User talk:ToadetteEdit/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Question from Bizbizbizzy (17:39, 14 July 2024)

How do I create a page --Bizbizbizzy (talk) 17:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bizbizbizzy, creating an article requires you to have at least 10 edits and be here for at least a day. In the meantime, you can use the article wizard to create drafts and sub,it it for review. Hope that helps! Toadette^Edit! 18:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi how to ping bcos I've sent the reply/clarification to ur msg at my ip pg

I can't edit my msg as an IP apparently? (To include your ping to my reply) ???? 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 18:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi ip, what do you mean by your message? Toadette^Edit! 18:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

the one at my talk pg, as said in the title ............ 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 18:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I mean your message announcing u had removed my msg requesting for advice at Talk:Wikimedia Commons 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Let's discuss at my ip talk page, ok 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 18:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I understood your message; to ping users, simply use {{ping|user who you want to ping}}. I am litterally writing it and you are continuing sending me messages. As for your edit, talk pages are intended to improve the article and not to use it as forums, giving advice away from the improvement and discussion about the content of the article. I have forgiven you. Toadette^Edit! 18:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

yes it's a little urgent so ..

Sry no offense but it's a little urgent 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I understand, but as I said, I can't edit my previous msgs to add the ping anyways , can we spk there 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

"I have forgiven you" what did I do ?? just tried to seek help abt accessing the Wikimedia commons and that's already an offense here??!! 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

dude its not an offense, but you can ask somebody, not just post a msg on talk pages, ur treating it like a forum. Toadette^Edit! 19:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Apologies but it seemed like an admin was already treating this as a disruptive/troll anon/biting so that's why I responded like dat

Anyways what I wanted to ask is why any Wikimedia commons link returns a 'this site can't be reached', all the time ? (Like ever since I've heard the site's name) 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Ik i reply pretty fast in chunks 😅 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I've better explained this at my tp (where u first posted msg) 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, the site is accessible rn (once in a frcking blue moon!), so the issue looks like it's been sorted, so yeah 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

c u (ik my sentences are a bit of rambling always, it's somewhat a struggle in conversation even offline so npb) bye 2402:E280:3D1D:563:2D96:CCBC:1CC1:2FFD (talk) 19:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Not everything needs to be urgent. This is just routine business. One reverts, the victim complains and everything gets resolved. You can just leave another msg, big issue? Toadette^Edit! 19:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

this is me srry for beraking rules 132.147.192.240 (talk) 02:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

You are posting from an ipv4 and you are saying to me sorry? Toadette^Edit! 14:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Davidmpol (18:45, 18 July 2024)

Is there a format to use when create an entry for a company? --Davidmpol (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Davidmpol! There is no formal format when creating company articles. But there is the Manual of Style that should be used for writing articles, and so is the defacto format. There may be at least one for companies, I am nit sure about it. Toadette^Edit! 17:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Impact of the 2024 CrowdStrike incident has been accepted

Impact of the 2024 CrowdStrike incident, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

• Discussion report: Internet users flock to Wikipedia to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo

• News and notes: Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification

• News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation Board resolution and vote on the proposed Movement Charter

• Essay: Reflections on editing and obsession

• In the media: What's on Putin's fork, the court's docket, and in Harrison's book?

• Obituary: JamesR

• Crossword: Vaguely bird-shaped crossword

• Humour: Joe Biden withdraws RfA, Donald Trump selects co-nom

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

An IT blessing for you!

May your "downtime" always be the relaxing kind.

:(

Toadette's device ran into a problem and needs to restart in a loop forever

Thank you for choosing to start the discussion without proposing a specific new title. Several participants criticized this choice, but it was absolutely the right call: an open-ended discussion was exactly what we needed. May your days be free of both outrages and outages.

