Most recent poster here: ClueBot III (talk)
Content requiring reviews!
FAC(s)
FLC(s)
Good Topics
GAN(s)
- Cribbage (pool) (nom)
- Honolulu (pool) ()
- 1970 World Snooker Championship ()
- 2011 World Snooker Championship ()
- 2022 World Snooker Championship ()
- Survivor: Africa ()
- Retribution (professional wrestling) ()
- 2020 World Seniors Championship ()
Service Award
|
---|
![]() This editor is a Senior Editor II and is entitled to display this Rhodium Editor Star. Currently, this editor has earned the Senior Editor II service award.
To get to the next level, Senior Editor III, he needs to meet the time requirement. Progress towards the next level (by time): [ 75.4 days / 182.6 days ]41.3% completed |
Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220620175231im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Internet-group-chat.svg/48px-Internet-group-chat.svg.png)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Yoruba art on a "History and geography" 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 23:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220620175231im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Internet-group-chat.svg/48px-Internet-group-chat.svg.png)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Heat of combustion 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 17:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220620175231im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Internet-group-chat.svg/48px-Internet-group-chat.svg.png)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of coups and coup attempts 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 19:30, 11 June 2022 (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) 12:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
DYK for Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma
![]() | On 13 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the reactions to food depicted in the manga series Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma were decided on through free association games? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 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. |
— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220620175231im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Internet-group-chat.svg/48px-Internet-group-chat.svg.png)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Timothée Chalamet 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 19:30, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Philip Baker Hall
Hi. I hope you don't mind me reverting your edit. I had previously tried Refill 2 to fix the bare URLs and it worked - but then I noticed they were grouping them under the wrong source. I explained it in more detail in my edit note. But basically Refill 2 is confusing two sources and grouping all the BFI ones under Hollywood Reporter one. Would you know a way to fix it? I don't other than using Refill2. If my edit is in error, please revert it. Thanks. 2001:BB6:4E18:E358:70B9:504A:E11D:D0FA (talk) 14:53, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think it's a Refill issue. Looks like some things were labelled before as "auto2", but against that source. I'm only speculating of course. I can take a look a bit later and see if this makes a difference. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! I've undone my edit that reverted yours to remove the tag in case someone else just uses refill2 again and I'll let you have a look at the sources grouping when you have time, thanks again. 2001:BB6:4E18:E358:70B9:504A:E11D:D0FA (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Just checked the page and see you fixed all the sources. Major thanks again - great job! 2001:BB6:4E18:E358:70B9:504A:E11D:D0FA (talk) 18:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed. At some point, the "auto2" was changed to the other source. Still needs a little cleanup, but if that's what you were looking for, then we are all good. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Flags on the Monkeypox outbreak page
Hi Lee Vilenski, I'm sure you were doing what you thought is best for the article, but there is pretty broad agreement on the talk page that removing the flags was a loss rather than a gain. Unfortunately, undo action was not possible for your first big edit, which has made it a little tedious to add the flags back (but I did start - the tables are a bit of a mess atm though). Anyway, I thought I'd point it out to you, dunno if you'd have browsed past the page again.
Regards, Sean Heron (talk) 16:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
P.S. For clarities sake - I really just wanted to point out the sentiment of other editors on the page (as well as the fact that adding the flags back is a little tricky). So, no request for action here, just information! (though if you could readd the flags in the tables, I'm sure it would generally be appreciated :P ).
- I've left a response on the talk page. I would have recommended just combining the diffs and hitting undo. I won't be adding the flags back into the page, as they shouldn't be there, as they are purely decorative. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:11, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Lee Vilenski
It will probably come as no surprise, but your RfB has been successful; congrats! Our main page is WP:BN, and most of what we do is at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats. If you've got questions, BN will be the best place to ask, but I'm always happy to field questions at my talk. Primefac (talk) 16:29, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Congrats Lee :) firefly ( t · c ) 16:34, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Congratulations! 👏👏👏 ~~ lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me • contribs) 16:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Congrats --Enos733 (talk) 16:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yet more work for ya! Yea! Congrats!
