Jump to content

User talk:Pbritti/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17

Kosovo Air Force again

I just saw this on my watchlist. What do you think, could this be our old friend? - ZLEA T\C 18:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

@ZLEA: Looks like classic quacking. ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I've brought it up here. - ZLEA T\C 14:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Difference?

What's the difference between one talk page section on missing material, and my own? Usually I sprinkle "The Article would be improved if..." throughout my suggestion but this time I assumed it went without saying. (Article on SBC "Talk" page that you just reverted.)2603:8081:3A00:30DF:64B9:F991:7457:CF8D (talk) 02:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Your contribution read as a question about the denomination's stance. While your comments here on my talk page clarify that you meant to suggest Wikipedia should mention those stances, you didn't indicate that. Often, people post comments wholly unrelated to improving articles to talk pages about religious groups to ask about their beliefs. I encourage you to do some research on the subject of SBC stances towards Judaism and to return to the article or talk page. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:56, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Licorici of Winchester

Hi, I see you have deleted a couple of references to a new book about the above lady. Not sure why. The book appears to be a reputable publication and is freely available on Amazon. Regards Murgatroyd49 (talk) 14:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49: On its face, the book looks reliable. However, the book's author is a creative writer with little to no peer-reviewed history writing. The book itself is not peer-reviewed and was published by a non-academic printing house. The article on the Tower of London is an FA and the one on Westminster Abbey is a GA, so there is a higher standard for sourcing required. If you need further explanation, feel welcome to ask! ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, I just wondered as, on the face of it, the reference seemed OK Murgatroyd49 (talk) 14:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Ludwell–Paradise House

On 29 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ludwell–Paradise House, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that John D. Rockefeller Jr., under the name "David's Father", secretly authorized the purchase of an $8,000 "antique"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ludwell–Paradise House. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ludwell–Paradise House), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Hook update
Your hook reached 14,720 views (613.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

by the way,

you may be interested in the Wikimedia Discord server. it's quite nice ... sawyer * he/they * talk 02:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Sawyer777: I'm aware of it and have actually been on there before! I may have to actually join it. Thanks for the invite. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Flemish bond

Hello! Your submission of Flemish bond at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Pbritti, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! signed, Rosguill talk 14:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Rosguill! ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

The Working Man's Barnstar
This award is given in recognition to Pbritti for accumulating at least 10 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Free and Candid Disquisitions

Congratulations, Pbritti! The article you nominated, Free and Candid Disquisitions, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:07, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the club

The Featured Article Medal
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this special, very exclusive award created just for we few, we happy few, this band of brothers, who have shed sweat, tears and probably blood, in order to be able to proudly claim "I too have taken an article to Featured status". Gog the Mild (talk) 21:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
@Gog the Mild: Thank you! Gladly, not too much blood... ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Four Award

Four Award
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Free and Candid Disquisitions. — Bilorv (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Well done on your first Four Award! — Bilorv (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

A pie for you!

I just wanted to stop by with some pie, and to say that altho the Piñon AfD didn't go in the direction you thought it should, I'd like you to know that I appreciate how thoughtful and civil you were throughout the discussion. I respect your work here on WP, and am grateful for the manner in which you communicate. Would you mind if I went ahead and moved it to Piñon, Colorado? I don't want to step on anyones toes! With best regards from a fellow editor, Netherzone (talk) 03:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
@Netherzone: I am a tad upset, as you beat me to the punch! I had wanted to award you a mark for your incredible research. The admin who formalized my withdrawal moved the page from Piñon, Colorado as a standard bureaucratic move—I'm fully on board with you moving it back! I'm glad a subject-matter expert like you lent your eye to the process! ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
The research was enjoyable and interesting to do. I understood your rationales during the discussion even though we agreed to disagree. In the next day or two I'll look back over the AfD to see if there are others to consult before moving the article. BTW, I was hoping to send a you peach pie since the very best peaches in the world are from Colorado, but it isn't quite that season yet. Netherzone (talk) 03:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
@Netherzone: I am quite a fan of my homestate's produce! If you want, you can open a move discussion on the talk page, as there's no rush. I'll gladly offer my support to whatever your desired next step is. If you ever need any help with Summit County, Denver, or Sangre de Cristo content, I have a lot of experience in those areas! Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Rite of Lyon

Hello, this seems to be up your alley and is in desperate need of more information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rite_of_Lyon. It was translated from the French article, so there may be some grammatical errors; which, I am trying to clean up. LambdaLover (talk) 02:18, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