Awarded for valuable contributions to the 2024 CrowdStrike-related move discussion

Jruderman (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@Jruderman, thank you so much for this message. I was concerned with the title so I started the discussion. I am commenting this on my new device. Toadette^Edit! 07:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wole Sentimenta

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wole Sentimenta requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@Drm310, I did not created the article. Maybe it was a redirect and then converted into an article. Toadette^Edit! 07:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi ToadetteEdit. I'm sure that is exactly what happened. Twinkle isn't smart enough to trace it back to the original author if it's moved from elsewhere. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 11:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_23#Template:Cantic_small_table

Hey, at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_23#Template:Cantic_small_table that isn't a keep result. It's a delete result and the redirect created during the dicussion should be deleted. Gonnym (talk) 11:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@Gonnym, the page was userfied, the redirect should be deleted instead Toadette^Edit! 11:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done Toadette^Edit! 12:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

That being said, the close should have reflected that fact, i.e. it should have been closed as "userfied" or "moved to user space"; the template itself has not been deleted. Primefac (talk) 12:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Article rejected for being "improperly sourced"

My AFC Draft:Motor Rifle Troops (Soviet Union) was rejected by you for being "improperly sourced", and lacking reliable sources. I fail to see which of my sources are unreliable or which sections are unsourced, so any advice or reasoning for rejection would be much appreciated, so that I can amend it. Harrytone (talk) 16:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Harrytone, some parts are currently unsourced, I suggest getting a source to verify your claim. Toadette^Edit! 16:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, it was my own error in not repeating references to sources that are used for more than one part of the article. I will amend that. Harrytone (talk) 16:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Advice

Hi, @ToadetteEdit You recently declined my AFC request for Ahamd Shah II's invasion of Mewar by reasoning that "'This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article.", but if you would look into the sources there is an individual section for the same as we can't use the same source. I have used multiple citations from different sources. Still, I was rejected so I would like to ask you what I can improve in the draft(exactly). Rawn3012 (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Rawn3012, the reason is that sources should be indepth and that it should lack original research WP:INDEPTH, WP:OR). I recommend finding at least two sources that have that. I may have made a mistake in the reviewing. Toadette^Edit! 16:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources question

You have indicated that my draft:aliasing (factorial experiments) "is not adequately supported by reliable sources." Two previous editors said this, and I have tried each time to correct this. I need more information as to what is unreliable or otherwise deficient in my sources. My sources are all published and easily available. I have read the Wikipedia pages that you reference, and I feel that I have adhered to Wikipedia's policy. Johsebb (talk) 02:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Johsebb, it may be that the article is undersourced, I recommend increasing the amount of inline citations to its relevant statement or add more sources. Toadette^Edit! 16:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. I'm not sure what "it may be" means here. Is that your determination, or are you unsure? And what would be the target for an appropriate number of inline citations? Or could you give me examples of passages that still need a citation? Please note that I have already increased the number of citations in response to a previous reviewer. I appreciate your assistance here. Johsebb (talk) 01:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

NACs at CfD

Hi Toadette! Thank you for volunteering at CfD to do some NACs – and I mean it. We really appreciate the help. I am wondering if you remembered to use User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/CFDlister to list the discussions you closed as WT:CFDW? If not, would you be able to do so? Best, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 16:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@HouseBlaster, I actually used the script to facilitate closures. Toadette^Edit! 17:54, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Did you remember to list them at WT:CFDW? There should be an option to do so under "More" at the top of the page. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 17:54, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@HouseBlaster, I got a notice saying that it was already listed. I click (One click close) and does that. Is this the correct way? Toadette^Edit! 18:01, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

That notification means that it was saved locally, not saved to Wikipedia. You still need to click "List discussions" under the "More" tab at the top of the page. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 18:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@HouseBlaster, understood. Toadette^Edit! 18:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you please do that now? The discussions you closed as now sitting in limbo and will not be processed by an admin until you do so. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 18:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done, anything else? Toadette^Edit! 18:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Nope, that is it. And again, thank you for your help at CfD :) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 18:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

