User talk:Lee Vilenski/Archives/2021/January
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
.jpg)
BennyOnTheLoose (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, 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:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Merry Christmas!
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!
Hello, Lee Vilenski! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Linguist111talk 23:33, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
- Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}
Merry Christmas!
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021! |
|
Hello Lee Vilenski, 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 2021. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Merry Christmas!
|
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021! |
|
Hello Lee Vilenski, 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 2021. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Hello Lee, happy "time of the year" to you, and I hope you're well. There's (yet) another discussion over Wikicup and FAC going on at the above, and one of your review comments has been brought up as an example. I don't believe you've been pinged and I think the ping I added probably won't work, so I thought I'd just let you know, so that you can correct any fallacious assertions being made about you or your approach or (once again) the Wikicup in general. Cheers, take care. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know, I'd have not seen it otherwise. Happy to change my wording or come up with a compremise to my message, but it's a bit odd not being messaged about it.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well yes, and the fact that your approach was mis-represented at the outset of that discussion wasn't really suitable either. Bad form. Glad you opined. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:21, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- The irony is that I didn't actually have a message to this effect until I had to denote my participation in the cup. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- That's a LOL moment. Cheers, and happy new year! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:08, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- I just want to make it clear that my participation in that discussion is not aimed at anybody in particular, but is just the result of my minority belief that the review request is better on a talk page. And yes, I think I do remember breaking that once. No offense intended from anything said there. Hog Farm Bacon 23:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- That's a LOL moment. Cheers, and happy new year! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:08, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- The irony is that I didn't actually have a message to this effect until I had to denote my participation in the cup. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well yes, and the fact that your approach was mis-represented at the outset of that discussion wasn't really suitable either. Bad form. Glad you opined. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:21, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Lee, that "discussion" has at last been closed down. I can't imagine it will be the last time it's brought up and I just hope next time the picture is painted fairly. I'm sorry that you were falsely accused of demanding a review before you would give one, it just shows how out of touch some people are. My advice, for what it's worth, just drop the phrase QPQ as that seems to have been the touch point for some people. Otherwise, good luck with your nominations, I look forward to reviewing them (with absolutely NO requirement for you to review mine, unless you feel like it!!) Cheers, and happy new year. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- I did change my boiler plate the moment someone told me it was an issue - it's at user:Lee Vilenski/FA Template. I don't really see how having a link to your nominated articles is any worse on the nomination page than a ping or talk page message. If there is more on that message that needs tuning, let me know. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:55, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- I think the issue at hand is the incorrect interpretation of the literal requirements of a QPQ. Because of DYK's use of it, whereby an article must be reviewed as part of the promotion process, that's how some individual's are choosing to interpret it in the FAC context, despite your previous clear wording. The whole discussion is completely muddled and without focus: Ceoil tried to get things back on track and that was sadly and summarily de-railed once again. What is clear is that any issue with your approach is coming from a minuscule minority so I'd just carry on carrying on. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:32, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the support. I will leave some comments for anyone who is active on FAC, that I make no attempt to do anything against the rules, and more than willingly have my contributions strutinised. I would rather have someone send me something (a diff or general topic) to my talk so I can figure out what the issues actually are, and change my setup in a corresponding way. I will reach out to anyone who may or may not have an issue with my current approach, as I would rather not have any more topics about this - unless it is to gain a consensus on if leaving a link to my nominations page is unsuitable. I don't want the aggro, I do want the process to work smoothly. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:57, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- I think the issue at hand is the incorrect interpretation of the literal requirements of a QPQ. Because of DYK's use of it, whereby an article must be reviewed as part of the promotion process, that's how some individual's are choosing to interpret it in the FAC context, despite your previous clear wording. The whole discussion is completely muddled and without focus: Ceoil tried to get things back on track and that was sadly and summarily de-railed once again. What is clear is that any issue with your approach is coming from a minuscule minority so I'd just carry on carrying on. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:32, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Straight pool
 | Hello, Lee Vilenski. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Straight pool at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 16:36, 21:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC) |
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2020
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 12, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2020
Previous issue | Index | Next issue 
Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2020, the project has:
|
|
Content
|
|
(Delivered 08:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC))
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Marco Fu
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Marco Fu has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
I wouldn't have described it as "poorly worded". I did try to vary repetitive phrasing and added a couple of clarifications. I was also able to fix the broken citation.
Stay safe! Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Technical news
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
Arbitration
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). - Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
Disambiguation link notification for January 5
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William Lyon Mackenzie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mayor of York.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
CSD
Hey! I was wondering if you could delete this to make way for a page move? Thanks, Andrew nyrtalkcontribs 02:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, all done. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
|
Happy New Year! |
Hello Lee Vilenski: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. |
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message
I wish you a prosperous 2021! Starzoner (talk) 15:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Lee Vilenski!
Lee Vilenski,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 19:49, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Happy New Year, Lee Vilenski!
