User talk:Pythoncoder

This user is a regular, and is indifferent to being templated. You may choose to template or not template him at your own discretion.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pythoncoder.

I never stopped by to say this, but I value your smart use of coding exploitation at the Glasses AFD last year. But, alas, four people think I'm funnier. Not sorry. Panini!^🥪 05:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can confirm, my AFD was much funnier. :-) —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 21:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pythoncoder, I recently drafted an article on Pytest, the most popular testing framework in Python, and submitted it for WP:AfC review. Though I'm allowed to move it to Main space directly, I opted for WP:AfC because it is my first article in this area and it's best that more experienced editors do a review to ensure its quality. Would you have time to take a look? Thanks. Thomas Meng (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pythoncoder,

Please look over WP:G13 so you can see what is required for User pages to be eligible for CSD G13 status. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:18, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the pages I nominated are G13-eligible because they are userspace drafts with "no content except the article wizard placeholder text", per the third subcategory of G13. I made a userspace draft on User:PythoncoderAlt/sandbox/Userspace draft, using Help:userspace draft and it created a page with similar text. Then I found an older version of the page skeleton and the article wizard placeholder text was exactly the same as the pages I nominated. Am I missing something? —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 05:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if this is a stupid question, but why are you deleting those articles anyway? Would it be helpful if I nominated a bunch of sandboxes for deletion? Talib1101 (talk) 00:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should only nominate pages (including sandboxes) for speedy deletion if you're sure they meet one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. Without knowing anything else about these sandboxes, I'm thinking the answer is no. I nominated them because I was quite confident that they met the third part of CSD G13 ("no content except the article wizard placeholder text") but now I'm not so sure. This is the second time I've gotten a message about these sorts of nominations so I'm thinking I'll avoid G13 nominations of userspace drafts for a while. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 01:49, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to be clear, there are no stupid questions when it comes to editing Wikipedia. Possible exception: “Should I vandalize Page X?” — obviously, the answer to that one is no. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 01:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - my name is Susan Gerbic (Sgerbic) and I'm writing to you because at some point you joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism. This might have been months ago - or even years ago. With the best of intentions the project was created years ago, and sadly like many WikiProjects has started to go dormant. A group of us are attempting to revitalize the Skepticism project, already we have begun to clean up the main page and I've just redone the participant page. No one is in charge of this project, it is member directed, which might have been the reason it almost went dormant. We are attempting to bring back conversations on the talk page and have two subprojects as well, in the hopes that it might spark involvement and a way of getting to know each other better. One was created several years ago but is very well organized and a lot of progress was made, Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skeptical organisations in Europe. The other I created a couple weeks ago, it is very simple and has a silly name Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skepticism Stub Sub-Project Project (SSSPP). This sub-project runs from March 1 to June 1, 2022. We are attempting to rewrite skepticism stubs and add them to this list. As you can see we have already made progress.

The reason I'm writing to you now is because we would love to have you come back to the project and become involved, either by working on one of the sub-projects, proposing your own (and managing it), or just hanging out on the talk page getting to know the other editors and maybe donate some of your wisdom to some of the conversations. As I said, no one is in charge, so if you have something in mind you would like to see done, please suggest it on the talk page and hopefully others will agree. Please add the project to your watchlist, update your personal user page showing you are a proud member of WikiProject Skepticism. And DIVE in, this is what the work list looks like [1] frightening at first glance, but we have already started chipping away at it.

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Participants page has gone though a giant change - you may want to update your information. And of course if this project no longer interests you, please remove your name from the participant list, we would hate to see you go, but completely understand.

Thank you for your time, I hope to edit with you in the future.Sgerbic (talk) 07:26, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

hi sorry i wanted to click the trout Turtelious (talk) 13:42, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind taking a look at this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alberto_Caballero_(astronomer) Thank you Iberastro (talk) 22:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve gone ahead and submitted your draft for review. It looks like you were missing a bit of code so I added it to your page. I don’t have time to do a full review right now, so I or another reviewer will take a look at it sometime in the next few months.