Isabelle Belato

• Ian.thomson
• Modussiccandi

Interface administrator changes

Izno

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49

Technical news

• Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
• Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

RM at Talk:Ted Wilson (figure skater)

Hello. I notice that your RM closure at Talk:Ted Wilson (figure skater)#Requested move 18 July 2024 does not describe why you chose "figure skater" rather than "figure skating" or "ice skating". Please also see the prior discussion at User talk:Quadrantal. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@BarrelProof, the reason is that there are more people who agreed on the current title as opposed to the other title. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Tinapplestephanie (21:00, 9 August 2024)

Thank you for being my mentor. --Tinapplestephanie (talk) 21:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Tinapplestephanie , welcome to Wikipedia! You can learn how to edit by visiting the introduction. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from LoveeOnee on User:LoveeOnee (23:20, 11 August 2024)

How do I create an article --LoveeOnee (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@LoveeOnee, welcome to Wikipedia! You can create an article through the AfC submit wizard. Once you reached certain threshold, you can create articles directly. Hope that helps! ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment-free pointless relists

Please stop doing comment-free pointless relists. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@SmokeyJoe, what do you mean? ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

You’ve been relisting at MfD, here, for example.

A meaningful relist is done by a someone looking to close, who finds it is on a path to a consensus but not there, and in need of refocusing, or calling back earlier participants to consider a new, later, argument or evidence. Your relists have no explanation, no refocusing comment, and appear to be meaningless. A meaningless relist shuffles the order of the MfD page, and hides the old mfd discussion amongst newer one, and is actually counter productive.

I don’t remember seeing you at MfD before. Have you participated in many mfd discussions? SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:52, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

1) I actually participated in MfDs, albeit only a few of them, and rarely ever. 2)I understand relists. In my point of view, the discussion I've relisted had multiple valid arguments, and consensus wasn't clear. I've also seen relists without valid reasons. I'll try to make reasoning on every comment. ToadetteEdit (talk) 09:12, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Every time you relist a discussion, it means you were qualified and prepared to close it, but found it not suitable for closing it. I’d ask, “why is this not yet suitable for closing”? Hopefully your answer could say something about how the next participants could help make it suitable for closing. If you will add reasoning on every relist, that would be fantastic, and if every relister did the same, I think it will really improve all XfD. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Move review for Donald Trump fist pump photographs

An editor has asked for a Move review of Donald Trump fist pump photographs. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. Levivich (talk) 15:42, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@Levivich, I will not be participating. I am ashamed of myself. I will still allow discussion to occur here. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:37, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

No need for feeling ashamed. If you agree you got it wrong, please self-revert, and I can revert the MR (no one has commented yet). It'll save a lot of time. Levivich (talk) 18:48, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I just self-reverted the MR anyway. Take some time to think about it. Levivich (talk) 18:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

No shame zone. ToadetteEdit, you did your job, in good faith, and editors are discussing it realizing that you closed in good faith. Jut Wikipedians discussing something. On this one, I think I see where the misunderstanding comes from. This youtube link shows that assassination attempt and Trumps reaction. He does do a few fist pumps, but then he holds his arm up, alternating between open handed and closed fist. It looks like the iconic photographs, which the article is about, came after the fist pumps and were taken as he held his arm up. Make sense per article title? Randy Kryn (talk) 01:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I could not tell that's what opposes are talking. But consensus sees those opposes as weaker than supports. I couldn't move the title back without a new move discussion. ToadetteEdit (talk) 09:01, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

You can undo the close and move the title back without a new move discussion and without a move review. Levivich (talk) 13:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

This edit seems clearly incorrect. It changed the description of what was proposed and discussed. I just reverted that edit. Was that accidental? Am I missing something? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I changed the target so rmCloser could move to the intended title. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

