Jump to content

User talk: Paine Ellsworth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
head of giraffe

Best of everything to you and yours! and...
Spread the Good!

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia – its articles, redirects, templates – all your improvements, and have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable life – both on and off Jimbo's amazing reference work!
'Wikipedia is a community effort of staggering proportions!'
The Closer: non-admin reveal
Disclosure
I am not an administrator on Wikipedia. I very much respect admins and have been helped by them many, many times over the years. I also respect the community vettings at RfA that often show the ultimate community respect and trust of an editor.
I shall likely remain a non-admin and continue to enjoy discussions with other WP editors. I sometimes participate, sometimes help with disagreements and sometimes close discussions when needed. I am no stranger to closing contentious discussions about controversial subjects. I sometimes close the easy talks, too, because if it's in the backlog, then it's fair game!

Remember that WP is not a democracy, so discussions are not just a vote. The key factors in all good discussion closures are the arguments written by concerned editors, policy-based rationales, which count most toward an acceptable decision and closure.
Anyway, if you have come to ask about one of my RfC, RM, MRV or other discussion closures, you are very welcome here! I am usually inclined to reopen a discussion if the outcome was "no consensus" and when I am specifically and intentionally asked to do so! (Not so much if I found a consensus – that doesn't mean I cannot be persuaded with a good, sound argument.) Please be very clear about your intentions and do not beat around the bush. That just means please don't expect me to read your mind; I have enough trouble reading my own mind sometimes. Thank you beyond words for your deeply respected concerns! – Paine  
'to help us keep our minds sharp!'
'PHILOSOPHIE!'

Recently registered?

[edit]

    Learn quickly how editors journey thru this awe-inspiring reference work! (and the people who build it!)


Older discussions and notifications... → click the section title in the Table of Contents (ToC) above, or click [show] to see all the discussions →
The following are closed discussions. Please do not modify them. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ⸎

The Signpost: 9 April 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2025 Newsletter

[edit]
Guild of Copy Editors April 2025 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the April 2025 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.

Election results: In our December 2025 coordinator election, Wracking stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, and Mox Eden were reelected coordinators, and IQR and WikiEditor5678910 were newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).

Drive: 55 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive 33 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 611,404 words in 237 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: 14 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 10 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 46,749 words in 18 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: 47 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive. 28 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 479,172 words in 207 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 13 to 19 April. Barnstars will be awarded here.

Progress report: As of 9:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 89 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,264 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, IQR, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and WikiEditor5678910.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.


MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Barnstar of Diligence
For ensuring move requests are properly closed and redirects are properly tagged. Thanks! Frost 16:24, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help! Paine  20:58, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

College Athlete End Template

[edit]

Hi, I appreciate your help on this template. There hasn't been any movement regarding the next set of changes I suggested, so I was wondering if either you can implement them or contact the other reviewer. I had poked him as well a few days ago, but still nothing, and I just don't want to lose momentum as I know these suggested template changes can sometimes get lost along the way. poketape (talk) 18:10, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi editor Poketape, the sandbox edits have been made to the live template. Let me know if anything else is needed. And thank you for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 06:45, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review Australian Party colour change

[edit]

Hi @Paine Ellsworthh,


May you please look at the request at Template talk:Australian party style - Wikipedia? I see you have been previously accepting requests. Thank you NoBudee (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi editor NoBudee, and thank you for coming to my talk page! Has this been completed? I was unable to find an edit request for 21 April 2025. Let me know if further help is needed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 06:52, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi editor Paine,
Thanks for the reply. It has been completed but was reverted, you can see the discussion at Template talk:Australian politics/party colours#Color for Australian Citizens Party Thanks. NoBudee (talk) 06:55, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pleasure! We'll see how the discussion goes, then. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 07:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Paine,
I was wondering if you could check out the discussion on the Australian Citizens Party talk page? I disputed the NPOV of the article due to what seems to be historical bias, there is an active discussion happening on the talk page. I don't know how interested you would be in the topic, but I am trying to get help from people who would be more neutral/without an interest. I don't really know who else to ask on Wikipedia. Thank you. NoBudee (talk) 00:48, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for asking, editor NoBudee! I don't know much about this subject, so I hesitate to enter a conversation like that without knowing enough to be helpful. Hopefully, you and the other involved editors will be able to resolve your disagreement. Wish you all the best, and thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:15, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Lucasfilm/doc

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Lucasfilm/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

{{Db-t5}}

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:12, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help

[edit]

Would you mind helped us to close the most recent requested move in Talk:2025 CONCACAF Women's U-17 Championship.

Thank you so much! Rey1996ss (talk) 21:27, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Rey1996ss: at this point there appears to be a consensus to move the article to the proposed title. I would be happy to close the request; however, since I closed the previous RM from February, it is common practice for a different uninvolved editor to close an RM on the same talk page. That is so there is not even the appearance of involvement on the part of the closer. Thank you very much for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, I agree!
Thank you so much! Rey1996ss (talk) 03:45, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol May 2025 Backlog drive

[edit]
May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
  • On 1 May 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Pages Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • 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) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Initiated template

[edit]

Good day! Thank you for your edit here [1]. I have a topic ban that prohibits me from using the initiated template. I have asked to get parts of my topic ban repealed, but was not successful. --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:41, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry to hear that, editor Jax 0677; let me know if there is anything I can do to help. I had no idea, so thank you for letting me know! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On or after August 4, 2025, I plan to appeal to be allowed to use {{histmerge}} so that I can have a history merge performed on some articles. Here is the link to my request for a revision to my topic ban. Thanks! --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help! Paine  15:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Christian_X#Requested_move_24_April_2025

[edit]

