year! (and thank you!) Plasticwonder (talk) 02:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Clock/calendar. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing my stupid (but significant) typo. Much obliged! 97.102.205.224 (talk) 20:44, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:45, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello/שלום Yesterday I made a Page I’m gonna expand it,so as I said that I wonder if I can remake the page please? Support from 🇮🇱🇺🇸😀. Noam Elyada (talk) 13:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not until you become extended-confirmed, as the rules for the topic dictate. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Pppery,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Pppery,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 20:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 20:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pppery, about the declined CSD, I understand that the article creation doesn't predate the block, but the {{db-g5}} referred instead to a topic ban that the user was subject to. It was discussed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement § Walter Tau. I think there was consensus there that the subject of the draft (created on 4 December) violated the topic ban, which was implemented 26 November.

If I'm mistaken and this isn't appropriate for the CSD tag, that's fine. Just thought I'd clarify based on the edit summary. Thanks, all best. Happy New Year, Bobby Cohn (talk) 01:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since you were the one who rolled back my edit, perhaps you can answer a question for me; why is I Love the '70s: Volume 2 a redirect to the I Love the... page, but none of the other mini-series pages do that? I undid the redirect because it's inconsistent with the other pages. If that one redirects, then why do none of the others do? Thank you. PAKMan1988 (talk) 05:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Love the '70s: Volume 2. And I rolled back your edit because you're unilaterally overturning the result of a community discussion, which is verboten. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you recently protected from vandalism (Mirpur district, India), has now been nominated for deletion by an editor. Your contribution to the discussion would be appreciated. Kind regards --Rvd4life (talk) 00:47, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not care, and find this attempt at canvassing inappropriate. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's a frequent target, but is indef protection really needed? RoySmith (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason to suspect time will alleviate the problem? I think not, and it's been going on for months now.

Playing whack-a-mole with short protections is a necessary evil for high-traffic noticeboards with lots of posts from new users like the help desk or the teahouse, but for back-end noticeboards it seems wiser to just set it to indefinite. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, replied at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#swarajyamag.com. extra999 (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award
		This award is given in recognition to Pppery for conducting 500 article reviews in 2024. Thank you so much for all your excellent work. Keep it up! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Anti-Spam Barnstar
		You are hereby awarded this Anti-Spam barnstar for your work on the spam black/whitelist pages. Stifle (talk) 13:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope you're doing good? Happy new year.

See, recently I made two request on the request page on AWB and PCR, all denied. I clearly understand the reason behind the PCR denial. But AWB really? Your reason is because I set a goal of 30k edits by the end of the year 2025? I clearly stated that to show how motivated I am to contribute actively to the encyclopedia, and with or without AWB, I will achieve it given the pace I'm going through.

I'm relatively new here, and within a timeframe of 1 month on wikipedia, I created 21 standard articles on Wikipedia with majority either start or C class. I have almost 16 editors praising my efforts in providing resources full information regarding Nigeria, you can look up my talkpage. I had 900+ generic edits within a month and before the threshold of January ending, I predict to have 35 standing C class articles, all within a month.

See what you did is called bias. you didn't check my activity, you judged based on a statement of motivation I said.

This community is basically discouraging and I'm already fed up with it. I came very enthusiastic with the spirit of contribution to open source knowledge, but leaving with disappointment. I know a user with 10 articles and 520 edits and has access to AWB, what you did is bias, judging from a mere statement of motivation. Best Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 01:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So what am I allegedly biased against? People making automated edits? People using AWB? If either of those were true I would not have spend months monitoring WP:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage and approving dozens of people. If you mean "am I biased against people with editcountitis", then yes and rightly so. I continue to feel that the mindset expressed there is incompatible with AWB usage, and am unlikely to be convinced otherwise.

Finally, I see the number of articles you have created as mostly irrelevant to whether you are qualified for AWB - the two are very different skillsets. I'm an admin and AWB user, and have created precisely zero articles.

I'll drop a ping to Primefac, the other regular reviewer of permission requests there, and see if they wish to comment. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of agree with pppery on this one. Wanting to help out is great, as is recognising that some fixes occur frequently and it's a pain to do them manually. Implying that you're doing it to rack up your edit count is somewhat concerning. Now I will be honest, I do not usually cross-check perms and likely would have granted this had I been the first to review the request, so maybe come back in a month or two and re-request. Primefac (talk) 20:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac Your response is more validate than that of the other editor. I appreciate the fact that you implied to comeback in a month, and I promise to come back stronger. But what I noticed closely is that, people who tend to write short sentence on the request page gets approved immediately even if they are not up to the criteria. I have came across few.

I went ahead to explain in details that I need access to make manual edits, even stated that I'm new and given the current rate at which I'm going, I have projected to reach a designated number of edits. with our without AWB.

strangely enough, what shocked me is the fact that the editor left all those comment and fired straight at me even quoting my statement of motivation.

Primefac, check my history, I started becoming more active on Wikipedia and in less than a month, I created 20+ articles and 1000 edits. That's the main Idea why I stated that.

But right way firing at me if not impressive, and I don't even want access to the AWB tool again.

Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 20:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]