The title you changed the target to (raised fist) is not the title rmCloser moved it to (fist pump). Levivich (talk) 13:11, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Yikes, this should be a bug. I will revert shortly. ToadetteEdit (talk) 13:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I have moved it to the intended title. This was the title I wanted to move, but I wasn't aware because I exited the window the moment I tapped the button. I also witnessed some discussion on my rerequest of PGM rights. ToadetteEdit (talk) 13:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh! 😂 Well your closing statement makes a lot more sense to me now! Thanks! Levivich (talk) 13:39, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Trump raised-fist photographs

Not understanding why you moved the page to an incorrect name (fist pump?). The correct result of a "move" result would be either Donald Trump raised fist photographs or Donald Trump raised-fist photographs, per both the RM nomination and the RM discussion. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Likewise, I am very confused by this close. I count 44 editors who voted in the RM, and 7 supported the move (Sir MemeGod, CaptainJZH, S5A-0043, SimplyLouis27, Keeper of Albion, Kowal2701, and Picard's Facepalm), while the other 37 supported something else. I get weighing votes and all, but 37-7? I've never seen such a dramatic weighing. You wrote the support side mainly cited WP:CONSISTENCY, as well as attributing sources for proof but I can't imagine how "fist-pump" is more WP:CONSISTENT than "raised-fist"--can you explain that? Also, of the 7 that supported "fist-pump," I see zero sources in their !votes, so what "attributing sources for proof" were you referring to? Levivich (talk) 16:12, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@Levivich, @Randy Kryn, the reason I took the approach is that the votes for the current title is more supported than the other title. In the opposes, there isn't any strong opinions other than some "it's fine" and "look at the photo". According to a comment, more sources support "pumped" more than "raised". In short, as @Gluonz said below, the consensus wasn't misread, and raw votes are nothing. I consider the ~7 supports more standing the the more piled opposes. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

With all due respect, if the title moved it would be moved to the title in the nomination, which was what was being discussed and either Supported or Opposed. "Fist-pump" has little support, no sources, and received explanatory opposes. Please read the discussion again with the nomination and lack of sources for 'fist pump' in mind, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:18, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

What had I said below? –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 17:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I had simply been referencing that I had started a similar discussion but had closed it in favor of this one. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 17:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Although, after watching the video of the incident, Trump did do a series of fist pumps. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:53, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I started Talk:Donald Trump fist pump photographs#Misread consensus? shortly before this thread was initiated, but I have closed it in favor of this one. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 16:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn:. Did you understand that the original proposal (shown here) was "Donald Trump fist pump photographs"? It seems to have been changed – perhaps accidentally – by ToadetteEdit when closing the RM. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:42, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Regardless, the photos which the article focuses on were made after Trump's several quick fist-pumps and as he was holding up his arm, alternately opening his hand and making a fist with his hand. During the notable photos he was not "fist-pumping". Randy Kryn (talk) 11:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I understood so, but I should also reconsider before closing discussions, whether the consensus makes sense or not. Regardless, in an event there is another RM on the article, I won't take action. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

• In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse

• Recent research: STORM: AI agents role-play as "Wikipedia editors" and "experts" to create Wikipedia-like articles, a more sophisticated effort than previous auto-generation systems

• In focus: Twitter marks the spot

• News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded.

• Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?

• Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing

• Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird

• Humour: I'm proud to be a template

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Llanthomas Castle Mound

I would like to have a conversation about your recent review of Llanthomas Castle Mound. Is this the right forum to introduce a lengthy and detailed posting? LiamGM (talk) 08:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@LiamGM, it's okay to post your concerns here. I am ready to help people. ToadetteEdit (talk) 15:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Firstly, I thank you for all your volunteer roles that for you do on Wikipedia. I am reaching out to you because you state on your user page that “ToadetteEdit … tries to do their work right”. I appreciate how hard it must be to get up to speed in a diverse and specialist subject areas including medieval castles and Welsh medieval history.

I have appended a subset of the many motte and bailey sites already in article space. The articles are small in content and low in citations/references. The common factor is that they have all being though the authoritative and rigorous national scheduling process for historical monuments, like LCM. Effectively, their notability has been established by regulatory bodies e.g. Cadw in Wales, English Heritage in England etc. Clearly, this has been recognised by the article reviewers.