The non-admin closer was trying to relist the RM b/c it was closed prematurely, but the moves had been performed already per a technical request. Srnec (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and thank you very much, editor Srnec! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion on this is at User talk:Extorc#Requested moves. Basicaly, several users, Srnec and me included, challenged Extorc's closures as bad NACs, and he agreed to re-open the discussion, though without the rights wasn't able to restore the pages to where they were before. I take it that your affirmative close means that your assessment of the discussion (as a page mover) agrees that there was consensus to move? --Paul_012 (talk) 18:56, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's correct, and thank you also for coming to my talk page! There are three supporting (including the nom), two of which are strong, policy-based args, and one opposing who did not appear to cite policy that supported their stance of "Country and numeral belong together like first and last names." So yes, there is consensus to move, the original closure was reasonable and followed the directions of the closing instructions – uhm, well, for the most part. Is there something you think I missed? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 19:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It's just that to me the closing summary seemed to describe the move as a fait accompli and didn't quite make clear whose judgement was being exercised in the consensus assessment (i.e. who to talk to in case of dispute). --Paul_012 (talk) 11:33, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's certainly understandable – for the most part that was a procedural close as a courtesy to the nom (and to the RMCD bot, which was listing the RM as a "malformed request"). The bot noticed that all the previously current titles had been turned into redirects, so the request was probably "in the process of closing" (redirects cannot be current titles in move requests). I waited a while to see if the page mover would handle the closure, but he didn't, so I went ahead with it. You did the right thing, though, in coming to me, because the closer of the request should always be the first stop. From here we can make contact with any other editor(s) that might be needed to help handle any dispute that arises. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

XfD vs Redirects for discussion

[edit]

Regarding:

The last I knew, "deletion" and "discussion" are not synonyms. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion are not deletion discussions unless that is the outcome. This is about finding the best target for a redirect, not about deleting it.

  • "Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted."

Am I missing something here? You should just create a section #Redirects for discussion. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:37, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By chance I just noticed your comment to me here. The ping did not work. I'd still like clarification about the difference between an XfD and a Redirect for discussion. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:55, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Valjean: most of the time those pings do work, but evidently not always. The "Deletion discussions" is a throwback to those days long ago when RfD stood for "Redirects for deletion", which was the original reason for taking a redirect to RfD. Back then, all XfDs stood for "X (something) for deletion". Then, as you know, RfD was changed to "Redirects for discussion" as were all XfDs, which were changed to "X for discussion". Since the Closure requests page is controlled by a bot, I guess nobody wanted to mess with that somewhat quirky bot, so the section subheader was never changed. Nevertheless, all XfD listings go into that section. Put them in the "Other..." section and that will cause confusion, chaos, the bitter end of the world. And you don't want to do that, do you? « grin » P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS. Thank you very much for coming to my talk page! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I don't use that page very often. Keep up the good work. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 22:35, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help! Paine  22:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

added Rusalkii
readded NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)
removed

Interface administrator changes

removed Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:War on terror/doc

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:War on terror/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

WP:T5

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RMCD question

[edit]

Hi! You made an edit at Talk:Swiss Challenge League here for an RMCD fix. The bot has not removed it from all listed pages, should I do it manually or is there an error? Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 00:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore this. The bot was not undoing my edits so I just did it all manually Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 01:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi editor Yoblyblob and thank you for coming to my talk page! What happened was that when you withdrew and closed that formal move request, the {{Requested move/dated}} template was still in the request. If that template and all its contents aren't removed, then the RMCD bot sees it as a "malformed request". I monitor those and that's how I came across the request. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:50, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Hindi languages (disambiguation)

[edit]

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 Hindi languages (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is:

  • a disambiguation page with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" which lists only one extant Wikipedia page (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • a disambiguation page that lists zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" whose target is neither a disambiguation page nor page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Protection icons and high use templates in taxonomy templates

[edit]

Hi, at Template talk:Don't edit this line dagger you asked: I've been meaning to ask if there have been any side effects or bad effects when the noincluded protection icons and High use templates have been included in the beginnings of the taxonomy templates' codes?, giving the example Template:Taxonomy/Otophysi. I'm answering here because that template is likely to be deleted. It doesn't cause any problems as far as I can tell. However, the part of the message that says "Test changes in the template's /sandbox or /testcases subpages, or in your own user subpage" isn't really relevant; you can't test the main effects of changing a taxonomy template, which will be on taxoboxes in articles, outside the template itself because of the way in which the automated taxobox system works. So I think a slightly different warning template is needed. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:Automated taxobox system#High use notices on taxonomy templates. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:15, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for letting me know all that! I will add my 2 cents to the discussion. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 01:14, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested closure

[edit]

On my talk page, I was suggested to close Talk:Tornado outbreak of March 13–16, 2025#Requested move 20 March 2025 on procedural grounds per WP:BMB as it was opened by a site-banned editor. However, due to the length of discussion, I don't know if that's advisable. As you seem to be experienced in the procedural ends of this, what's your opinion on what should be done now? (Note that this is not a direct request to close the discussion.) Departure– (talk) 00:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Departure–: thank you very much for coming to my talk page! It's good that you did not ask me to close that discussion, because I am far too involved in weather discussions to close them. In that particular talk I was the first to oppose the proposed title. I notice that you are also interested in articles about weather. So I advise you to be careful about closing such discussions. It's easy to be perceived as being involved, and we don't want to even give the appearance of not being objective. On the other hand, if your closure is taken to move review, and you are confident that you would be able to justify your decision, then there is no reason why you shouldn't do the closure. I sincerely hope this helps, and thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 03:21, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Paine_Ellsworth&oldid=1292470288"