Also, how did you find my talkpage? It looks like you just created your account so I’m curious about how new users find their way around. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 02:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I found you in the list of inclusionists :) Iberastro (talk) 02:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just googled the game (the one by Brad Howard) and could find no reliable sources other than the app’s own information and user-submitted reviews.[2] [3] MegaMack02 (talk • contribs) 03:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That means it's not notable enough to deserve a Wikipedia article. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just made some significant changes to User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool. Since you have the tool active, I am informing you of this since it may affect you. To open the tool you will now have to click the "respond" button. The tool will load a similar interface as before. There is now a live preview of the response. These changes might have introduced some bugs so if you have any concerns / suggestions or run into problems please leave a note at User talk:Terasail/Edit Request Tool Thanks, Terasail^[✉️] 15:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A basic analysis including voter guides is available at User:Kudpung/ACE2022. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:53, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:

It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous rather than factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kconraw Noremac AuhsoJ and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 07:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pythoncoder! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 07:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop deleteing my edits Lil Arizona (talk) 05:21, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit because it linked to an article that does not exist. When you edited the article, there was a message [4] that warned you that any edits linking to nonexistent articles (i.e. adding red links) would be reverted. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sir, from el.wiktionary. Sorry to bother you for external help. I know zero about computers and programming, but our wiktionary needs things, and I have to try to find them. I have been looking at internet for a css to copy: nested ordered fully numbered list with levels, and start= like this one. I cannot find one, except partial bits. Trying to learn at wikt:el:Template:test-ol, unsuccesfully (alas, if I were 50 years younger I might study properly). I was hoping that you might know a nice link for us to copypaste from? Thank you, Sarri.greek (talk) 02:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a few things but I couldn't get the code you had to work. Have you tried this page yet? —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 04:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for directing me to the right place. I will try it. :) Sarri.greek (talk) 10:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pythoncoder, Pythoncoder! It works! Thank you so much!!!! Sarri.greek (talk) 11:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS all this time i was writing style=counter-reset: item+1 and it did not work (of course). Now: style="counter-reset: item 2;" and it works! Sarri.greek (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Technical Barnstar
	@media screen { #mw-head { position: fixed; background: linear-gradient(to bottom,#fff 50%,#f6f6f6 100%); } } Preferring it even to the Vector2022 implementation right now! CMD (talk) 03:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. I don't think the IP is quite getting the message, concerning his attempts to replace the List of longest-reigning monarchs page. GoodDay (talk) 05:07, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we have the same definition of what funny is, but I took your advise, and "forked" it. Well, I created a new userbox with a similar name, if that's what you meant by forking it. Dhrm77 (talk) 19:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted because your user page is utter chaos. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 07:57, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I try —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 04:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a legit nickname used in various circumstances. Why is it not accepted??? This is not vandalism! Why is there censorship on a Wikipedia page? That in my opinion is vandalism to not accept legit changes!!!! 207.98.198.231 (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you know someone named Benjamin who is sometimes referred to as “Benzilla”, but to put that on Wikipedia, you’ll need a reliable source. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 04:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE Joemamam2 (talk) 17:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC) idk I like fish[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: declining my draft. Why did you do that i was just trying to make a better version of the routing page ) 02:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC) CoolberryWiki (talk) 02:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, Welcome to Wikipedia! If you want to improve the routing page, please improve our existing page Routing (disambiguation). Wikipedia's draft system is not for submitting improvements to existing pages. Also, your draft is more confusing than the existing page, because every link just shows up as "Routing". —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there I have received your comments and have deleted the copied and pasted sections from our website and replaced them with new text which i hope avoids this issue. Thanks for your reconsideration Leo mollison (talk) 07:16, 2 April 2023 (UTC) Leo Mollison 02 april 2023 Leo mollison (talk) 07:16, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the page has been deleted. If you choose to create a new page about the same topic, please make sure the page does not infringe any copyrights. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:49, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Leo mollison (talk · contribs)
  • User:Leo mollison (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I appreciate your comments re copyright as I was testing how to do the while thing. When I got your comments I rewrote the sections in my own words but still referenced then to the RVGA website. But now I cant see the thing in my sandbox at all - the original nor the revisions

