User talk:Fayenatic london
|
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
|
• 9 Sept 2006 – 20 Aug 2007 |
 |
|---|
| 4 July 2024 |
|
Administrators' newsletter – July 2024
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).
Administrator changes
Technical news
- Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)
Miscellaneous
- The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more
Hello @Fayenatic london:
In the recent discussion about "Release history" table, Andrew318 said that those are distributors, not labels. If you have any further comments as you wish, as well as Chinese talk page. 2001:D08:2901:5053:17E2:EEC0:6088:DC75 (talk) 08:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the links. I have no particular knowledge or opinion on this matter, and will follow the consensus. – Fayenatic London 08:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1576 in Portuguese Mozambique
[edit]
A tag has been placed on Category:1576 in Portuguese Mozambique indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 09:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message, Liz. This enabled me to delete all the empty parent categories after Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_11#16th_to_19th_century_in_(Portuguese)_Mozambique, leaving a link to that discussion in the deletion log. – Fayenatic London 21:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's confusing to tag all of these empty categories that weren't marked as being part of a CFD discussion and have them all disappear. Is this how it is done? Should I just delete any more I come across that look like they are associated with a CFD discussion? I've gotten in trouble for doing that before. Liz Read! Talk! 21:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I was happier that you left these for manual deletion. In this case I chose to redirect one because a former subcat had a cat header template that will resolve the redirect. IMHO it would be best practice to tag and list them all in the nomination, after which the list can be given to the bot, but that can be a lot of work. – Fayenatic London 08:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- By the way, all of the categories from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Tourism in the Republic of Artsakh were deleted with an explanation of CSD G6 "Housekeeping", should these categories be restored and redeleted with a link to the CFD discussion that caused them to be deleted? Liz Read! Talk! 21:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Liz: Thank you for this note. Yes, I believe those category pages should be restored and redeleted. Firefangledfeathers deleted them but can't be blamed as it was Marcocapelle who tagged them with {{db-xfd}}. Marcocapelle did include a link to the discussion, but that template does not put that into the default edit summary. Perhaps we can edit db-xfd to do so. Meanwhile, Marcocapelle, please append db-xfd rather than replacing the page content, so that the deleting admin at least has the opportunity to use the "delete" link in the CFD template, which pre-fills the deletion log edit summary. – Fayenatic London 08:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- By default I am copying the db-xfd script, including the date of the discussion, to the edit summary. Do you mean that this does not suffice? Marcocapelle (talk) 08:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, that does not suffice. Only admins will have access to that edit summary after deletion, and even they would have to go to the bother of viewing the page history. We want the discussion link to be left in the deletion log entry. {{Cfd all}} facilitates this, but db-xfd does not ATM. – Fayenatic London 08:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- On further inspection I see that db-xfd does make use of the XFD link if provided, and in that case you did provide a link to the CFD log page albeit not to the discussion, viz. {{db-xfd|votepage=Log/2024_July_6}}. However, Firefangledfeathers seems to have used another deletion script rather than clicking the deletion link in the template. Firefangledfeathers, please amend your practices to leave a link to the discussion in the deletion log, rather than a bland reference to G6. – Fayenatic London 09:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- I plan to! Liz already got me the memo. I can restore and redelete
- soon, once I'm off mobile. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Now done. Thank you both. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- On further inspection I see that db-xfd does make use of the XFD link if provided, and in that case you did provide a link to the CFD log page albeit not to the discussion, viz. {{db-xfd|votepage=Log/2024_July_6}}. However, Firefangledfeathers seems to have used another deletion script rather than clicking the deletion link in the template. Firefangledfeathers, please amend your practices to leave a link to the discussion in the deletion log, rather than a bland reference to G6. – Fayenatic London 09:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- By default I am copying the db-xfd script, including the date of the discussion, to the edit summary. Do you mean that this does not suffice? Marcocapelle (talk) 08:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Liz: Thank you for this note. Yes, I believe those category pages should be restored and redeleted. Firefangledfeathers deleted them but can't be blamed as it was Marcocapelle who tagged them with {{db-xfd}}. Marcocapelle did include a link to the discussion, but that template does not put that into the default edit summary. Perhaps we can edit db-xfd to do so. Meanwhile, Marcocapelle, please append db-xfd rather than replacing the page content, so that the deleting admin at least has the opportunity to use the "delete" link in the CFD template, which pre-fills the deletion log edit summary. – Fayenatic London 08:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's confusing to tag all of these empty categories that weren't marked as being part of a CFD discussion and have them all disappear. Is this how it is done? Should I just delete any more I come across that look like they are associated with a CFD discussion? I've gotten in trouble for doing that before. Liz Read! Talk! 21:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Armenian buildings in Azerbaijan has been nominated for deletion
[edit]
Category:Armenian buildings in Azerbaijan 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. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)