Andrybak

Ah, I was wondering for a while how I would go add categories in a Sandbox type of environment, like you did at User:Qwertyxp2000/Template:Auckland, New Zealand, but now that you stated the colons behind the category stuff, that makes a lot of sense. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 19:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Qwertyxp2000, check out WP:COLONTRICK. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have seen this colon trick before, but hadn't known that I could do this in the context of sandboxed templates. Thanks for letting me know that page. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 23:35, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Should I be moving the cats to the doc pages when Im making them? I still have hundreds of pages left to create. Noah, AA^Talk 23:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hurricane Noah, yes. Please see the guideline Wikipedia:Categorization#Template categorization for details and syntax. Additional information is covered by Wikipedia:Template documentation#How to create a documentation subpage and Template:Documentation/doc.

Please avoid putting templates into content categories, as per this RfC. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hurricane Noah, since the text of the documentation is the same on all the templates in Category:Pacific typhoon season button templates, you might want to consider creating a dedicated template for the documentation. See examples in Category:Documentation shared content templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Did I do this correctly for templates in Category:South_Pacific_cyclone_season_buttons?Noah, AA^Talk 00:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hurricane Noah, look good to me. Thank you for working on documenting these templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 01:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Minor simplification is possible in your approach: the subpage /doc is not needed if the whole documentation is done with a single template. Example: Special:Diff/1214112762. —⁠andrybak (talk) 01:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Category:Film templates parameter issues has been nominated for splitting. 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. Bearcat (talk) 22:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have a very clear notice that states you are not to edit my user page unless you are me. Do not edit the user pages of other editors. Thank you. 9t5 (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@9t5, to clarify Special:Diff/1231890593 – your userpage as of Special:Permalink/1231617380 was put into Category:Wikipedia substituted templates. User pages are not templates. Therefore such categorization has to be suppressed, if templates such as {{substituted}} are placed on the user page.

Per WP:UOWN: pages in user space belong to the wider community. They are not a personal homepage, and do not belong to the user. They are part of Wikipedia, and exist to make collaboration among editors easier – making the collaboration easier includes avoiding polluting the maintenance categories, such as Wikipedia substituted templates.

Other popular issues on user pages to avoid:

1. misuse of HTML and wikitext causing so called lint errors
2. pollution of the category tree of User namespace templates due to copy-pasting of wikitext, which most often happens with userboxes.

Hope this helps. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Can you export File:Sun-Maid brand logo used in 1923.jpg to wikimedia commons? Gilimaster28 (talk) 23:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC) Gilimaster28Reply

No. I'll let someone else deal with that. Thanks. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply