User talk:Hey man im josh

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, linking to me ({{Ping|Hey man im josh}}), so that I will be notified. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, linking to your username, so that you will be notified. Please click here to leave me a new message.

This is Hey man im josh's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This talk page is automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. Any threads with no replies in 75 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

I'm sorry to hear that another editor's persistent disruptive conduct has lead you to spending less time on the site. I know what's it like to be wikihounded by someone, but I don't have any good advice for that situation. I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate the work you do here, and I know lots of other people do, too. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:06, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Bgsu98, I very much appreciate the comment. I hope I can feel the fire and will to come back and do more... but the drama and headaches regarding things I want to work on and contribute to have really run me down, and led to it being a battle instead of something I was enjoying contributing to. Comments that encourage others are always valuable though, because people need to know they're appreciated, and I appreciate what you do and that you went out of your way to make this comment to me. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I read your response at ANI and it made me chuckle. A few years back, I was throwing a tantrum at the ice rink over something ridiculous, and the skating director said to me, "You are a grown-ass man" and then preceded to tear me a new one, which I deserved. So I always appreciate seeing that phrase justifiably used. 😂 Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:37, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Bgsu98, I don't like to take that tone, but sometimes we all get tired of handling people with kid gloves.... But yeah, it's definitely a phrase that I've found to be useful in particular situations for highlighting the ridiculousness of said situation. I can't say I'm not amused by your situation or when it is used well lol. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:49, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that you weren't annoyed by my action in putting a Level 3 heading in front of your statement about Dicklyon. I thought that otherwise your issue might get lost in the noise about capitalization wars. What we have is a user who is one of the unblockables. I am inclined to agree with you, but would like either more information about the sockpuppetry, which in my book shows untrustworthy character, or about civil POV pushing. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just found this comment after responding to a number of pings at ANI, and I'm sad to say that I am definitely a bit more than annoyed about it @Robert McClenon. It comes off as a proposal from me, one which I never intended to make because I am far too WP:INVOLVED. It contains no diffs, it's far too based in emotion to be a formal proposal, and it doesn't properly outline the scope of what I believe to be the user's disruptive activity. Instead of being a proper proposal, my name is now behind a half assed emotion based proposal to site ban someone, which I don't like or agree with. Proposals for such shouldn't be based on emotion, and it lacks a lot of meaningful context. In splitting the comment out, it does a disservice to what a proper proposal could encompass and accomplish. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand that you had good intentions, and I do think a proposal was warranted, but my comment absolutely should not have been that proposal. I think my comment was made with the hopes that someone would put together a more detailed and proper proposal, one which could stand on its own and have a good shot at accomplishing the outcome proposed, whereas the one based on "feels" and barely scratching the surface that is now there is one I personally would have trouble supporting if I was unfamiliar with the situation based on the lack of meaningful context and diffs. I've been largely inactive due to exhaustion over drama, and unfortunately this has clawed me back into the center of it to defend myself against people upset about the state of the proposal and how involved I am and still making it, so that just kinda sucks. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. It appears that I made a mistake, and will think about what lesson to learn from it. It appears that we have a working proposal developing now. I regret that I went against what you wanted when I was trying to do what I thought you wanted, because I thought that the community needed something. More later. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well that whole thing looks to have been a complete waste of time. It's people like that who go far toward convincing me to stop wasting my free time here. But gods forbid someone upset the precious protocols or the true believers who enforce their own version of them. Intothatdarkness 12:45, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HMIJ,

Need an opinion to help me make a decision. Check this redirect: Alabama House of Representatives, District 102nd. I do not know the best redirect category for it. I think 'r from subtopic'? Any ideas? Red Director (talk) 19:03, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Red Director: I'd say probably two subcategories; R from subtopic, and R from incorrect name. It's essentially just a modification of an appropriate title, based on what I see in Category:Alabama House of Representatives districts. R from modification would also be a fine category to add instead of R from incorrect name, as a less specific category. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:55, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Red Director (talk) 22:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A quarterly update from the Growth team on our work to improve the new editor experience.

