User talk:Smasongarrison/Archives/2025
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Smasongarrison. 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. |
Top Ten Medical Editor Barnstar 2024
 Top 10 |
Top 10 Medical Editor Barnstar 2024 |
You were one of the top medical editors on English  in 2024.Thank you for your hard work! —Mvolz (talk) 15:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC) |
Nomination of 2020s in history for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decades in history until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Sm8900 (talk) 20:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- This feels like canvasing. SMasonGarrison 20:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- ok, noted, apologies. Sm8900 (talk) 20:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Category:Permanent Representatives of Sweden to NATO
Category:Permanent Representatives of Sweden to NATO only has 1 possibly entry at present. It is not a position that is default notable. I have no idea when the current holder will be replaced, but it will be years until we could even have 3 articles. I think upmerging is probably the best move at present since this category makes navigation between articles harder.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I'm not sure that Category:Permanent Representatives of FOO to NATO isn't notable. But I get your point about navigation being an issue. SMasonGarrison 17:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- If we have 5 in a category than it makes sense to have the category. Just like if we have 5 people who fit in Ambassadors of Sweden to Nigeria, Ambassadors of Sweden to Brazil, etc. than we can have a category. However, the decision is that no ambassadors are default notable. Ambassadors (and permanent representatives, and high commissioners) only get articles if we have enough reliable sources to justify an article. Now in practice there may be some ambassadorial level positions that most of the time are filled by people who are notable. However unlike foriegn ministers/secreateries of state/another 5 or more various titles used for the head of relations on the part of one country with all other countries, who are notable by virtue of holding the office, the Ambassador of the United States to Palau or the Ambassador of the Federated States of Micronesia to Madagascar are not notable just for holding that office, we need substantial coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject and secondary to justify an article, not just enough sourcing to confirm they held the position, which is what we need for some defualt notable positions. However in the case of the Permanent Representative of Sweden to NATO this is only 1 person who has ever held that position. Its potential growth above 1 person is technically crystal ball prediction, but a highly likely one. However even when it gets to 2 people, which it will probably do in not too many years, it will still not be large enough to aid navigation but will still be a small category that hinders navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- This sounds a lot like smallcat. SMasonGarrison 23:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- If we have 5 in a category than it makes sense to have the category. Just like if we have 5 people who fit in Ambassadors of Sweden to Nigeria, Ambassadors of Sweden to Brazil, etc. than we can have a category. However, the decision is that no ambassadors are default notable. Ambassadors (and permanent representatives, and high commissioners) only get articles if we have enough reliable sources to justify an article. Now in practice there may be some ambassadorial level positions that most of the time are filled by people who are notable. However unlike foriegn ministers/secreateries of state/another 5 or more various titles used for the head of relations on the part of one country with all other countries, who are notable by virtue of holding the office, the Ambassador of the United States to Palau or the Ambassador of the Federated States of Micronesia to Madagascar are not notable just for holding that office, we need substantial coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject and secondary to justify an article, not just enough sourcing to confirm they held the position, which is what we need for some defualt notable positions. However in the case of the Permanent Representative of Sweden to NATO this is only 1 person who has ever held that position. Its potential growth above 1 person is technically crystal ball prediction, but a highly likely one. However even when it gets to 2 people, which it will probably do in not too many years, it will still not be large enough to aid navigation but will still be a small category that hinders navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RFC, Wikipedia:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
- A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
Technical news
- The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.
Arbitration
- Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.
Miscellaneous
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!
Category:People from the Holy Roman Empire by subdivision has been nominated for renaming
Category:People from the Holy Roman Empire by subdivision has been nominated for renaming. 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) 21:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Ambassadors to Yugoslavia
The Ambassadors to Yugoslavia category has 33 sub-categories with only 1 or 2 articles. With Yugoslavia not having existed for well over 20 years it seems unlikely we will see much expansion of the category soon. I think upmerging all these categories would aid navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Huddersfield sex abuse ring 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 11:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Ambassadors of Honduras
This category has 1 sub-cat with 4 articles and all other sub-categories have fewer articles. I think it would greatly aid navigation if the whole structure was upmerged to the parent Ambassadors of Honduras and to other parents for the various sub-cats.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Category:Suicides by occupation
Please help me understand--- What is the point of keeping this category if you will nominate for deletion all of the child categories under it? I don't understand this, if the parent category still exists, then others will continue to make child categories under it.
