User talk:Whoop whoop pull up

Archives

1 (October 2010-May 2011) 2 (June 2011-July 2012) 3 (July-November 2012) 4 (November 2012-June 2013) 5 (June-November 2013) 6 (November 2013-April 2014) 7 (April 2014-April 2015) 8 (April 2015-August 2016) 9 (August 2016-August 2021)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Electrical fault, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fuse.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, as you finished that last one,you can start the next one. Difficultly north (talk) The artist formerly known as Simply south 13:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 23:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For your work on the Wikipedia movies, you have received a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Minkai (talk to me) 16:26, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make mass edits to undo blocking of specific bots on articles you don't edit. That template exists for a reason when a specific bot is not improving a certain article. (t · c) buidhe 20:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Preventing Citation bot from improving these articles is directly harmful. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 20:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've now made 2 reverts on Armenian genocide denial which is a 1RR article. So here I'll slap you with the obligatory edit warring template:

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

FYI the template is applied to prevent the bot messing with existing citation templates. (t · c) buidhe 20:52, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You mean fixing existing citation templates. Whoops, my bad on the 1RR part. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 20:53, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please stop. Citation bot is deliberately blocked on those articles because it does more damage than good in those instances. DrKay (talk) 20:50, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

^{[citation needed]} Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 20:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I demonstrated why in the edit summary of the revert: removing valid page numbers. Note also: changing citation style contrary to WP:CITEVAR. It is Wikipedia:Disruptive editing to continue with a series of edits after being asked to stop. DrKay (talk) 20:58, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a specific reason to block Citation bot on a particular page, it should be spelled out so that people know why Citation bot is temporarily being blocked from the page, and so that it can be immediately unblocked once the issue has been resolved; additionally, comment-blocking Citation bot from fixing the specific problematic citation (as detailed at User:Citation bot#Stopping the bot from editing) allows the bot to be kept away from that particular citation without preventing it from cleaning up refs on the rest of the page. (Also, when you have knowledge of a particular bug in Citation bot's reffixing, you should submit a bug report at User talk:Citation bot, so the bug can be fixed.) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 21:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

People do not always agree with Citation bot's default functioning. One man's feature is another man's bug. WP:CITEVAR says that the citation style established in article should not be changed unilaterally—such as by running citation bot over the article to change it. (t · c) buidhe 22:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here you are restoring a version that links to copyright violations. Please stop. (t · c) buidhe 03:27, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And here's a revert of a bad bot edit that introduced faulty page number formatting. You are welcome to restore the good edits manually, but stop unblocking the bot from articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:42, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any introduction of bad page-number formatting there, just the replacement of two hyphenated page-number ranges with en-dashed ones (the style called for by the MOS, by the way). Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 01:32, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the source in question you will see that it actually uses hyphens in its page numbering, so "3-4" and "3-7" are each single pages, not ranges. I agree with my colleagues here and below: tools aren't perfect, you need to take care when using them and not assume that any objection to their use is wrong. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:02, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This and this are WP:Cosmetic edits because it does not change the reader's view of the article. You are not supposed to be making cosmetic edits without a good reason since all they do is clog people's watchlist and waste time. (t · c) buidhe 00:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And this edit broke an anchor. Please be more careful with tools; just because a tool recommends an edit does not mean that it is valid or a good idea. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please preview your changes before saving, to ensure that you are doing something useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:30, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is perfectly right to say Robert Koch discovered the causative agent of cholera, and there is no need to delete "cholera" in the article. It is true that Filippo Pacini had discovered the bacterium earlier, but it should be noted that he (Pacini) failed to recognise it as the cholera pathogen. Thus, it was Koch who established the bacterium as the agent of cholera by rediscovering the bacterium in cholera patients. If you want to know more, please read my other contribution Vibrio cholerae (discovery section) where the story is elaborately discussed. Chhandama (talk) 03:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, those represent many hours of single submissions, which were delayed by your and the other big users' batch jobs. It looks like your most recent batch is going now, probably ahead of some of my requests from hours ago. Abductive (reasoning) 03:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You could always collect all those individual requests into a batch job - like @BrownHairedGirl: and I do - and have it only take up a single bot channel instead of potentially several at once. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 13:14, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abductive has been asked repeatedly to stop making requests until the previous one has finished, but as with all the rest of Abductive's disruption, the IDHT problem dominates. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:18, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do kinda see where they're coming from - when you put in a toolbar request and it's taking a while and you've got a lot of other pages you want to run the bot on, it's really tempting to just pile on the others and trust that they'll all eventually go through. (I used to do that myself - I remember once when I had dozens and dozens of individual toolbar runs pending at once, enough to warrant a whole Chrome window of their own.) But I also know now that piling up requests like that is really, really disruptive to other users, since it clogs up the bot's four channels (thanx, BrownHairedGirl, for pointing that out to me), which is why I don't do that anymore - a point that Abductive doesn't seem to have grasped, given that they keep on doing it! Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 13:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will do as you suggest, and only request groups of articles henceforth. It will probably not solve the load problems. Abductive (reasoning) 14:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It will probably help alleviate them, though. Thank you. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 14:09, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a load problem. It is a bottleneck problem, created by a failure to recognise the effects of rapid-fire individual requests. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:02, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect David Cleary. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 7#David Cleary until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:08, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 18:39, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assured you, AManWithNoPlan perfectly understands the request without seeing diffs of what the bot screwed up. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:49, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. (Did you mean to use the past tense there?) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 20:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it's any consolation, I also had trouble finishing the crossword when we trialed it before publication. You can see the clues that stumped me and one other editor at the newsroom archive. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:21, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri: That does make me feel better, thanx!  :-) The ones I haven't been able to get yet are 4, 5, 10, 13, 16, 18, 19, and 22 - and I see that most of those were the same ones that gave you and Ezlev trouble when playtesting. (Also, the clue for 15 should probably say "banish from view" rather than "banished from view"; the tense mismatch tripped me up for the longest time on that one and I had to guess around a bit to get the right answer.) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 01:35, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I asked someone a question about the Wikipedia movies, and now all the Wikipedia movies are up for deletion.