@LambdaLover: I'll try to fix it up a bit. Unfortunately, I fear me cleaning it may have to wait until around October, as I've somewhat scheduled through then. If you need access to certain sources, I possess a few that may be relevant and would love to share them as needed. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
It would be nice if you could share your sources, for both personal interest and the purpose of cleaning up this page. LambdaLover (talk) 16:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

SCOOCH and the recent edit

Hello there. I had seen your welcome message: thank you! Hope this is the right place to ask this, but may I kindly ask what was the reason for reverting the edit on the Oriental Orthodox Churches page? I noticed that SCOOCH was referred to as the “standing conference” of the OO Communion (while it is merely a regional conference), and that almost the same list of churches are repeated again: hence the edit. Thank you. Hypatiusbrontes (talk) 13:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@Hypatiusbrontes: First off, welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for commenting here; the other appropriate place would have been the article's talk page. Upon review of that edit, I think my reversion could probably be undone. Your explanation here is clear and I now agree with your decision to remove that content. Thanks for your politeness! ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
I am sorry if this was the wrong place: in further instances, I will make sure to discuss such matters in the talk-page of the article itself. Thank you for your re-consideration: I will re-add the edit. Again, thanks, and have a nice day! Hypatiusbrontes (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Some painted tiles for you!

I wish you a good feast of St Alban, St John Fisher, and St Thomas More. Ascensiontide is long past, but I took a beautiful picture of the painted tiles at All Saints, Margaret Street, which also happens to be an article I am working on. Sts Fisher & More are included in the prayers today. So do pray for your anglo-kins; we pray for you! Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@TheLonelyPather: Lovely tiling! Let me know if you need any help on the article. Happy feast of my patron, St. John the Baptist! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Flemish bond

On 24 June 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Flemish bond, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that bricks laid in Flemish bond were a sign of wealth in colonial Virginia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Flemish bond. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Flemish bond), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hook update
Your hook reached 14,578 views (607.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of June 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Another possible DYK

"...that four of the twenty-six Chief of Chaplains of the United States Army - Patrick J. Ryan, Francis L. Sampson, Patrick J. Hessian, and Donald W. Shea - were graduates of Saint Paul Seminary in Saint Paul, Minnesota?" ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 23:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Darth Stabro: I don't think any of these articles are less than a old, expanded at least five-fold during the last week, or recently promoted as good articles. Sadly, that means they don't qualify for DYK. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Ah, shoot. I didn't realize that was a requirement. ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 00:15, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
@Darth Stabro: No problem. Thanks for the interest—will look into if those articles can get some overhauls. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 July newsletter

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Shameful

At Special:Diff/1232130137 you describe my actions as "shameful". I'd remind you of WP:AGF and WP:NPA. TarnishedPathtalk 03:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath: Your actions are shameful. Denialism of arson targeting Indigenous people and their places of worship—even if due to truly righteous rage—has no place on Wikipedia. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Please show me exactly where I engaged in "denialism of arson targeting Indigenous people". TarnishedPathtalk 03:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Here. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I wrote "seeking to lump together the arsons of a group of churches to particular prior events on the basis of speculation only". Clearly there is no denial of any arsons. I specifically refer to them as arsons. Are you going to withdraw your aspersion casting? TarnishedPathtalk 03:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
TarnishedPath, you engaged in a bad-faith AfD. Much to your credit (indeed, the mark of a very good editor), you very quickly withdrew it upon being challenged on that decision. In the spirit of reconciliation, I retract my statement. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Just fyi

Mentioned you here by way of edit summary Moxy🍁 21:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Notification

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Noleander and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Horse Eye's Back (talk) 03:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back: thanks for bringing in this other discussion. Better for everyone to have a wider grasp of what's being discussed. I (most probably) won't comment, but your diligence in notifying the relevant parties is really appreciated. Let me know if I can help the discussion in any way. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Sororate Marriage

You removed information pertaining to the Westminster Confession here for the purpose of removing original research, although it was quoting a published secondary source (The Creeds of the Evangelical Protestant Churches by Philip Schaff, originally published 1877). It was linked to the digital version on the Bible Hub site rather than a regular book reference so that those without the physical book could verify the source. The same edit removed info on the Orthodox church's position which was also not original research, just a self-evident summary of the source, though admittedly a more verified source would have been preferable, so I consider that removal fair, even if not for the reason stated. Did you have some other reason besides original research for removing the section on the WCF, though? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.202.1 (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

You're correct about the Westminster Confession portion; I must've failed to see to prefatory statements about alterations. I'll reinsert that content. Thanks for the heads up, and my apologies for initially misreading the source and removing that content. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Clarification request closed

The Noleander clarification request, in which you may have been involved, has been closed and archived. The request was related to that case's principle 9, which states:

Editors are expected to refrain from making unnecessary references to the actual or perceived racial, religious, or ethnic background of fellow editors. Such references should be made only if they clearly serve a legitimate purpose. In the context of a noticeboard discussion or dispute resolution, it will rarely serve a valid purpose to seek to classify the participants in the discussion on this basis.