There is an entire literature of intersectionality between suicide and occupation. But if this does not matter, then why keep this parent category for "Navigational purposes"?
In terms of sports, there are books written about the correlation. Cricket for example: https://chesterrep.openrepository.com/handle/10034/315057 but you deleted the category. Why is it up to a certain very narrow group of Wikipedians to decide what is worthwhile, especially when someone has put care into developing the category?
I am not as advanced on Wikipedia and am unable to take part in the conversations with the correct formatting and syntax as others that are participating here for 10+ years. Very few people take part in these conversations especially during the holiday period. It appears that there is a bias towards keeping things in the past because of certain rules made in the past and not evolving the site.
Nayyn (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- >There is an entire literature of intersectionality between suicide and occupation.
- Yes, but that's not the issue being discussed. Each intersection needs to be examined on its own. Not every occupation has a meaningful intersection.
- >But if this does not matter, then why keep this parent category for "Navigational purposes"?
- So here's how I see it. The individual categories currently exist, so we might as well keep them organized. Removing the parent category doesn't do anything to help advance the case that each specific occupation's intersection is defining. It merely makes it more difficult to work in the category. SMasonGarrison 23:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 9 § Categories:LGBTQ in on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --MikutoH talk! 23:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Ambassadors of Burundi to Canada
This category consists of Else Nizigama Ntamagiro. However Ntamagiro was never Ambassador to Canada. She was a lower level diplomat in Canada, not holding the position of Ambassador. So I believe we should delete this category as not functionally having any contents.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 15 § Category:Attacks on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:17, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Posting on my user talk page
Don't revert to put stuff I've removed back on my talk page. In fact, kindly do not post on my user talk page again. MrOllie (talk) 04:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Reverting made it challenging to add a followup when you didn't engage with the issue. I'll do my best to not post there again. [1] SMasonGarrison 05:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 19 § Natural disasters by year
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 19 § Natural disasters by year on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Art collectors by century
A tag has been placed on Category:Art collectors by century indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, 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! 04:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
fässù
|
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. |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:CD01:5181:972:7B63:CF98:AD6B (talk) 06:35, 22 January 2025 (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) 00:53, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Eid Mubarak
Dear, do you have File:12231391541611988226eid mubarak.svg in another color? The link on this page to the original site appears not to work. Mortalkombateer (talk) 21:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- You can make it in any color you want, you just need to edit "#ff0000" to be the color you want instead of red in the svg fileSMasonGarrison 23:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography on a "Wikipedia style and naming" 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, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 30 § Category:People by city on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:56, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 5 § Category:Eponymous categories
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 5 § Category:Eponymous categories on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:16, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Technical news
- Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
- A '
Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Constantine XI Palaiologos 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 09:30, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 11 § Sports events in Russia by month
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 11 § Sports events in Russia by month on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:24, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Page mover?
Hi Mason! I was wondering if you would like the WP:PAGEMOVER permission?
If you already know what that does, you can skip this paragraph; if not; read on! The main thing the perm would let you do is process your own WP:C2E requests and move categories listed at WP:CFDWM. You can read the full list of abilities at Wikipedia:Page mover#Flags granted. Besides moving category pages, you would be able to supress redirects when moving any type of page; this ability is goverened by Wikipedia:Page mover#Redirect suppression criteria (which is a lot more strict than leaving {{category redirect}}s; redirects need to meet a WP:CSD to be surpressed and when in doubt, do not supress).