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:JulieMinkai/Planning for seventh Wikipedia movie

Minkai^(rawr!)_{(see where I screwed up)} 12:19, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JulieMinkai: I'm backing them up on the Wayback Machine as we speak; this should allow us to restore them offsite if we want to after they get deleted here. (If that fails, I've also downloaded backup copies to my personal machine.) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes} 19:32, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia III: Revenge of Jimbo, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia III: Revenge of Jimbo and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia III: Revenge of Jimbo during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dronebogus (talk) 12:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia IV: Attack of the Vandals, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia IV: Attack of the Vandals and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia IV: Attack of the Vandals during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dronebogus (talk) 12:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia VI: The Last Editor, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia VI: The Last Editor and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Whoop whoop pull up/Wikipedia VI: The Last Editor during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dronebogus (talk) 12:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you from TAMU whoop whoop? I like your name! 47.218.245.77 (talk) 10:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

“

Although UTF-8 is designed to be self-synchronising, the constraints imposed by ASCII backwards-compatibility mean that there are some types of character sequences where character boundaries can be ambiguous.

”

Really? What sequences are these?

To my understanding, since UTF-8 ASCII bytes are only used as ASCII bytes, and UTF-8 lead bytes are only used as lead bytes, a byte boundary is a character boundary if and only if the byte after the boundary is an ASCII byte, UTF-8 lead byte, or end of the stream. It is plausible that that might make the preceding character truncated or otherwise invalid in a corrupt or truncated UTF-8 stream, but the error is confined to that character, and the boundary detection still works.

Character boundary here of course refers to code point boundary, not to grapheme cluster boundary (which is much less rigorously definable, the nominal definitions can change between Unicode versions, and the de facto ones can even differ between fonts; this has nothing to do with UTF-8 ASCII compatibility).

Unless you're talking about mixed UTF-8 and Windows-1252 (which is not valid UTF-8), or UTF-8 with ECMA-35 8-bit representation of C1 controls (which noöne uses afaik, and also isn't valid UTF-8, UTF-8 being classified as an "other coding system with standard return" in ECMA-35 terms)?