Mentoring new editors

In February, Mentorship was successfully rolled out to 100% of newcomers on English Wikipedia. Following this milestone, we collaborated with Spanish Wikipedia to expand Mentorship coverage to 70% of new accounts, with plans to reach 85% soon unless concerns are raised by mentors. (T394867)

“Add a Link” Task – Iteration and Experimentation

Our efforts to improve and scale the “Add a Link” structured task continued across multiple fronts:

• Community Feedback & Model Improvements: We’ve responded to community concerns with targeted changes:
  • Restricting access to newer accounts (T393688)
  • Some links types were removed to align with recommendations written in the English Wikipedia Manual of Style (T390683)
  • Allowing communities to limit “Add a Link” to newcomers (T393771)
  • The model used to suggest the links was improved to ease its training (T388258)
• English Wikipedia rollout and A/B test: We increased the rollout to 20% of newcomers, with analysis underway. Preliminary data suggests this feature makes new account holders more likely to complete an unreverted edit. (T386029, T382603)
• Surfacing Structured Tasks: An experiment where we show “add a link” suggestions to newly registered users while they are reading an article is running on pilot wikis (French, Persian, Indonesian, Portuguese, Egyptian Arabic). Initial results are under analysis. (T386029)

Newcomer Engagement Features

• “Get Started” notification: Engineering is in progress for a new notification (Echo/email) to encourage editing among newcomers with zero edits. Early research shows this type of nudge is effective. (T392256)
• Confirmation email: We are exploring ways to simplify and improve the initial account confirmation email newly registered users receive. (T215665)

Community Configuration Enhancements

Communities can now manage which namespaces are eligible for Event Registration via Community Configuration. (T385341)

Annual Planning

The Wikimedia Foundation’s 2025–2026 Annual Plan is taking shape. The Growth and Editing teams will focus on the Contributor Experiences (WE1) objective, with a focus on increasing constructive edits by editors with fewer than 100 cumulative contributions.

Get Involved

We value your insights and ideas! If you would like to participate in a discussion, share feedback, or pilot new features, please reach out on the relevant Phabricator tasks or at our talk page, in any language.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Air India Flight 171 on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm new to NPP, and participated in the May 2025 backlog drive. Regarding the awards: is there a form I need to fill out to get those sweet, sweet awards? No rush if they are in-work ... I'm just curious. Thanks for all the volunteer work you do at NPP and elsewhere! Noleander (talk) 03:16, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Noleander. First off, thank you for your contributions to NPP, I'm very appreciative of them! As for the awards, that's entirely on me, I've dropped the ball, as I've not been as active on Wiki. I'd like to apologize to you and others about this. I'll work on getting them all sent out tomorrow (sorry for the delay in responding, I don't check Wikipedia on weekends). Hey man im josh (talk) 19:02, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there were three editors that did 25 re-reviews: Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2025/Re-reviews. Noleander (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Hey man im josh, I saw that you moved the page International Meshing Roundtable to draft space last fall, oct 2024. Someone else deleted the draft in April 2025. I’ve requested undeletion of the draft so I can improve it. In the meantime, I'd appreciate it if you could expand upon your reason for moving it to draft. I saw that the reason given was "more sources needed." Can you be more specific? In particular, I'm on the steering committee for this conference and I created the page in the first place in order to follow the best practice on the Mesh Generation page of pointing to a wiki page instead of the conference website. I tried to follow the examples of three other conferences I'm familiar with, also pointed to by Mesh Generation: Symposium on Computational Geometry and SIGGRAPHand Symposium_on_Geometry_Processing. Could you give examples of what these pages have that the International Meshing Roundtable page lacked? Thank you! Samitch87111 (talk) 18:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Samitch87111: The article has only a single source and didn't not appear to be written in the typical encyclopedic fashion we'd expect. In addition, please see WP:COI and declare that you have a conflict of interest if you intend on recreating the page. It won't stop the page from being accepted at WP:AFC, but it's important that we note any instances in which we have a conflict of interest with the subject matter. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:04, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Sometimes it is important to take a step back and look at the frankly incredible volume of high quality work one has contributed to realise that actually, you're a damn good editor and admin. CoconutOctopus talk 17:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @CoconutOctopus, it's always nice when people go out of their way to give positive feedback to one another. I appreciate the kind words that all folks send my way when they do, but in particular, those in NPP who may be more familiar with my work. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:38, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a lot of progress recently, as you can see at this history of Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations. I suppose I'll be laying off that for a while, so it's back in your court if you want to help. Dicklyon (talk) 04:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Capitalization Disputes and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Robert McClenon (talk) 20:37, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't believe I personally should be a named party, I think that there was an expectation that SMcCandlish would be named as a party if a case was brought forth @Robert McClenon. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, Josh: The ANI was opened to consider only the actions of Dicklyon, and that is what it focused on (despite evidence being presented of a wider dispute). This is not a case of Robert McClenon attempting to re-run the ANI until he receives a favourable outcome. I intend to present evidence regarding SMcCandlish but it will take me more time to compile it than I have at the moment. (from the link provided above). Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, to be clear, I don't think it's a case of re-running the ANI @Bgsu98. I just think that, if we're examining the overall caps discussion behaviours as a whole, based on the discussion at ANI and my experience, there was an expectation of SMC being a named party. I'm already named, so I can't propose my removal, but the subject matter as a whole warrants their involvement in my opinion. Additionally, just a clarifying point, the ANI was opened to examine Dicklyon and Cinderella's heaviour. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:37, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I just wanted to point out that someone is still planning on bringing evidence against SMC, and several mentions have been made about how no action was taken against Cinderella (seriously... that's a man's username?). I sincerely believe that Dicklyon dug his own grave in the ANI rigamarole. Cinderella didn't bludgeon the daylights out of everything. If Dicklyon had said his peace and let it go, I think the matter would have faded away. How many times have we seen someone escalate a speeding ticket to a felony charge on ANI? 😂 Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey now, it doesn't matter what Cinderella's gender may be, or what their username is. Otherwise, I do largely agree with you @Bgsu98. We gotta keep our focus on the right places. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:21, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Hey man im josh for accumulating at least 100 points during the May 2025 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 17,000+ articles reviewed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @ToBeFree, better that it comes from someone other than me haha! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:50, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:33, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The third round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 June. This round was again competitive, with three contestants scoring more than 1,000 round points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,314 round points, mostly from articles about athletes and politicians, including 20 good articles and 48 did you know articles
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,197 round points, mostly from military history articles, including 9 featured topic articles, two featured articles, and four good articles
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 1,055 round points, mostly from television station articles, including 27 good articles and 9 good topic articles

Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 4 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 9 featured-topic articles, 149 good articles, 27 good-topic articles, and more than 90 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 18 In the News articles, and they have conducted more than 200 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Hey man im josh! The list you nominated, 1968 Winter Olympics medal table, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Hey man im josh! The list you nominated, 1972 Summer Olympics medal table, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Josh,

I just noticed that Jamiebuba was indefinitely blocked which came as a big surprise to me because I frequently ran into them on the project and they were very active on NPP. Do you know anything about this? Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:34, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Liz, unfortunately I'm not aware of the situation regarding their block. My understanding though is that you should, as a functionary, have access to the relevant information in the linked ticket. To be honest, I don't recall ever seeing that user name before, so I'm not sure I'd refer to them as "very active" in NPP. I like to think I would have noticed them if they were relatively active. Perhaps it'd be worth a post to WT:NPP to let people know about the block so that they can review that person's patrols. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm surprised you are not familiar with them, I thought they were very active in NPP. They are one of those editors who I would run into every day. And I also just found out that Mushy Yank has just been blocked as a sock and I saw them all of the time in AFDLand. It's strange to see editors with tens of thousands of edits who have been active for years get caught as a regular old sockpuppet. All of that time they put in on the project. It's just bewildering. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well we all have our blind spots and areas of interest, but I mostly focus on the top reviewer leaderboards, the NPP backlog drives, and those with an interest in the areas I've also had interest in, which is probably why I missed them.

As for Mushy Yank... Damn! Didn't see that one coming! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm slipping. Two of them? Congrats x 2!! Regards, John. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:27, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Bringingthewood! It's easy to slip when I've barely been around lol Hey man im josh (talk) 17:58, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome and you deserve some rest!! I'll try to avoid those banana peels going forward. Enjoy the summer. John. Bringingthewood (talk) 20:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2025).

Administrator changes

NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• Following a talk page discussion, speedy deletion criterion G13 has been amended to remove "Userspace with no content except the article wizard placeholder text."
• WP:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts was upgraded to a guideline following a RfC discussion.

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!