Given that the feedback from my first reviewer was ill-informed, let me expand upon the process of scheduling. Cadw have been tasked by the Welsh government with the specification of the criteria needed for the legal protection of historical assets in Wales. Cadw identify the buildings and monuments that meet their criteria. Scheduled historical assets receive legal protection under the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2016 and Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. Sites are assessed by professional archaeologists. If scheduled, the Welsh government takes on the responsibility to fund Cadw to maintain a perpetual watching brief on the scheduled site. A field monument warden, a professional archaeologist is assigned to the scheduled monument, which includes regular site visits. I can provide contact details for the PhD qualified field warden for LCM, if required.

I hope you will review your decision about LCM, and come to the same conclusion as the reviewers of the articles below. Note a medieval motte and bailey castle that does not have existing evidence of the bailey is called a mound, tump or twt:

• Bledisloe Tump.
• Castle Tump.
• Castle Tump, Dymock.
• Stow Green, St Briavels.
• Twmpath Castle.

* Wormelow Tump.

LiamGM (talk) 08:49, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@LiamGM, sorry for the late response, but you can add more sources as you like. I agree with your statement above. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

If you agree that notability is proven and is a topic already in article space, why did you not approve the article? Specifically, "Submission is about a topic not yet shown to meet general notability guidelines". TIA. LiamGM (talk) 07:06, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

because in the beginning, I thought it doesn't meet notability guidelines based on the sources in the article. ToadetteEdit (talk) 07:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, so promptly. Can you you please approve moving the draft into article space? LiamGM (talk) 12:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Closing wikiproject-related MfDs

Hi ToadetteEdit. Please note when closing MfDs relating to wikiprojects (e.g. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Kamala Harris) that the outcome generally effects more than one page. See User talk:Joe Roe#Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Kamala Harris and Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_August_11#Template:WikiProject_Donald_Trump. – Joe (talk) 06:28, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

There are also various subpages that have not been dealt with. – Joe (talk) 06:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Joe Roe, understood. I wasn't aware of the consequences that result from closing mfds. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of battles in Belgium

Hello, ToadetteEdit. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of battles in Belgium, 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) 18:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Dronufie (01:08, 19 August 2024)

I would like to add a page about a physician to wikipedia. Can you help me with getting started? --Dronufie (talk) 01:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

@Dronufie, welcome to Wikipedia! Please read our introduction to editing. To create an article, use the Article wizard. Hope that helps. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello!

Hi, ToadetteEdit,

I saw your comment at your request for global permissions when you withdrew your request. I'm sorry that you are discouraged but I wanted to reassure you that the opposition doesn't seem to be about the quality of your editing but just the fact that you seem to be pursuing acquiring a lot of permissions over a short period of time. You already have pending changes, rollbacker and new page reviewer permissions on this Wikipedia which is quite a lot to achieve for an account of just one year and three months. There are editors who've been active a decade or more who have no advanced permissions at all! I waited until I had been editing Wikipedia for two years before starting an RFA and even then I was criticized for not having enough experience.

Trust comes with time and productive editing and requesting a global permission requires even a higher level of trust as you could impact smaller wikis that don't have a lot of oversight. The potential for inadvertent damage is high there unless you really know what you're doing and I think that those who opposed your request just want to see over a longer period of time that you can handle the permissions you have already have been granted. Finally, there will always be editors who view your behavior as hat collecting so you have to realize that and be prepared for those objections from editors who are not shy about voicing their opinions and doubts. Just know that your entire contribution history might be examined and scrutinized which can put many editors off from even attempting to ask for any permissions.

On the plus side, you look like you are doing good work on this Wikipedia so keep at it! Just wait a while, six months or, better yet, a year, before inquiring about getting even more responsibility. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I want to echo every single word Liz said. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi ToadetteEdit

I hope it's ok to post here? If not, it's your talk page so feel free to remove this message, no judgement from me. I think we both watch each others pages due to anti-vadal work, so I noticed your recent addition to your user page.