How do I proceed? Leo mollison (talk) 07:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your current signature is using <font> tags, which are obsolete and are not HTML5 compliant. Would you be willing to adjust that font tag to
<span style="font-family: fontnamehere"> for an error free equivalent? The following:

<span style="font-family:impact">—[[User:pythoncoder|<span style="color:#004080">python</span><span style="color:olive">coder</span>]] ([[User talk:pythoncoder|AAAAAAAA! A snake!]] ¦ [[Special:Contribs/pythoncoder|Why did it have to be snakes?]])</span>

displays as the visually identical (to your current) signature: —pythoncoder (AAAAAAAA! A snake! ¦ Why did it have to be snakes?)

Thank you, Zinnober9 (talk) 07:58, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Haha, that was my April Fools’ Day signature. I changed it back last night. Also changing the tags to span would not in fact result in a visually identical signature because I was already bumping up against the character limit with the existing joke signature. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I had already declined this Draft:Claudia Latilawa Taylor. Did you mean to undo that, or did our edits just overlap? Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:47, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, looks like it was just an edit conflict. Reverted to your version. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 04:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no worries, just wasn't sure what happened. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I and others have proposed additional options at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC_on_a_procedural_community_desysop. You may wish to review your position in that RfC. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Translated from German Wikipedia. --Pinoberlina (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my submission for "Billy Gets Grounded" is rejected. Please understand, that the series exists in real life, it's a YouTube show. All the sources I got are true and I'm not joking. 87.0.164.237 (talk) 07:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your submission. In order for your draft to be accepted, it doesn't just have to exist, it has to be a notable topic. Please read WP:GNG (just the section "General notability guideline") for more information on what that means. Given that the draft says the series has "thousand of views", it doesn't seem like it's notable, but if you can find any reliable sources about it, I encourage you to add them. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 14:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me some suggestions on how to make it accepted? 87.0.164.237 (talk) 06:05, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever seen this show? What else do you know about it? 87.0.164.237 (talk) 06:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen the show. What the article needs is some reliable sources to prove the series is important. The easiest option is probably finding links to major news websites discussing it. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 14:06, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I looked all over the Web but I didn't find any news websites about the show. So if I don't find it, what can I do? 2001:B07:6472:D95E:C:DC04:5D32:40F7 (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that means the subject is probably not notable, and thus not suitable for Wikipedia. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 12:31, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please help review my draft again, thanks. Misraaa (talk) 09:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pythoncoder:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1600 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Here's a brownie for your efforts
		Thank you for your participation in the Articles for Creation's November 2023 Backlog Drive! You made a total of 8 reviews, for a total of 8 points. – robertsky (talk) 06:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– robertsky (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

– robertsky (talk) 06:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for:

OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 10:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for likeing improve Wikipedia's coverage of early-'60s music!, BTW you remember back in the days i acted like a reviewer who approved my own draft? Samchristie05 (talk) 16:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am C809, a fairly new editor. I noticed that you did this edit, which was made in good faith. However, based on the "humor" tag, I could tell they wanted the link to go to here. We both know that is not the real "beginning" of Wikipedia, however it was meant to be a "funny" joke, easter egg, trinket, etc. As it is not an encyclopedic article, would it be appropriate for your edit to be reverted? C809 (talk) 17:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Main Page was the original target of that link, and I think the joke is funnier that way, rather than going to WP:The beginning of Wikipedia, which is just the same joke as The End except worse. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 17:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. Sorry for wasting your time, have a great day :) C809 (talk) 17:43, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“a fairly new editor” lol it was a sock —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 05:58, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dfwaterhouse (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:I Digress Podcast (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I had originally used an LLM for some suggestions, but since rewrote the content in my own words, so don't know why this is getting flagged again.