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/July 2025/Candidates.

Here is the schedule:

• July 9–15 - Call for candidates
• July 18–22 - Discussion phase
• July 23–29 - 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 familiar with the community's expectations of administrators, 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 seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.
• The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus 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.

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) 01:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Historic Site of Anti-Mongolian Struggle on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(trialing replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (talk|botop) 19:31, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's just a boilerplate/template,[1] but I doubt someone who's dead will have need for or be re-applying for permissions anytime soon. DMacks (talk) 19:54, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeeks, yeah... definitely looks bad when you point that out @DMacks. Looks like Xaosflux also left a boilerplate message for a different permission revoked as well. Definitely a boilerplate message during a revocation of 28 users who met the revocation criteria. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:58, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the July 2025 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 18–22 - Discussion phase (we are here)
• July 23–29 - SecurePoll voting phase
• July 30–c. Aug 3 - Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages are 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/July 2025/Discussion phase.

On July 23, 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 totals 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 totals during the election. You must be extended confirmed to vote.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last approximately four days, or perhaps a little longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (you may want to watchlist this page) and transcluded to 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), and must also have received a minimum of 20 support votes. Because 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) 00:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Josh,

Did you mean to rename these categories "members of justice"?

• Category:Members of justice of Sri Lanka
• Category:Members of justice of Iceland
• Category:Members of justice of Hungary
• Category:Members of justice of the Gambia
• Category:Members of justice of Kenya

I assume you meant "ministers", but I didn't want to do anything before confirming with you. Woko Sapien (talk) 17:38, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely did when I renamed those categories. Unfortunately, when I'm renaming thousands of categories, I have happened to make a mistake or two... Thanks for catching this and bringing it to my attention @Woko Sapien, I'll nominate them for renaming now. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:46, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course that's not meant to excuse or justify, in any way, the lack of attention I paid when I did these renames. I've nominated all of these for renaming. I promise I'm giving myself a self trout! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't sweat it; it happens to the best of us! Woko Sapien (talk) 18:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the July 2025 administrator elections has started and continues until July 29 at 23:59 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 23–29 – Voting phase
• July 30–c. Aug 3 – Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies to 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 totals 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 vote total during the election. The suffrage requirements are similar to those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for approximately four days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to 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), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Because 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) 00:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Recently, after twenty years on Wikipedia, the article describing my career was deleted. While I do recognize that the impact of my career is best known within the Jewish community, I think its deletion was the result of some poor research, poor conclusions, mistaken understanding, and what appears to be personal displeasure on the part of one of your editors. The discussion concerning deleting the article "Seymour Rossel" was based on the misconception that the article was mainly the description of an author. In fact, my career and its impact on the community (and the bulk of the bio) was based on my work in Jewish publishing and Jewish education. I rose to be Executive Vice-President of Behrman House, Inc., a major publishing arm of the American Jewish community; to be Dean of the School of Education of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, NY; to be Publisher of the UAHC (now Union for Reform Judaism) Press, Director of the National Department of Education of the Reform movement (URJ) and Director of the combined Commission on Reform Jewish Education of the CCAR, URJ, and NATE; and Publisher of Rossel Books, a well-recognized Jewish press established in 1982. I served for twenty years on the National Board of the Jewish Book Council of America, as Curriculum Expert for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum of Washington, and as Chairperson of two major international Conferences on Alternatives in Jewish Education (CAJE) convened at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Along the way, I also served as rabbi for a congregation in Texas, head of a Jewish day school in Dallas, and lecturer in religion and philosophy at the Women's Institute of Houston. As an author, my books have actually sold in the hundreds of thousands but, since many are textbooks, you are unlikely to find the reviews of them in places you can easily search. Contrary to a statement in the discussion of my books not a single one was ever published by a vanity press. Even when published by my own Rossel Books imprint, they are vigorously edited and reviewed by my professional staff. Many of the books I have written and published were reviewed in places like Jewish Review of Books, Response Magazine, and Jewish newspapers around the country. As textbooks for religious schools, they have passed the severest test of all--they served for nearly thirty years as the backbone of Reform and Conservative curricula throughout the English-speaking Jewish world. I think it is clear why the biographical entry was acceptable to Wikipedia for the past twenty years. My listings in well-respected references such as Who's Who in World Jewry, Contemporary Authors and Writers, Jewish Publishing in America, Literary Market Place, and others would seem to qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia. The discussion on the article's deletion seems to have been led by an editor who rightly objected to a remark I made on the talk page of an article concerning my father, Willy O. Rossel. The editor in question was right to correct me on that account and I apologized to him and agreed with his solution in that case. But he seems to have unilaterally taken upon himself to reprimand me in an untoward manner by excising me personally from Wikipedia. In the course of doing so, he managed to accuse a major Houston newspaper of being a rag and reading fit for washrooms! This does not sound like someone who did fair and impartial research (as was pointed out by another editor in the course of the discussion). In making this request, I assume that any personal animus of a single editor should not be acceptable as a final conclusion for any discussion of articles on Wikipedia. I therefore am requesting that you revisit this decision to delete. I am hopeful that you will see that the article represents a career worth reporting. Rabbi Seymour Rossel (talk) 16:38, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth II on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(trialing replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk) 17:33, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hey man im josh. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Route nationale 186, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 10:05, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you hurt me, Josh? I thought we had an understanding. Yet, you continue to light those fires up there!!!! Regards, John. :) Bringingthewood (talk) 22:12, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can a twin be notable on its own? I created the article Dylan Tuomy-Wilhoit (which I redirected) like exactly a year ago and he is a twin of actor Blake Tuomy-Wilhoit. They were both twins and were main cast in Full House, their only acting credit. His twin Blake was only an actor, but for Dylan he's also an Emmy-winning sound editor with four Primetime Emmy Awards wins and with seven more nominations. I have added two newspapers sources in the article and I believe he is notable on his own, but mostly I just want your opinion if I should turn the redirect back into an article. (talk) 06:40, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2025).