Let me know, and I'd be happy to grant it. You clearly have a good use case and I fully trust you to be careful when using it in areas outside your expertise :) Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 07:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sure! Now that you bring it up... that does sound like a good permission that I'd be able to help the project with. I'll definitely do my homework before dabbling outside of categorization. Thanks for thinking of me and your kind words!!! SMasonGarrison 02:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Granted :) In lieu of starting a new section with the template message, I'll point you to {{Page mover granted}} which contains the normal instructions. And, as always, my talk page is wide open. Another use case which I forgot to mention is it lets you move subpages along with the parent page, so you can rename a template, its documentation, its sandbox, its testcases, and its /core in a single action. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:46, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks!!!!!!! SMasonGarrison 21:55, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- You are quite welcome! Thank you for everything you do for WP :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster Am I allowed to help with processing speedy renames? Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Admin instructions kind of implies that only admins can do this. SMasonGarrison 14:29, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- You are! In general, it is less work to do things making use of WP:CFDW (which is unfortunately admin-only). However, if there are only a couple of members in the category and/or the category is populated by a template which you updated, you are more than welcome to help out :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:26, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Ok cool! :) SMasonGarrison 23:50, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- You are! In general, it is less work to do things making use of WP:CFDW (which is unfortunately admin-only). However, if there are only a couple of members in the category and/or the category is populated by a template which you updated, you are more than welcome to help out :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:26, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster Am I allowed to help with processing speedy renames? Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Admin instructions kind of implies that only admins can do this. SMasonGarrison 14:29, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- You are quite welcome! Thank you for everything you do for WP :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks!!!!!!! SMasonGarrison 21:55, 24 January 2025 (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) 23:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" 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 07:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
- A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
- A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.
Technical news
- A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
- Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378
Miscellaneous
- The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
- Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 7 § Per-year categories from 500s BC, 400s BC, 300s BC
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 7 § Per-year categories from 500s BC, 400s BC, 300s BC on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Beland (talk) 09:08, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
About your notice on my page
I have a doubt here: you go to my edits (and I'm the one about the Crips) and you say "Please ask yourself". Have you lost your mind? Why be rude, huh? What did I do wrong to you? Is this how you treat the other editors here? MafiaBoy123 (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- Excuse me? @MafiaBoy123 Please assume good faith instead of questioning my sanity. I was trying to give you some advice when I happened to come across a category. It had two people in it. It seemed like you had not asked yourself whether the category needed to exist. An alternative could have been that you hadn't populated the category. In either case, it's a reasonable question to ask in what was intended to be a polite piece of advice/a nudge. Could it have been a little more finessed? [2] Probably, but I strongly encourage you to assume good faith instead immediately assuming that someone is mentally ill. SMasonGarrison 18:22, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Please note glass engravers are not "engravers for categorizing purposes, unless they were also printmakers (which few were). Johnbod (talk) 04:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- So where do they belong? SMasonGarrison 04:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Typically "Glass artists" by nationality, and "artists" by period. The 2 Germans you moved earlier are sorted. Johnbod (talk) 04:18, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:List of museum wikis
Hello, Smasongarrison. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of museum wikis, 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) 23:08, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Missing doc for Template:People by occupation and nationality and century category header
Can you please create documentation for {{People by occupation and nationality and century category header}}? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Sure! I thought I already had. SMasonGarrison 17:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. It was showing up on a list of templates with no categories. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Apologies! All fixed now :)SMasonGarrison SMasonGarrison 00:23, 19 March 2025 (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) 00:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Denali on a "Wikipedia style and naming" 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 23:31, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
College athletic director categories
Smasongarrison, how's it going? My watch list blew up today with many of your edits to diffuse Category:African-American college athletic directors in the United States to Category:College athletic directors in the United States. But the vast majority, if not all, of the articles in first former category are also already in a school-specific child of the later category. Take Harry R. Jefferson for example. That article is categorized in Category:Bluefield State Big Blues athletic directors, Category:Hampton Pirates and Lady Pirates athletic directors, and Category:North Carolina A&T Aggies athletic directors. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:27, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
- Hey there! Because I didn't see a tag that this non-diffusing category was non-diffusing... I didn't see the harm in undiffusing for a bit after adding the tag.SMasonGarrison 21:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
- Anyway, I think I've only got directors in the core category, who don't have a school specific subcategory. SMasonGarrison 22:27, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
CS1 error on Peter Shann Ford
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Peter Shann Ford, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:19, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2022 in Indian economy
A tag has been placed on Category:2022 in Indian economy indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, 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. ✗plicit 11:18, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
GA assessment for Shamila Batohi
User:Nettrom/sandbox/WikiProject Law stub predictions assessed this as a GA. I could only assess it by myself as a B-class article whose criteria are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Law/Assessment. I would give it GA status, but I want to abide by the process and have at least one live human peer evaluation. Bearian (talk) 23:02, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
- I always view bots as a basic attempt that would augment a human judgment (or serve as a stand in until an actual human looked at it). But from a basic glance, it does seem to meet the basic GA criteria, but I'd love to know what you think it's missing. SMasonGarrison 23:13, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia style and naming" 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 21:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
Category:Educators from Los Angeles has been nominated for deletion
Category:Educators from Los Angeles 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. Lost in Quebec (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Miscellaneous
- Sign up for The Core Contest, a competition running from 15 April to 31 May to improve vital articles.