—HarJIT (talk) 10:05, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A simple example would be a a continuous string of null characters, which comes out as a continuous run of 0s with no indication of boundaries. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 15:05, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right, so we're clearly talking at cross-purposes (self-synchronising for indexing a byte array, versus transmitting a bit array). Got it. --HarJIT (talk) 09:43, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This was a new one on me, but then I would have expected an embedded anchor in a section title to cause referencing problems in any case. What I've been doing is this technique:

===Adoption ===

{{anchor|Timeline}}

lorem ipsum

Does that achieve the same result as your span technique, or is it just as bad as the original ===Adoption {{anchor|Timeline}} === ? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Anchor/doc recommends substing the anchor in the section title (for instance, ===Adoption {{subst:anchor|Timeline}}===, which becomes ===Adoption <span class="anchor" id="Timeline"></span>=== when saved), as placing the anchor on the line after the section title causes links to the anchor to jump to just below the section, hiding it from view. In any case, if an anchor is placed in the section title itself, it MUST be substituted. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 17:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TYVM, I've been applying monkey see monkey do for years without a second thought, never occurred to me to RTFM. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:14, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Helionium and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 28#Helionium until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, from one inclusionist to another!

Joe (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I notice that you're often the one who makes suggestions for the IA bot to archive sources and I have to ask, how do we determine what sources need to be archived before they die and what sources don't? I noticed that you made a suggestion for the IA bot to run on Slime Rancher and it archived 3 sources. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze Wolf

I think if you run articles though "batch job" (like what Whoop has done), it will only add archive links to ones that are already dead. To preempt archive you need to go through one by one on the article with IABot. Rlink2 (talk) 00:40, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rlink2: Yep. I've figured that out now. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may be confusing pre-emptive archiving of sources (making sure that archive.org has a saved copy) with pre-emptively adding the archive links to articles. The first is useful, though rarely necessary these days: per WP:PLRT, Links added by editors to the English Wikipedia mainspace are automatically saved to Wayback Machine within about 24 hours. Only in certain situations (developing news stories likely to change, saving a specific version of a page, etc) where you wish to archive immediately, or where archive.org doesn't properly save the page, is there a need to do it yourself.

Pre-emptively adding the archive links to the article, on the other hand, is not useful outside those specific situations. It increases the page loading time, the length of the wikitext (thus making editing more difficult), the amount of text in the citations (making them more difficult to read), and the length of scrolling required, while offering no additional benefit to the reader. If you're particularly concerned that some links in an article haven't been archived, you can always do the full archiving like you did on the GLX article, then self-revert to avoid the page bloat. IAbot will add the archive links as needed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Were you meaning to reply to me or were to talking to Whoop? Just curious cause your response seems to be in response to my question, but you mentioned that I did full archiving on an article called "GLX" (which I don't recall having edited). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze Wolf: Just to WWPU, though on a very similar subject! Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Your name is difficult to type out but correct Ah ok! I was tempted to merge the sections since it seemed like you were replying to me but didn't do so because you mentioned full archiving on the "GLX" article which, as I said, I don't recall ever editing. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:49, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: I take a v different view on pre-emptive archiving, i.e. I am strongly in favour of it.

1. IAbot's automatic archiving began only in 2015. Earlier links still benefit from pre-emptive archiving
2. Even with newer links, the sooner they are archived the better, because that way it is more likely that the archived version is the one used when writing the article
3. IAbot's adding of archiving links is at best haphazard and slow. I encounter many links which have been dead for years, but not archived, so it is wrong to assert that IAbot will be round in a jiffy to add archives. That may be aim, but it's not the reality.
4. The additional page length is a trivial issue when downloading. The archive markup is highly compressible, and since even the biggest pages grow by only about 30kB with archived links, that's less than 10kB extra to download. which is trivial when compared with images.

So I strongly encourage pre-emptive archiving, because it offers huge benefits to both readers and editors. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly seconded! Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 16:49, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: @Blaze Wolf

I understand that there has been discussion regarding preemptive archiving, however the people that oppose this usually say "Well if the page is already archived at Wayback as soon as its added, then we only need to add it when the link is actually dead!". Here are some things to consider:

• Yes, the Wayback machine does auto crawl every link on Wikipedia, but there are many websites that did or do not work with the Wayback machine. For these sites there will be a broken or blank site archive. Notably, Wayback could not archive Youtube videos for quite some time.

There are other sites that are able to archive these websites (archive.today and ghostarchive.org in particular), but they only archive stuff per request, from what I know. So if it isn't for someone preemptively archiving these "no-Wayback" sites, once they are dead, the content basically can not be recovered.