Among the participating Arbitrators, there was a rough consensus that this principle remains true with current policies and guidelines and that there is not an exemption from this principle for asserting that an editor has a conflict of interest. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 05:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

For remaining calm during a nasty dispute at 2021 Canadian church burnings, and accepting a third opinion. Scorpions1325 (talk) 19:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
@Scorpions1325: Thanks! It has been weird. Definitely the most charged experience I've ever encountered on the project. Clovermoss has demonstrated that their somewhat recent accession to adminship was well deserved and, once all is said and done there, I hope to pay them back for their commitment to improving editor relationships and maintaining factual accuracy. As an aside, something came across my desk, so to speak, regarding possible disruption on articles related to Catholic BLPs. I may drop a line on your talk to ask for your input on whether intervention is necessary should it continue. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
You can tell me at any time. Scorpions1325 (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Reminder: GA backlog drive

Hello! Just a reminder that, if you have time, you are welcome to join the GA backlog drive; it runs until the end of July. You are receiving this message because you signed up on the drive page but have not yet listed any reviews. We hope to see you there! Either way, happy editing! —Ganesha811 (talk) 05:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipediocracy

I no longer have access to the private forums of Wikipediocracy, but I strongly advise you not to engage with them as they have become increasingly vitriolic over the past year. Has your personal information been leaked? Is there anything about you in the private forums that I can't see? Scorpions1325 (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll communicate about this over private messaging if it comes up further. I've received private advice on best approaches to the issue and wish to adhere to that advice. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Great collaboration effort at 2021 Canadian church burnings.... this is the type of effort we need to solve the majority of problems here. Moxy🍁 23:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
@Moxy: Thank you! I'll be around if you need a second pair of eyes to glance at something. ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Coon Rapids Dam

On 20 July 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coon Rapids Dam, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Coon Rapids Dam on the Mississippi River is the northern terminus of the river's navigable portion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coon Rapids Dam. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Coon Rapids Dam), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:04, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

you've got mail!

Hello, Pbritti. Please check your email; 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 05:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ludwell–Paradise House

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ludwell–Paradise House you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Rollinginhisgrave -- Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 10:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Francis Procter

On 1 August 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Francis Procter, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "the old man was startled and a little shocked" when he was shown Walter Frere's revision of his book? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Francis Procter. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Francis Procter), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

DYK for A History of the Book of Common Prayer

On 1 August 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A History of the Book of Common Prayer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "the old man was startled and a little shocked" when he was shown Walter Frere's revision of his book? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Francis Procter. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A History of the Book of Common Prayer), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in the July 2024 GAN backlog drive

The Minor Barnstar
Your noteworthy contribution (3.5 points total) helped reduce the backlog by more than 160 articles! Here's a token of our appreciation. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Kosovo again

Just added two more suspected SPAs to the list. It might be time to bring this to WP:LTA. - ZLEA T\C 19:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Triple Crown

Congratulations Pbritti, you are awarded a Triple Crown for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your hard work is appreciated. Damien Linnane (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Free and Candid Appreciations

Across the Cantuar Aisle
Congratulations for making Free and Candid Disquisitions today's TFA! Your effort of working across the aisle and your spirit of constructive inquiry is greatly appreciated.

BCP Collect for the unity of the church:

Almighty Father, whose blessed Son before his passion prayed for his disciples that they might be one, even as thou and he are one: Grant that thy Church, being bound together in love and obedience to thee, may be united in one body by the one Spirit, that the world may believe in him whom thou didst send, the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord; who liveth and reigneth with thee, in the unity of the same Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 11:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@TheLonelyPather: Sorry for the much belated response! I'm currently on holiday in Edinburgh, so please forward me any requests or suggestions regarding the city you may have! I'd love to collaborate with you on something soon, so any ideas for an article we could build up together would be appreciated. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 09:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Dear @Pbritti: thank you very much for your kind offer. I am in a rather important period of the year and work will be overwhelming–but if you would like to double check All Saints, Margaret Street it would be very much appreciated. I am not sure whether it's up to GA standard. Certainly can write a bit more about the architecture, but GA isn't FA, you know. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 13:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