Govvy (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Cheers Primefac et al. I feel like I'm in some esteemed company after a stressful week. I'll be sure to ask some questions should they come up. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
- Congratulations! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:06, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Congrats, and welcome! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:50, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Congratulations for Bureaucratship !! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:35, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the gang. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 21:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm really glad to have been able to support you, Lee, and thank you for stepping up. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 01:07, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- It wasn't something I expected you to do, but I'm glad you did. It was a pleasure supporting. 🎱 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:53, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Cheers! You'll still see the same output of random snooker and cue sport articles to come. Last time I ran for RfX, I won the WikiCup. In 2022 - who knows?! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:06, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nice to see two editors I convinced to run for RfA have gone further and got the 'crat bit. May you desysop wisely..... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:24, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for volunteering! valereee (talk) 02:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Question from MB2234 on Wikipedia:Help desk (21:47, 15 June 2022)
Hello! I'm trying to edit the title of a product for my company's page, but it's not allowing me to do so. --MB2234 (talk) 21:47, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Cribbage (pool)
The article Cribbage (pool) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cribbage (pool) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 23:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the Good Article review!
I hadn't worked on the 2021 French Grand Prix article for a few months, so it wasn't at the forefront of my mind, but it's an honour to see an article I've worked on given the Good Article badge. Looking through your review I'm trying to address the issues you bought up, although I'm not sure how to address the qualification table issue. Since the review is closed, I'll address a couple of the points bought up here:
- My personal preference for saying "
Sole Formula One tyre supplier...
" comes from running some other articles past friends or relatives who don't follow F1 and finding that they express confusion as to why teams wouldn't simply use tyres from another company if some sort of issue with the tyres arises (punctures, lack of grip etc).- I feel like just saying "the F1 tyre supplier" gets across that they are the only one. Saying "sole" is a bit unnecessarily accurate. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Both are basically identical so either should be fine. To me "sole" feels a bit more neutral than "the" (perhaps I associate it with adverts declaring a particular product to be the definitive product in a particular class), but if others were to express a preference for "the" in an FAC or the like I'd be fine with changing it. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I feel like just saying "the F1 tyre supplier" gets across that they are the only one. Saying "sole" is a bit unnecessarily accurate. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I agree that having the prose and tables intertwined is messy (and may be a MOS:ACCESS issue), but the current Wikiproject consensus is to have that format.
- I'm aware. I always bring it up, as it should be challenged. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure what prose would be best added to the "Championship standings after the race" section. I think most of that information is more coherently presented within the context of the race report, but a simple prose description of the championship standings would be relatively easy to add.
- Just an explaination line, something like "Below is the top five positions championship standings after the race for both constructor's and driver's.[168]" I do this with my snooker tournaments, see 2021 World Snooker Championship#Main draw for an example. This avoids the un-needed note, and you can source in prose rather than at the bottom of the table. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Additional note I missed from the GAN - there's some MOS:FLAG issues, in that you should really define flags on first use, so they should use {{flagathlete}}. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Similar to the other issues with tables this is something where Wikiproject norms (which can be very hard to get people to budge on) are likely to run up against the MOS as articles reach GAN or FAC. If this does get put up for FAC then it could lead to a change in the Wikiproject, though more likely it'd just result in the article getting labelled a "special exception" like 1982 Formula One World Championship did regarding {{flagathlete}}. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Cheers! HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your prompt replies! HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Question from Since Independence News (12:05, 18 June 2022)
hello sir we have run a news website for three years. we want to create a Wikipedia page for our website. please help us for making a page on Wikipedia --Since Independence News (talk) 12:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- The short answer Since Independent News, is don't. First of all, Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about topics you have a conflict of interest in. Your newspaper is very unlikely to meet our notability guidelines, so it would be likely deleted very quickly. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)