We have already seen this with many of the Youtube and Instagram links on here - there are a significant porition of permanently dead links from those sites. If someone had preemptively archived them all before hand, then we wouldn't have had those permadead links.

• Some sources may be paywalled or loginwalled. An archived link is a way of providing a bypass around the paywall while preserving the content, which is important for Wikipedia:Verifiability: the addition of an archived link along with the original link ensures that anyone can access the content while respecting the wishes and hard work of the publisher.
• More links die than IABot can keep up with, so if a reader comes across a dead link and the cite is archived preempteively, they can simply click on the "archived on" link in the cite template, instead of hunting for a copy themselves. In addition, many article writers are already adding archived links as soon as their articles go live.
• It increases the page loading time, please read Wikipedia:Don't_worry_about_performance. Rlink2 (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"In addition, many article writers are already adding archived links as soon as their articles go live." Me, for instance. In fact, I add archivelinks to mine even before they go live (while they're still userspace drafts). Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 20:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Me too, Whoop. I regard archiving as a core part of good referencing, because it guarantees that anyone else can verify my work by accessing the source exactly as it was when I accessed it. And, y'know WP:Verifiability is a core policy. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:24, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In fact, usually when I encounter a page with just 1 dead link, I go to IAbot and have it archive all the links it can on the page which will not only save that dead link and possibly find others, but it will also save all the other links on the page. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You added the publication year to a cite in Mountain Meadows Massacre(using Citation bot) with this edit & I just wanted to say thanks, Shearonink (talk) 04:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just saying I have tried to create an idea you came up with a while ago. Difficultly north (talk) The artist formerly known as Simply south 17:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Citation Barnstar
		For efforts in archiving references in citations. Rlink2 (talk) 02:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rlink2 (talk) 02:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I literally popped in just to say that I like your username; that made my day! Happy Editing! Kehkou (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx! :-) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 23:33, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Girls und Panzer, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Centcom08 (talk) 07:08, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Girls und Panzer shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Centcom08 (talk) 08:51, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs in Citation bot should be taken up with the bot's maintainers, not with the people suggesting articles for it to edit. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 09:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the first time I handled this issue and the editors at Discord have already given me insights about this matter. Thank you for your time in dealing with this bug. Centcom08 (talk) 09:37, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- I just undid this edit by Citation bot -- the relevant website is isfdb.org, not sfdb.org. The edit summary says you were the editor who triggered the edit. I'm not familiar with how the bot works, so I can't tell if this is an error in Citation bot's database in some way, or just a typo -- is this something that could happen with other Citation bot edits? Or is it a one-off? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably an error in the database; I'd recommend filing a bug report on Citation bot's talkpage. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 09:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; have done so. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You triggered the citation bot on Donald Trump to replace "work" with "newspaper". Please be advised that work is a shorter alternative for newspaper and that page size is a concern on a page with more than 800 cites. I undid the change. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 09:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to User_talk:Citation_bot#Automatic_cite_magazine_conversions before you continue using the citation bot for MCU related articles. -- Zoo (talk) 21:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Supply-side economics. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Bellowhead678 (talk) 03:54, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to strongly disagree with your characterization of my edit as "unconstructive"; see the comment I left on your talk page for further explanation. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 04:14, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed some of your edits through IABotManagementConsole, and I was shortly after truly blown away by your userboxen! They are very cute. The internet archive bot also seems to save a lot of time archiving!

I wish you a happy day and a fun time on wikipedia. :) Darcyisverycute (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit Citation bot, run by you, made the changes "Alter: title, pages. Add: website, doi. Formatted dashes." In this edit, 19 hours later, Citation bot, run by you, made the changes "Add: isbn.".