A heads up
Sports announcers, sports journalists, sports writers, are not categorized as Sportspeople unless their page has some kind of athletes category on it. If you don't believe me look at categories like these two Category:American sports journalists and Category:Australian sports journalists. Those categories and the many like them are in categories Sports journalists, Sports mass media, and people in Sports, but not sportspeople. You recently placed Todd Kalas in Sportspeople from Tampa but I removed them. BTW I discussed[3] this with another editor recently and they concur. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. That seems reasonable to me. I'm doing my best to try to diffuse the people from FOO categories into occupations. SMasonGarrison 19:44, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Reform UK 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 21:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
CS1 error on Việt Linh
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Việt Linh, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:46, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
Re: Category:19th-century American state court judges and subcats
I am not seeing the point of this, since all of the judges currently in the 19th-century judges by state categories are state court judges (federal judges being subcategorized into their centuries by their appointing presidents). BD2412 T 01:41, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- I agree that there's a lot of overlap, but 19th-century Connecticut judges for example, could include, in theory, include federal judges from United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Is your intent for 19th-century Connecticut judges to be limited to Connecticut state court judges?SMasonGarrison 01:45, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, because all 19th century Connecticut federal judges are already out of Category:19th-century American judges by subcategorization by appointing president. BD2412 T 03:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- Ahhh ok. So then ones who were appointed in the 18th-century would just live in 19th-century United States federal judges? I'm fine with that scheme. But I do think that we should make that clearer. How would you feel about renaming 19th-century Connecticut judges to 19th-century Connecticut state judges? I think that would make it clearer about the structure. SMasonGarrison 03:16, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- One of my concerns about that, actually, is that a substantial proportion of federal judges previously served as state court judges (and on a few occasions, a federal judge has left that service for a state court position). The super-cat is already just "judges" without specifying state or federal levels. BD2412 T 03:42, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- Wouldn't those cases just belong in both subcategories? There's a similar scheme over in the politcians tree. I was thinking that this category could be a mirror of Category:19th-century American legislators, which breaks it down by state and federal. SMasonGarrison 03:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- I've been mulling this, and I'm not sure. The lists I have made have been based on the intersection of judges by century and judges by state courts, so technically they could all be at state court titles. BD2412 T 22:10, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- I think I'm confused about what you're mulling. But in the mean time, if you're ok with renaming 19th-century Connecticut judges to 19th-century Connecticut state judges, etc. I can nominate them for speedy renaming. SMasonGarrison 22:15, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- I renamed it to Category:19th-century Connecticut state court judges (to avoid any confusion over whether "state" just meant "in the state of"). BD2412 T 16:22, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- nice! SMasonGarrison 18:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- I think the last thing is renaming Category:19th-century American judges by state to 19th-century American state court judges by state. SMasonGarrison 18:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- We could eventually have subcategories specific to 19th-century federal judges by state. BD2412 T 23:06, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- I think that would be useful down the line as well. SMasonGarrison 00:41, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
- We could eventually have subcategories specific to 19th-century federal judges by state. BD2412 T 23:06, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- I think the last thing is renaming Category:19th-century American judges by state to 19th-century American state court judges by state. SMasonGarrison 18:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- nice! SMasonGarrison 18:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- I renamed it to Category:19th-century Connecticut state court judges (to avoid any confusion over whether "state" just meant "in the state of"). BD2412 T 16:22, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- I think I'm confused about what you're mulling. But in the mean time, if you're ok with renaming 19th-century Connecticut judges to 19th-century Connecticut state judges, etc. I can nominate them for speedy renaming. SMasonGarrison 22:15, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- I've been mulling this, and I'm not sure. The lists I have made have been based on the intersection of judges by century and judges by state courts, so technically they could all be at state court titles. BD2412 T 22:10, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- Wouldn't those cases just belong in both subcategories? There's a similar scheme over in the politcians tree. I was thinking that this category could be a mirror of Category:19th-century American legislators, which breaks it down by state and federal. SMasonGarrison 03:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- One of my concerns about that, actually, is that a substantial