You've accomplished so much in the short time you've been here. You're a benefit to this project and nobody can fault your enthusiasm.

Over the last year or more, I know you've been praised and encouraged within the project. There are a lot of people rooting for you. And I think that says a lot about you. Wikipedians generally don't bother with such advice and encouragements for those editors who don't put the work in. We all recieve criticism from time to time. It can be frustrating and demoralising BUT...people here are offering you advice on addressing those issues. They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was worth it. Maybe look at the criticisms as a way to learn and a way to improve your Wikipedia work? I'm sure you're aware of the difference between criticism and constructive criticism. I think the advice of slow down and sit back a bit in some areas can be great advice? I don't know much about the closing matters that have been brought up, but one way to assess how you're doing would be to stop any closes for a short while, assess how you would close an issue and then see how it compares to how others are closing XfDs. How have they done things differently to what you might have done? Look at how they came to their conclusions and why they might be different to your own conclusions. We can learn so much by slowing down a bit and watching (the equivalent of listening irl right?). Don't be hard on yourself, if you get something wrong (I do every day), then ask if you can observe what they have done and then ask questions if you're still not sure.

If this is TL;DR then give yourself a break, take a small step back, acknowledge that some people are really trying to encourage you, watch, learn and compare.

Just delete this if it annoys you or it's unwelcome advice, I won't be offended at all. Knitsey (talk) 08:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seneb-Neb-Af

Hi, can I ask why you closed this as no consensus? No editors in the discussion have argued for a keep, and no one has seriously advanced redirect as an alternative either. -- asilvering (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I was coming here to talk about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red Ink Awards. Generally speaking, non-admins should never be closing as no consensus. My foolish closes cost me my first run for adminship. True. Please stop closing as no consensus. BusterD (talk) 02:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

ToadetteEdit, I am disappointed. Less than a week after I told you to slow down, you have three complaints about your closes. Let me try again, this time with a little more force.

First, I cannot emphasize this enough: When you are closing discussions, you need to follow WP:ADMINACCT. See WP:NACD: Non-admin closers are accountable to the policies at WP:ADMINACCT and WP:UNINVOLVED. Repeated non-adherence to these policies may result in being topic banned from closing discussions.

There are four outstanding requests for reconsideration of closes you made on this talk page. § Requesting review of Wikipedia:WikiProject Hillary Clinton MFD has received an inadequate response which completely misses the point of Jonesey95's request. Randy Kryn has a similar request at § The presidential navbox RM (which was actually a TFD). You have edited since both of these were left, so there is no excuse for you not to have already answered these questions. And there are two discussions here, which in fairness were left after your most recent edit (though asilvering's was only a single minute later).

Considering your track record of diving in too fast, I am certain there would be support for another pblock (and if you are not immediately responsive to all four outstanding requests for reconsideration, I would support one to prevent further unaccountable closes). And depending on how you respond to these concerns, there very well might be support for a sitewide block per WP:IDHT.

Slow. Down. Consider taking a break from closing XfDs. But at the very least, respond to all four outstanding requests for comment on your own closure before making any further edits. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@BusterD, I am quitting my work closing AfDs, I've reverted my closure. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering, I've reverted my closure. I'd closed it as no consensus because the arguments are still unbalanced despite multiple relists. I will let another admin review the request and take the appropriate action. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Requesting review of Wikipedia:WikiProject Hillary Clinton MFD

At Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Kamala Harris, you closed the MFD, which included redirecting Wikipedia:WikiProject Hillary Clinton to Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Presidents. Hillary Clinton was never a US president or vice-president, so I believe that this redirect was an error. Can you please take a look? – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

@Jonesey95, I was attempting to create the second nomination but struggled due to weird Twinkle not creating the second nomination page, and I had to do the nomination all manually which I gave up. Any assistance? ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