Did you run the bot with different option to get it to add the ISBN in the second edit when it didn't do so in the first edit? Was this the result of timeouts in the first run causing it to quit looking at URLs before it got to the one where it added the ISBN in the second run? Was it the result of a change to the bot between the runs? Or was it something else? (I'm trying to see if there are other knobs I can turn or switches I can flip when running the bot, to get as much work done as possible.) Guy Harris (talk) 21:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure why that sort of stuff happens (you'd have to ask AManWithNoPlan for that sort of technical explanation), only that it sometimes does. As for why the bot ran on the same page twice in the first place, I ran Citation bot on one category, and, then, later, on a subcategory of the former category; it appears that that particular page happened to be a member of both the category and its subcategory. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 22:09, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your 'Why?' tag. Question: does it apply to the 'in shallow water' phrase or to the entire sentence? Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The whole sentence. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 19:35, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so may I ask: why is the rest of the sentence unclear? Why is the relative description of the two classes of submarines (the SSN which is faster and deeper-diving than the SSK, and air independent to boot) not enough to convey that the SSK would not be able to find and sink the SSN except by chance? I think that says it all, unless you think we need to get into a description of how temperature gradients at depth affect passive sonar, and how torpedoes of the day were slower than the SSNs and could not vary their depth much. BTW, the 'at shallow depth' phrase is what raises other issues: the SSN has to slow down and has less room to maneuver, the SSK is more vulnerable to counterattack and would have to travel farther than to the planned deepwater patrol areas around Iceland (a real problem for a deliberately small sub), etc, etc.

Given all this, do you really think a massive re-write is necessary? I mean, I'm game to try, but I think it might really unbalance the article - I'm also thinking it might be a better fit in the SSK article. Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 20:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Anarchist Totalitarian, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Anarchist Totalitarian and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:Anarchist Totalitarian during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Sundostund (talk) 12:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why you are special. You are now exempt from the "too many big jobs" policy, since I cannot figure out what is going on. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx, and apologies if it came across as me demanding your attention re: Citation bot (I meant to inform, not [so much] to pester). Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 16:57, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The alternative (not telling us) is worse. People have come up to complain about a problem "that has existed for years". 17:50, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AM&SPHR has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Side note: I know that you authored the template, but the idea of the railroad map template was originally input by an anonymous editor on December 4, 2013. Idk what you had in mind when you created a special template page for it, but I honestly don't see how the content (railroad map info) helps the Raising Steam page in any meaningful way. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 06:31, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming that the reason your name is attached to edits by IABot (v2.0.9.2) is because you have something to do with how it works. FYI: it tagged 4 links in a bio as being dead and unable to find archives. But I found the archive copies. IABot (v2.0.9.2) cannot be trusted, and if it cannot perform a comprehensive search for archives it may be ruining references in articles. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's because I happened to be the one to feed those particular pages into the InternetArchiveBot interface. I have nothing to do with the design or operation of the bot other than being one of its (many many) users; if you've found a problem, submit a bug report at the bot's Meta talkpage, not here. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 09:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyxis Solitary: FYI this is due to archive.ph/archive.today sucking at the moment and making IABot think all archives on it are dead with its responses. See T320969 for more information --Nintendofan885^{T&Cs apply} 03:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whoop, if you've got a moment would you mind running your magic software over Deptford Cattle Market to correct the citation references. I don't know how to do it, or I would. ThanksTtocserp 10:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not my software; I just use the thing. If you want to talk to the people whose software it is, leave a message at User talk:Citation bot. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 10:12, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Ttocserp

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:01, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Whoop whoop pull up. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Massive Monolithic Telescope".

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a gentle reminder: when you run Citation bot, you should manually check the changes it makes. On the recent run of MBTA articles, there were about 15 edits that needed reverting, primarily due to obviously incorrect metadata. (Examples: Special:Diff/1127622984 and Special:Diff/1127616555.) Thanks, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding this. Lots of cosmetic bot changes that are going through for no reason. Please do not run them off a single userpage's links, as it absolutely floods the watchlist. SounderBruce 06:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm here to third this comment. Citation bot frequently introduces errors in short-footnote citations (generated by the {{sfn}} and {{harv}} template families), and so any time that you run citation bot on an article that uses short footnotes you need to check manually that it has not introduced errors. I've just reverted this edit for example, which made a complete hash of the references in a featured article. I understand that checking each of the bot's edits is a lot of tedious work, but unfortunately citation bot is not written carefully enough to be trusted without manual checking. Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 15:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wham2001: ...What errors did the bot introduce in that edit? All the changes I see that it made appear to have been good ones (anonymizing links, adding title/author/date information, etc.). Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 16:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Short footnote multiple-target errors. You can see them as red error messages next to many of the references in the version edited by the bot, unless you have their display suppressed. The reason for this is that the templates that generate short-footnote form citations ({{sfn}}, {{harvnb}}, etc.) link to the associated bibliographic information in long-form citations using the authors and date. Citation bot's edit meant that there were two such possible targets for each references, and the software that does the linking can't work out which one to link to. The fact that the article had duplicate bibliographic information in the first point wasn't citation bot's fault, but the correct solution (either merging the {{cite web}} templates with the {{cite book}} templates, or – as I opted for – removing the duplicate {{cite web}} templates entirely) can only be ascertained by inspecting the article. In an ideal world citation bot would refuse to make an edit which causes an article to be added to Category:Harv and Sfn multiple-target errors or Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors, but I don't know how easy it would be for the developers to make such a change. Wham2001 (talk) 18:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wham2001: Have you tried submitting a bug report on the bot's talkpage? That way, the developers might well be able to update the bot to fix that situation, and, if they can't, at least you'll know. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 19:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea – I'll do that. But perhaps tomorrow when I'm more awake Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wham2001: I'd do it myself, but you seem to understand the problem considerably better than I do. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 22:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done at User talk:Citation bot#Citation bot on articles with shortened footnotes. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 08:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 10:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have read all your userboxes and the ones you have chosen lead me to believe you would make a good colleague. Shall the friendship commence?