proportion of federal judges previously served as state court judges (and on a few occasions, a federal judge has left that service for a state court position). The super-cat is already just "judges" without specifying state or federal levels. BD2412 T 03:42, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- Ahhh ok. So then ones who were appointed in the 18th-century would just live in 19th-century United States federal judges? I'm fine with that scheme. But I do think that we should make that clearer. How would you feel about renaming 19th-century Connecticut judges to 19th-century Connecticut state judges? I think that would make it clearer about the structure. SMasonGarrison 03:16, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, because all 19th century Connecticut federal judges are already out of Category:19th-century American judges by subcategorization by appointing president. BD2412 T 03:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Occupation by nationality category header
Template:Occupation by nationality category header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Occupation by nationality category header/outercore
Template:Occupation by nationality category header/outercore has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:People by occupation and nationality and century category header
Template:People by occupation and nationality and century category header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:List of museum wikis
Hello, Smasongarrison. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "List of museum wikis".
Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions here. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia categories named after Jewish families indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, 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! 01:19, 17 April 2025 (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) 00:58, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
Category:American radicals has been nominated for deletion
Category:American radicals 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. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 01:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
Robert Gilbert
Sorry, that wasn't intended: thanks for fixing. Tony (talk) 15:48, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Did you know on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" 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 03:30, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
New pages patrol May 2025 Backlog drive
| May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol |  |
| |
| 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) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
Somalian?
I saw that you moved the Somali-related category to "Somalian". It is common knowledge that adjectives referring to Somalis should be written as “Somali.” When comparing the number of papers written after 2024 on “Somali diaspora” and “Somalian diaspora” using Google Scholar, the former yields 411 hits, while the latter yields only 5 hits. I hope you will update your knowledge about Somalis. Freetrashbox (talk) 11:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
- The convention on wikipedia categorization is Somalian, which is why I moved it. You're welcome to propose a rename. SMasonGarrison 23:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
- If you check the existing categories, you will see that there are far more categories named Somali than Somalian. First, move the category back to where it was originally, and then you should propose a name change. Freetrashbox (talk) 11:59, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- I did check. But in the future, what I'll do is raise my threshold for what is considered controversial. My point of suggesting that you propose a rename was that if you want to make the naming consistent, you can propose a renaming all the categories to Somali. SMasonGarrison 12:28, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- There are some inconsistencies in the category names, but simply changing Somalian to Somali is not the solution. Somalian and Somali are different words. At least, that is how some people interpret them. Freetrashbox (talk) 13:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- A CFD would still be useful given the concerns you have raised. SMasonGarrison 13:09, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- I will consider submitting to CfD. I recommend that you thoroughly research unfamiliar topics before editing them, and that you undo your edits if you are notified of any problems. Freetrashbox (talk) 22:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- A CFD would still be useful given the concerns you have raised. SMasonGarrison 13:09, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- There are some inconsistencies in the category names, but simply changing Somalian to Somali is not the solution. Somalian and Somali are different words. At least, that is how some people interpret them. Freetrashbox (talk) 13:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- I did check. But in the future, what I'll do is raise my threshold for what is considered controversial. My point of suggesting that you propose a rename was that if you want to make the naming consistent, you can propose a renaming all the categories to Somali. SMasonGarrison 12:28, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- If you check the existing categories, you will see that there are far more categories named Somali than Somalian. First, move the category back to where it was originally, and then you should propose a name change. Freetrashbox (talk) 11:59, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).
Administrator changes
Rusalkii
NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, administrator elections were permanently authorized on a five-month schedule. The next election will be scheduled soon; see Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections for more information. This is an alternate process to the RfA process and does not replace the latter.