Dfwaterhouse (talk) 05:35, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. I have updated the decline message to reflect another issue with your submission: the lack of notability of your topic, which must be shown by coverage in independent reliable sources. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 05:56, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not sure how I can get more sources when it is so new. More than happy to but it doesn't have wider coverage yet. I'm honestly trying to do the right thing Dfwaterhouse (talk) 08:31, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it hasn’t been covered by outside sources yet, that means it’s probably not ready to have a Wikipedia article. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 14:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pythoncoder. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of User:Cjrhoads/Draft Integrative Medicine, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 08:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you’re right. This is probably a sign that I was up too late looking for userspace spam and should go to sleep earlier. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 17:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi pythoncoder, I noticed the newest update to userHighlighter.js migrating from mw.uri to the native JS URL had caused some errors to pop up because apparently URL expects the full path rather than just a relative path, or something like that. I think the easiest way to fix it would be to change the var url = link.attr('href'); line to use link.prop('href') instead, but I'm not to familiar with jQuery so I don't know if that might have side effects. Cheers! (and thanks for maintaining the script in the first place) Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You recently declined a submission for rotatopes on wikipedia. I saw a page for polytopes, so I thought it would make sense to add rotatopes. There aren't many books on it so the only sources I could use were the web pages I listed. However, I think this definition should suffice: "the set of all shapes that exist in dimension ${\displaystyle n}$ that lie in the the n-dimensional space between regions that are specified by ${\displaystyle k}$ equations of the form ${\displaystyle x_{1}^{2}+x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2}+...+x_{p}^{2}=r^{2}}$ where ${\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{k}p=n}$." Doesn't the addition of this definition render the need for external sources unecessary? Ncgtr (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All draft submissions need to cite reliable sources in order to be accepted, regardless of whether the page contains a mathematical definition of the concept. If the concept has not been covered in reliable sources (wikis are not reliable sources), then it is not sufficiently notable to have a Wikipedia article. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 23:47, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you also review the drafts Draft:Before I Wake (soundtrack), Draft:Blindspotting (EPs), Draft:Fifty Shades of Grey Remixed. Draft:Fifty Shades of Grey (score) and Draft:Fifty Shades Darker (score) 223.178.86.198 (talk) 13:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My draft, Draft:Advanced Combinatorics, is actually AI-generated from Copilot, sorry for wasting time btw. TheNonEditor (talk) 21:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You rejected my article for sounding like an advertisement. I'm new here, so I thought we were just supposed to take the literal verbiage from the sources we cited, and what I wrote was exactly how it was written on NBC News, the Los Angeles Sentinel, and other publications. Anywho, I tried to adjust it so hopefully it's better. Thanks! ~~~~ AshGolden (talk) 17:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your description of your previous submission doesn’t line up with its actual contents. Please take a look at it again and observe the large number of promotional phrases like “innovative”, “positively transform”, and “accelerate children’s knowledge”. Your revised draft is definitely an improvement, but if you have a conflict of interest with regard to the subject, you must disclose it — see the page WP:PSCOI for more information. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I removed all of that, even though again, that was the verbiage used on NBC News and other publications where I pulled the info from. There is no conflict of interest with regard to the subject, so that doesn't apply to me. I'll double check there are no other phrases like that, but I'm pretty sure I removed them. AshGolden (talk) 21:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pythoncoder:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in June!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 1 month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 June 2025 through 30 June 2025.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 3200 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

Hi @Pythoncoder , thank you for reviewing my draft on Ant International. I noticed that the submission was declined with the reason that it contains promotional or advertising content.

Could you kindly help me understand specifically which parts of the article or which sources were considered promotional? I’d like to revise it to meet Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing standards, but I want to make sure I correct the appropriate sections.

Your guidance would be greatly appreciated. Apriliantosetyadi (talk) 06:08, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ChatGPT, beep boop to you too. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 22:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pythoncoder,

Thanks for your time reviewing the intiial entry for Coleman Douglas Pearls - much appreciated! I've removed any unreferenced content and made the article objective and non-promotional based on your guidance. Please take a look and let me know if there are any other issues whenever you get a chance.

For context, I write blog posts and web content for the company and have been asked to write a Wikipedia entry as a one-off project. I will update the conflict of interest in my account now.

I was wondering if you could help with another issue regarding referencing. A lot of the sources we do have are physical copies of things like magazines and newspapers. Is there any way we can use these as references for additional information, such as scanning them or uploading pictures? It would be a shame not to include many of the company's historical successes.

Thanks

WikiMnemosyne (talk) 09:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]