Allaoii ^talk 23:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain this edit summary. Because on the face of it, it looks to me like a bad-faith assumption about the quality of my user page. At best it is a very poor choice of how to spend bot resources, as most of the links there are to Good Articles not in significant need of citation repair. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:55, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I'll refrain from doing linked-page runs from your userpage in future. (That makes your userpage a rather unusual case - most userpages have a lot of links to ripe-for-citation-repair articles in userboxen and stuff.) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 22:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit funny, I just came here to ask the same question! Not that I care, I just didn't realize that CB operated like that. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 02:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

seem to be in error as they have added publication dates to undated material, see a Ramsdell Theatre edit and a Benjamin Franklin Graves (soldier) edit. I have reverted your changes (I think at one article a single-space edit got caught in my revert) but I wanted you to know why your edits were reverted. If I was wrong about the dates, let me know. Shearonink (talk) 20:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shearonink: Thanx for the heads-up; I've submitted a bug report about this. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 21:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, thanks to the bug report you filed it looks like what I thought was a Citation bug/issue is actually based on information hidden within the html code that can date web content. Who knew! I sure as heck didn't...from now on anytime I come across web content that appears undated I can either run Citation bot on it or look "under the hood" at the page's mechanics. Shearonink (talk) 22:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Whoop whoop pull up! I am very glad to see that you added Template:User No Neo-Confederates to your userpage. Having that in mind, I must ask you to consider endorsing a closely related essay, WP:NOCONFED, in which creation I participated. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 12:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching the apostrophe. 🖖🏻 —DaydreamBelizer (chat) 22:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you running InternetArchiveBot and just wanted to let you know that I very much enjoy your username. Reminds me of Capybara meme and I start singing it to myself, although I very much recognize it's more than likely an aviation reference. Skipple ☎ 01:07, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx! :-) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 01:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Dogfighting has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 6 § Dogfighting until a consensus is reached. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads-up, the guidechem website, which you hvae in one of the refs on User:Whoop_whoop_pull_up/Interpnictogen, is headed for blacklisting. I didn't want to edit a non-public draft or personal-use page, but you should remove that link soon (if that page is still worth keeping) so it doesn't cause problems in future edits. DMacks (talk) 20:31, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx! :-) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 21:00, 9 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) 05:50, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have a way to make iabot runs on category listings a bit more efficient by avoiding visits to the single-character articles A, B, etc. In Excel, I paste the contents of a category's list of articles into column A. I then add the formula =LEN(A1) to B1 and drag it down so that I have a column of lengths. Then I sort downwards on column B, so that all the single-character article names are at the bottom and can be removed from the list before submitting it to iabot. If more than one category has been copied into your spreadsheet, you can then sort column A alphabetically, which will make any duplicate names more obvious so that they can be removed from the list before submitting it to iabot. This isn't necessary all the time, but it saves iabot from visiting A, B, etc. multiple times a day. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for the tip; does it work on LibreOffice Calc? (I don't have Excel.) Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 23:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there wiki-buddy! I'm hoping I can attract some interested folks to consider reviewing the Wikipedia page about amyotrophic lateral sclerosis for Good Article status. As you may know, ALS is a rare and fatal neurodegenerative disease that quickly causes people to lose the ability to move, speak, and breathe. The Wikipedia page about ALS is read over 2,000 times each day in English alone, and often experiences spikes in traffic whenever a celebrity is diagnosed. There have recently been a number of genetic advances made in the space and some recent drug approvals, thanks in part to the momentum started by the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. I've been grinding away at it since early this year but keen to see it improve further, hope you'll consider! PaulWicks (talk) 08:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to stop by and say you have the coolest username I have ever seen on English Wikipedia. That is all! GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 04:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, thanx! 😊 Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 13:25, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to say the same! - AquilaFasciata (talk | contribs) 16:17, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