- An RfC was closed with consensus to allow editors to opt-out of seeing "sticky decorative elements". Such elements should now be wrapped in {{sticky decoration wrapper}}. Editors who wish to opt out can follow the instructions at WP:STICKYDECO.
- An RfC has resulted in a broad prohibition on the use of AI-generated images in articles. A few common-sense exceptions are recognized.
Miscellaneous
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!
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) 23:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bulgarian wheelchair users
A tag has been placed on Category:Bulgarian wheelchair users indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, 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. ✗plicit 00:30, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Category:Anninsky District geography stubs has been nominated for merging
Category:Anninsky District geography stubs has been nominated for merging. 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. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Category:Bobrovsky District geography stubs has been nominated for merging
Category:Bobrovsky District geography stubs has been nominated for merging. 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. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Category:Ertilsky District geography stubs has been nominated for merging
Category:Ertilsky District geography stubs has been nominated for merging. 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. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Category:Swazi royalty stubs has been nominated for merging
Category:Swazi royalty stubs has been nominated for merging. 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. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 23:51, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Category:Moldavian and Wallachian poets has been nominated for merging
Category:Moldavian and Wallachian poets has been nominated for merging. 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) 10:36, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Category:People who studied the transit of Venus
I created a category Category:People who studied the transit of Venus. I added about 7 articles that were currently categorized in the category Transit of Venus to the category. Another editor has come along and removed each with the explanation "reverted a ridiculous Category creation". I do not believe this is how things are supposed to be done. Editors should not unilaterally empty a category. I was going to try restoring each, but I decided against an edit war. At this point the existing category should be discussed. I really think if we have this many people who have having studied the transit of Venus as a defining trait we should have a category. Either way this should be taken to CfD not unilaterally removed.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
- I agree with you that emptying out of process isn't the right approach. Have you tried discussing this with the editor who removed them? SMasonGarrison 13:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Lower Saxony
Lower Saxony was either formed in 1946, or had the preliminary process put in place to create it and might not have been formed until 1947. It does not exist before the 1940s. It is incorrect and anachronistic to categorize people as from there who lived hundreds of years before. We should not treat German states as essential places that have always existed. They are not. They are places that were created by specific political processes and do not exist until they do. We should not have people categorized in connection with them hundreds of years before they existed.John Pack Lambert (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- Could you at least put them in a better category rather than just dumping them into a occupation category. Like even moving them to century would be better. SMasonGarrison 01:32, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
Royalty/nobility
For Category:12th-century Swedish people I moved some of them to Category:12th-century Swedish nobility if they were part of royalty (since there is no Category:12th-century Swedish royalty). However, SergeWoodzing reverted these changes and I have noticed they have been unilaterally removing Category:Nobility from Category:Royalty and have done the same to Category:Swedish royalty despite this not being consistent with the other categories (e.g. Category:German royalty). How can we address this inconsistency? Mellk (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'd recommend bring the question as a CFD so that we can hammer out a nesting structure that's consistent. Perhaps having a parent of royatly and nobility? 🤷 SMasonGarrison 23:22, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- Royalty is (currently) a subcategory of monarchy. Monarchy and nobility are both subcategories of aristocracy. I am not sure if we need another category here. If we have some kind of rank category then I don't think this will address the issue with the missing 12th-century Swedish royalty category. Would aristocracy by nationality/country be feasible?