Administrator changes

• CoconutOctopus
• Curbon7
• Hinnk
• Jlwoodwa
• Kj cheetham
• KylieTastic
• Ser!
• Smasongarrison
• UndercoverClassicist

• Bbb23
• Beeblebrox
• David Gerard
• Oleg Alexandrov
• Satori Son

CheckUser changes

• Alison
• Bradv
• Joe Roe
• RickinBaltimore
• ST47

Oversight changes

• Bradv
• RickinBaltimore

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, G15, has been enacted. It applies to pages generated by a large language model (LLM) without human review.
• Following a request for comment, there is a new policy outlining the granting of permissions to view the IP addresses of temporary accounts. Temporary account deployment on the English Wikipedia is currently scheduled for September 2025, and editors can request access to the permission ahead of time. Admins are encouraged to keep an eye on the request page; there will likely be a flood of editors requesting the permission when they realize they can no longer see IP addresses.

Technical news

• Administrators can now restrict the "Add a Link" feature to newcomers. The "Add a Link" Structured Task helps new account holders get started with editing. Administrators can configure this setting in the Community Configuration page.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Indian military history has been closed.
  • South Asia (WP:CT/SA) is designated a contentious topic. The topic area is specifically defined as All pages related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.
  • The contentious topic designations for Sri Lanka (SL) and India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan (IPA) are folded into this new contentious topic.
  • The community-authorized general sanctions regarding South Asian social groups (GS/CASTE) are rescinded and folded into this new contentious topic.
• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 31 July.
• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 11 August.

Miscellaneous

• Wikimania 2025 is happening in Nairobi, Kenya, and online from August 6 to August 9. This year marks 20 years of Wikimania. Interested users can join the online event. Registration for the virtual event is free and will remain open throughout Wikimania. You can register here now.

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Salim Yahya al-Kharega. 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. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of characters in The Loud House franchise, which you previously marked as reviewed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in The Loud House franchise until a consensus is reached, and you are welcomed to contribute to the discussion.SodiumBot (botop|talk) 07:29, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These updates are delivered by SodiumBot. To opt out of these messages, add {{User:SodiumBot/NoNPPDelivery}} to your talk page.

Hi Josh, I see that you deleted Draft:Low Pomanti on Oct 2, 2023. I am creating a new draft for Lou Pomanti, a Canadian musician. I was not involved in the deleted draft, I don't know if it's the same Low Pomanti. Should I create a new draft? Or do we need to restore the old one. Thanks SquidX (talk) 22:46, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]