Lee Vilenski,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 01:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Orphan article
Hello, I have linked Pixel Game Maker MV to other pages such as Playism, Side-scrolling video games, Nintendo Switch games nad others. Can the orphan tag be removed? Rrobotto (talk) 14:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Rrobotto Orphans are for other articles to link to this article. Currently only Playism links there, so might be worth creating links some more places that talk about this software. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:31, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Lee Vilenski , I came to notice that the EC protection on this talk page has expired and all IPs are again attacking the page. Can you please have a look at it? Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 10:37, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy 20th anniversary!
|
Celebration~! |
Wikipedia will only ever turn 20 once! Hope you are doing well and have a prosperous onwiki experience in the future. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 02:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
|
Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of states with limited recognition on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment, and at Talk:List of people from Ukraine on a "History and geography" request for comment, and at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment, and at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment, and at Talk:Gabriel Rothblatt on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment, and at Talk:Signal (software) on a "All RFCs" request for comment, and at Talk:Pentagon UFO videos on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry
I'm not going to start GA reviews ever again because of the Jenson Button mishap. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 22:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- How am I going to do better on those? NASCARfan0548 ↗ 22:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Kapadia FAC
Hi there, Lee Vilenski,
First, I appreciate your comments on the Dimple Kapadia FAC. I think I've addressed all of them now, but it looks like you were midway through the reviewing process and probably got busy doing things. I thought I'd remind you of the FAC anyway. If you are, indeed, kept occupied with other activities and not currently available to continue your review, I'll understand. Regards, Shahid • Talk2me 13:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
- It's on the to-do list. Don't worry. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:56, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Mass deletion of IDOSI journals.
These were not G8-elibigle (see see discussion), please restore these redirects. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:19, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- I saw the thread on AN btw. No need to reply to this message. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:30, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Aye, sorry. I'm working on it. Just trying to see if there is even a semi-automated way of doing it before I sit down and restore them l manually. Apologies. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:27, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah no worries, thanks for restoring. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:18, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Once again apologies for this - let me know if this isn't complete btw. Headbomb Is it worth us having a better discussion about the merits/fixes for retaining these categories? I worry that others may view these as empty categories like I did. I did see that there was a deletion consensus, but it currently doesn't link at Category:International Digital Organization for Scientific Information academic journals or the other items on the list. I thought there was quite a few requests for these to become hidden categories, which makes sense to me. Is it worth me opening another MfD, or adding some sort of link to the prior consensus to each of these categories to make it a bit more visable? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
- The CFD was closed with "overwhelming consensus" to keep, so I'm not sure where you're getting that there was a consensus for deletion. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, no I thought there was a decent argument to hide the categories, but the AN discussion did have further people talking about it. Happy to do whatever with these. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
- The CFD was closed with "overwhelming consensus" to keep, so I'm not sure where you're getting that there was a consensus for deletion. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
- Once again apologies for this - let me know if this isn't complete btw. Headbomb Is it worth us having a better discussion about the merits/fixes for retaining these categories? I worry that others may view these as empty categories like I did. I did see that there was a deletion consensus, but it currently doesn't link at Category:International Digital Organization for Scientific Information academic journals or the other items on the list. I thought there was quite a few requests for these to become hidden categories, which makes sense to me. Is it worth me opening another MfD, or adding some sort of link to the prior consensus to each of these categories to make it a bit more visable? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah no worries, thanks for restoring. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:18, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Aye, sorry. I'm working on it. Just trying to see if there is even a semi-automated way of doing it before I sit down and restore them l manually. Apologies. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:27, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I wouldn't want to do it without consensus. I'm not sure CfD is the best place for that discussion; but it's the only real forum for category chats. I'm a bit tied down to start a suitable discussion, so I'll leave as is for now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kane Tanaka on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Snooker peer review
Hey Lee, how's it going? I noticed you put the Snooker article up for peer review. I've started having a closer look at it to help get it ready for FA nom, but I'm probably not the best person to do a peer review as I'm a bit too closely involved in the snooker project. In fact, I'm not sure I know exactly what peer review means! Is it a formal review process like a GA review? Or would you expect several editors to contribute in a less formal manner? If you like, I can just carry on doing some general copyediting? I've got a bunch of questions/suggestions, which maybe could go into the review before you put it up for FA nom. Cheers, Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- The peer review is a sounding board to make the article up to FA quality. There are some general fixes that I've seen that you've done, but any help working on it would be appreciated. I don't plan to nominate until later this year, but I know it isn't quite there yet! Thanks for taking a look, and anything you can do to improve the article would be grand. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, so you want me to put some stuff on the peer review page for you? It might take me a while to go through it but I guess I can just add a few comments as I go along, and then maybe a few more, etc. etc. Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be fantastic if possible. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Righteo, my absolute pleasure! Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Just a thought... It's occurred to me that Rules of snooker should probably be peer reviewed next because it's linked from the main Snooker article and should therefore be brought up to the same standard. Rodney Baggins (talk) 09:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- Righteo, my absolute pleasure! Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be fantastic if possible. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, so you want me to put some stuff on the peer review page for you? It might take me a while to go through it but I guess I can just add a few comments as I go along, and then maybe a few more, etc. etc. Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Did I do this right?
I recently performed a username block of User talk:Joe Biden slept with Bernie Sanders, for obvious reasons. You've had the admin bit a little longer than I have, and are more experienced with the admin stuff. Did I execute the block setting correctly? Hog Farm Talk 01:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, looks good! Obviously twinkle is your best friend with blocks. Just remember to watchlist in case of having to revoke TPA. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:57, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
DYK for 2021 Masters (snooker)
On 24 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2021 Masters (snooker), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kyren Wilson set fire to his cue stick at the 2021 Masters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021 Masters (snooker). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021 Masters (snooker)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:PragerU on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
XTools
Thanks once again for your comments. What do you think?--Hildeoc (talk) 05:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:2017 in cue sports
Hello, Lee Vilenski. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2017 in cue sports".
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! 20:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)