- But some kind of discussion probably needs to take place as SergeWoodzing has been continually restoring their changes in a few categories e.g. see the history for Category:Royalty and Category:Norwegian royalty. Mellk (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- Aristocracy by nationality and century would be easy to implement templates for and would probably help clean up some categorization. I do suggest starting with SergeWoodzing if you haven't already re the discussion. SMasonGarrison 01:48, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will see what they say first at Category talk:Royalty#Royalty is not nobility. Mellk (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Good luck! I think having clear guidance on these would be extremely helpful. SMasonGarrison 01:52, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- The clear guidance has already been covered by every dictonary and every encyclopedia in the definitions of these words. There is a misconception that nobility and royalty are the same thing, based, I think on the fact that members of royal families automatically are considered noble. No are beautiful race horses, generous philatropists, charismatic drag queens, etc. This does not make it factual to categorize royalty as nobility. Nobility is a social classification created by, and ranked below, royalty. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:40, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- By this logic, we cannot have people by nationality as the parent because the nobility are not ordinary people like peasants. Mellk (talk) 18:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, I do not understand what you mean. Nobility is a specifically defined social class which includes certain specific members of society and excludes others. Neither you nor I nor any other Wikipedian can change that fact. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, nobility is a specifically defined class, therefore with this logic, we cannot have for example Category:12th-century Swedish people as the parent of Category:12th-century Swedish nobility because that includes commoners. Or how does that logic not apply here? Anyway, let us keep this discussion to one page please. I would suggest the category talk page. Mellk (talk) 19:03, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- @SergeWoodzing please try to have a constructive conversation on that category talk page. We all want to work toward improving the project. SMasonGarrison 20:00, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- [Reply to Mellk:] Nobility are people. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- please try to have a constructive conversation SMasonGarrison 20:10, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, nobility is a specifically defined class, therefore with this logic, we cannot have for example Category:12th-century Swedish people as the parent of Category:12th-century Swedish nobility because that includes commoners. Or how does that logic not apply here? Anyway, let us keep this discussion to one page please. I would suggest the category talk page. Mellk (talk) 19:03, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, I do not understand what you mean. Nobility is a specifically defined social class which includes certain specific members of society and excludes others. Neither you nor I nor any other Wikipedian can change that fact. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- By this logic, we cannot have people by nationality as the parent because the nobility are not ordinary people like peasants. Mellk (talk) 18:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- The clear guidance has already been covered by every dictonary and every encyclopedia in the definitions of these words. There is a misconception that nobility and royalty are the same thing, based, I think on the fact that members of royal families automatically are considered noble. No are beautiful race horses, generous philatropists, charismatic drag queens, etc. This does not make it factual to categorize royalty as nobility. Nobility is a social classification created by, and ranked below, royalty. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:40, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Good luck! I think having clear guidance on these would be extremely helpful. SMasonGarrison 01:52, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will see what they say first at Category talk:Royalty#Royalty is not nobility. Mellk (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Aristocracy by nationality and century would be easy to implement templates for and would probably help clean up some categorization. I do suggest starting with SergeWoodzing if you haven't already re the discussion. SMasonGarrison 01:48, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Electoral princess of Saxony
Why do we have Category:Electoral princess of Saxony and Category:Prince-electors of Saxony? What is the difference? If there is one, maybe we should use names that make the difference more clear. I am thinking "electoral princess of Saxony" may mean male members of the family in the price-elector, while the prince-elector is the holder of a specific title. If that is the case at least the latter should be ruled a sub-cat or overlap cat such that we only put people in one of the two categories. I am thinking in categories where the ruler of the state has the title Prince of X, or some other title with Prince in the title, referring to royal family members also as "prince" is both confusing and questionable. I am not convinced we actually need all rotlyal family member cats. Some places that existed only before 1900 we barely have any articles on people who were not members of the Royal family (Kingdom of Kongo comes to mind), so it might make more sense to mainly place people in Category:People from Foo, and only the actual ruler and maybe the consort have seperate categories. I think if we do need a category for members of the Royal family we should name it Category:Members of the Royal family of Foo, and not use the assumption that we can just default call all Myers of the Royal family "prince" or "princess" which seems to be what we are doing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:08, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- Hmmmm. That's an interesting question. Did you try digging into the category creation history? SMasonGarrison 13:10, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
Your complaint?
Hello! I would like to try to understand this recurring comment of yours which seems to ba a complaint about my behavior. If you have such a complaint please take it to my talk poage so I can try to figure out what you mean in that forum. I only came here to defend myself in a conversation about me started here by someone else (I don't know why, here) with no intention of causing trouble here re: my behavior. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:14, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- My point was to remind you that we're all on the same team here. There's no need to "defend" yourself, and I encourage you to not approach editing from that lens. The entire conversation on my talk page was about trying to see if we can get consistency in categories. SMasonGarrison 20:19, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- If you persist in commenting as if I have not tried to have a constructive conversation, I am asking you again to specify what you mean on my talk page. Snidely vague remarks inferring that others have transgressed are not constructive. Clear specific complaints often are, and they can be addressed. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- You asked for something specific: what I’m referring to is the pattern where you treat general discussion about category structure as if it's a personal accusation—like when I said "please try to have a constructive conversation" and you read that as a complaint. The goal is to talk about category consistency, not conduct, and it would help if we could keep the focus there. You asked me for specifics about this "complaint", I elaborated and you called that "snide" and "vague". I'd encourage you to not assume that a comment is a personal attack or a complaint. It wasn't. You drew an inference that was never implied. SMasonGarrison 02:04, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- I have taught English since 1968. You and I apparantly have irreconcilable differences re: the meaning of "please try to have a constructive conversation" as to whether or not it implies a complaint/accusation. It certainly does. This, along with your continued disparaging pointers about how I treat a category discussion and about "focus" only enhance my opinion. You need to practice not getting personal far more than I. Let's try to stay away from each other so as not to make matters worse. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
- You literally asked for my opinion on your behavior and for specifics. As requested, I gave them. It's a shame that you're still viewing my feedback as "disparaging". My advise remains: " I'd encourage you to not assume that a comment is a personal attack or a complaint." SMasonGarrison 21:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
- I have taught English since 1968. You and I apparantly have irreconcilable differences re: the meaning of "please try to have a constructive conversation" as to whether or not it implies a complaint/accusation. It certainly does. This, along with your continued disparaging pointers about how I treat a category discussion and about "focus" only enhance my opinion. You need to practice not getting personal far more than I. Let's try to stay away from each other so as not to make matters worse. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
- You asked for something specific: what I’m referring to is the pattern where you treat general discussion about category structure as if it's a personal accusation—like when I said "please try to have a constructive conversation" and you read that as a complaint. The goal is to talk about category consistency, not conduct, and it would help if we could keep the focus there. You asked me for specifics about this "complaint", I elaborated and you called that "snide" and "vague". I'd encourage you to not assume that a comment is a personal attack or a complaint. It wasn't. You drew an inference that was never implied. SMasonGarrison 02:04, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- If you persist in commenting as if I have not tried to have a constructive conversation, I am asking you again to specify what you mean on my talk page. Snidely vague remarks inferring that others have transgressed are not constructive. Clear specific complaints often are, and they can be addressed. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.
Technical news
- A new feature called Multiblocks will be deployed on English Wikipedia on the week of June 2. See the relevant announcement on the administrators' noticeboard.
- History merges performed using the mergehistory special page are now logged at both the source and destination, rather than just the source as previously, after this RFC and the resolution of T118132.
Arbitration
- An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.
Miscellaneous
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 17 June 2025. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
- An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
- The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in June 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!
Category:Former Sunni Muslims has been nominated for deletion
Category:Former Sunni Muslims 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. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mario (franchise) 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 13:39, 12 June 2025 (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) 00:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
Category:14th-century Spanish Jews has been nominated for merging
Category:14th-century Spanish Jews has been nominated for merging. 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) 11:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
About English page
Hello dear, I hope this message finds you well. I'm reaching out to kindly ask for your assistance in reviewing and possibly approving a draft page I’ve been working on for Wikipedia. I’ve done my best to ensure the content is well-sourced, neutral, and aligned with Wikipedia’s guidelines, but I would greatly appreciate your expert input to make sure everything is in order.
Your support would mean a lot, and I’m more than willing to make any necessary changes based on your feedback.
Thank you very much in advance for your time and help.
Best regards,
Farah
Draft:Fatima Al Safi Farah244 (talk) 10:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- From what I can see folks are concerned about your sourcing. I think you'd benefit from polishing the introduction to make it clearer why this person is notable.SMasonGarrison 01:35, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
Alvin Hollingsworth - artist
Hello @Smasongarrison: I see you removed Alvin Hollingsworth from the category "20th Century African-American artists" per WP:DIFFUSE. But "20th Century African-American artists" is identified as a "non-diffusing category." Doesn't that mean your rationale is mistaken? As a matter of fact, Hollingsworth certainly belongs in the larger category. Or do I misunderstand what "non-diffusing" means? PDGPA (talk) 14:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking. I removed him from the artists category because he was already in 20th-century African-American painters. SMasonGarrison 04:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)