What assistance? I am not an admin. I am asking you to reconsider your closure because I believe that the reasoning was illogical. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

To open the MfD regarding the WikiProject. I will be quitting so I will not be doing anything other than to just participate and initiate discussions. I am so sorry. ( @Jonesey95) ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The presidential navbox RM

Hello. Please re-read the discussion. There is a viable third option to "Keep" and "Delete": put the presidential material in the overly large navboxes in expandable sections. You are so very quick with your relistings and other RM edits that I'm concerned you may not have read the discussion closely enough in order to miss the third option. Thanks, Randy Kryn (talk) 01:48, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn, I am sorry, but I am quitting my work in the RM process entirely. Please provide the link so I can review it, and take actions where necessary. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh yes, can you clarify it; I couldn't find the discussion you are talking about through my contributions. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Reminder:CVUA

Hi, little reminder since you haven't replied in CVUA for 2 weeks. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:23, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

@Me Da Wikipedian, the final exam is ready today. Sorry for the delay though, I was focusing on crosswiki patrolling, and recently had stress from a global rollback request. ToadetteEdit (talk) 07:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Sorry to hear about your global rollback request. Don't cry. This is just some (relatively unimportant) site on the internet. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:18, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Hey, don't be disheartened, TE. The messages left on your talk page (and your archives full of barnstars and advices) are evident to the fact that a lot of editors care about you and want to see you get better. The community really loves your enthusiasm, but you need a little short break. Have a baklava (tea goes best with it), got out and touch the grass, be back in a while and start slow. Roam around various noticeboards and discussion to analyse consensus and how to be a better closer. Your next RfA will have my full support if you are willing to edit more productively and maturely. Never quit because your contributions are precious. Happy editing :) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

ANI thread

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ToadetteEdit's non-admin closures. Thank you. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 08:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I am quitting AfD and RM closures ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I will reply at ANI. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 08:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I will also be stepping back from administrative areas such as ANI; as I am currently not competent enough to work in these areas. Ui also remembered my block from last year, and it is likely that I will be blocked in any moment. I can't take this anymore. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I am serious, I will never be closing the discussion. I am acting in good faith, though, and I will now cry. I am taking this voluntarily; I will not be closing any discussion at all, including RMs. I am so sad, very, very sad. In fact, right now, I would retire from this project and never edit again. I am so incompetent and ashamed right now. I try to do my best, I try to give my very best to help you, yet you reject my help. I will indeed cry. I am not trying to condemn the project or the community, but soon, I could just migrate to new projects and never see me again. I will not edit noticeboard again, never. I will take this as a solemn vow that I will not be closing or relisting or doing anything else other than to participate and start discussions of any type under any ip or account, under any circumstances. ;( ;( ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

ToadetteEdit, I do not doubt for a moment that you are acting in good faith. Taking this to ANI was one of the most difficult things I have done as an admin because it is so clear you are acting in good faith. (I say this so you know I am not trying to hurt you, not to minimize what you are feeling.) I cannot, in good conscience, accept yet another promise after you made a similar problem mere months ago. Broken pledges have consequences.

If you need to take a wikibreak, take a wikibreak. They are magical. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi. The ANI thread has been closed with an indefinite topic ban from closing discussions. While this is obviously not the outcome you would have preferred, it's worth noting the great many positive comments about your contributions. There's a strong sentiment that you are a net asset to Wikipedia. Hopefully you take that message from the thread as well as from the positive comments on this talkpage. The ban is appealable to the community in six months. In the mean time, all the best for wherever else your editing interests take you. -- Euryalus (talk) 08:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I enjoy your user page's design

142.113.140.146 (talk) 00:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
As requested, I'm leaving a note because I really enjoyed the new design of your user page. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Nanda Ang (17:18, 2 September 2024)

Hi, could you please re-review my article submission? --Nanda Ang (talk) 17:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

• Courcelles
• GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)