😊 Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 22:31, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Same! Notrealname1234 (talk) 01:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thx 😊 Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 03:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Template:R from deadname has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 30 § Template:R from deadname until a consensus is reached. A smart kitten (talk) 12:35, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you have sent a bot to Donald Trump to change "work" to "newspaper" several times recently (Sep 3, Aug 30, Jun 12). You also sent the bot to add archive-urls to urls that are not dead.

Size is a concern in this very long article. "Work" is an alternative for "newspaper", "magazine", etc, and the consensus parameter title on the page, and there is an express consensus against web archives for live sources — see [Talk:Donald_Trump#Current_consensus current consensus], #25, "Do not add web archives to cited sources which are not dead." Other editors and me have been reverting these changes, and I, for one, would appreciate it if you could take Donald Trump off the bot's to-do or target or whatever list. Space4Time3Continuum2x ^(cowabunga) 11:42, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Space4Time3Continuum2x You should say this to the bot's maintainers. Notrealname1234 (talk) 16:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

quacker !kurukitty! (talk) 01:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect VA Medical Center station (MBTA) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 13 § VA Medical Center station (MBTA) until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:15, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distance 50km at speed 3x10⁵km/s needs 1.7 ^-4s. Mean lifetime = 2.2x10^-6s . Cheers - DVdm (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello Whoop whoop pull up, 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 2024. Happy editing, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 (talk) 06:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A+ username

I can hear it in my head. I heard it as soon as I saw the username.

That is all. Test35965 (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thx! 🤭 Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 04:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also couldn't help but hear the username in my head… along with bank angle - bank angle. 👍 from a queer Minnesotan :) SunTunnels (talk) 13:28, 16 May 2024 (UTC) SunTunnels (talk) 13:28, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

🤭🤭 Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 20:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

I just saw that you activated the citation bot for the page Conversion to Christianity. Can you please do the same for Christianity in India which has bare URLs? I tried using it but the bot didn't work for me.

Thanks! Ciao! 106.79.197.124 (talk) 16:51, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that should help! Y'welks! Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 19:24, 1 May 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]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 18 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) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

I’m proposing the probably Un-controversial merger of Marital breakdown into Irreconcilable differences. What do you think? Bearian (talk) 20:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional destroyed planets 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. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I recently got a draft undeleted from the G13 stuff and when I went on to add some images, Wikimedia Commons said that the image is being used by your userspace so I saw your userspace and it had so much more information that the draft I got undeleted. I also noticed that your draft was last edited on April 25, 2022, so I'm here to say that are you still gonna work on it? If not, can I use all the information from it? Thanks. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 03:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead! :-) Whoop whoop pull up ^{♀️ Bitching Betty 🏳️‍⚧️ Averted crashes ⚧️} 22:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 23:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Y'welks! Whoop whoop pull up ^{♀️ Bitching Betty 🏳️‍⚧️ Averted crashes ⚧️} 23:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WWPU, this edit is another example why it's important for you to personally check any IABot edits you initiate. The bot replaced a live archival link with an archived 404 page. If I hadn't caught that, it would have become a permanent dead link. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: I made a similar complaint here two weeks ago which was... well... you can read it here.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 00:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 🫃 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 14 § 🫃 until a consensus is reached. LIrala (talk) 04:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding directions Citation bot says you gave. The thread is User:Citation bot won't stop adding incorrect dates to articles. Thank you. Legend of 14 (talk) 17:54, 15 January 2025 (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: existing :3

Hi... I have nominated the AN/MPN-14K article for deletion. There is a current discussion about the nomination here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AN/MPN-14K Mobile Ground Approach System. Since you have done some editing to this page (possibly a long time ago), I want to invite you to chime in with your thoughts on the deletion there. Thanks. — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 17:43, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]