An invitation to a U.S. Mountain West online meeting

Wikimedia US Mountain West

The Wikipedia users of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming are invited to an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, August 13, 2024, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. There is no obligation to participate and all guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

See also section

Hi, based on this edit[1] I wanted to take a moment to check that you don't actually think that see also sections are for "core element of this topic" because that would be absurd. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back: Allow me to elaborate, as you seem a bit confused: an article with <10 views a day is almost certainly not among the most relevant for inclusion in the see also section of the main article of an incredibly broad subject. For example, Anti-Catholicism, listed in the see also, averages over 300 views a day. Not keen on this distrust of other editors and their judgement you've demonstrated here by posting your above comment. Please do review the guidelines for inclusion in see alsos. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
It seems like it could reasonably be included and more information on the subject can be found there. I don't see anything about core elements in the guidelines for inclusion in see alsos. There were only eight things in the section, so it isn't like that had to be removed for anything else to stay there. I would also note that Anti-Catholicism appears to have been there in error as the concept appears in the article, I have now rectified that error. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
@Horse Eye's Back: You're being intentionally confrontational. I'm not going to bite, not over a see also link. I'm not sure why, and I'd love to hear exactly why you think a <10 view-a-day article is among the best candidates for that see also. Your attitude of "why not?" is exactly what the MOS for this trying to prevent. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
That isn't my attitude, if you think there are better candidates then add them... When size becomes an issue then we can talk about removing Catholic peace tradition. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
@Horse Eye's Back: Any reason for the misleading edit summary that failed to mention the reinsertion of the contested link? Particularly odd when that article's subject is subordinate to at least two of the superior, more generalist articles I added. ~ Pbritti (talk) 12:48, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't thats part of the error being corrected, there was nothing which suggested that you intended to remove the link either on this talk page or in the edit summary which reads "Accepting invitation on my talk page to add superior see alsos. These two are more generalist." Horse Eye's Back (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
@Horse Eye's Back: Please recall your warning from earlier this year, visible here. You seem intent on trying to make a point, contradicting the view that you're here to build an encyclopedia which won you clemency last time. If you maintain this level of subtle incivility over trivial issues, you are likely to land yourself in the same trouble as before. Please do not message me on my talk page again unless to advise me of mandatory notices or for requests to assistance with instances of vandalism or unverified statements (that kind of assistance will always be received upon request). I hope to see your standard substantive contributions in my watchlist again soon. Pbritti (talk) 13:08, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Free and Candid Disquisitions scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 3 August 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/August 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks, and congratulations on your work! Gog the Mild (talk) 13:59, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "This article covers a disproportionately influential religious pamphlet written by an otherwise minor figure in 18th-century English Protestant history. The pamphlet would prove the primary influence (besides the 1662 Book of Common Prayer) on American Anglican liturgies and served as a catalyst for the Unitarian prayer book tradition. However, its influence on the institution it was explicitly written for–the Church of England–was almost null."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Today I have two "musicians" on the Main page, one is also the topic of my story, watch and listen, - I like today's especially because you see him at work, hear him talk about his work and the result of his work - rare! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:34, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: A rare treat indeed! I'm assembling material related to organs in one of my areas of focus (Williamsburg, Virginia), so this serves as a good primer on some of the lexicon! ~ Pbritti (talk) 09:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
That is wonderful! - ... and a third, like 22 July but with interview and the music to be played today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
On 13 August, Bach's cantata was 300 years old, and the image one. The cantata is an extraordinary piece, using the chorale's text and famous melody more than others in the cycle. It's nice to have not only a recent death, but also this "birthday" on the Main page. And a rainbow in my places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:34, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Lout

Greetings, Pbritti!

I used to be known as User:Elizium23, but I can't prove it. I requested a global lock/block from Meta, but per the Stewards suggestion, Elizium23 permanently locked me out of Elizium23's account. Elizium23 is also indeffed on Wiktionary (en). Stewards have hinted that editors could face a global block/ban if the account or editor is blocked/banned on at least 3 different projects. 2600:8800:1E96:E900:218D:D20E:1CB9:C53E (talk) 16:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Given what evidence I can see, I'm going to assume you are Elizium. What can I do for you? ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Actually, considering your block here on EnWiki, please engage with me on the Commons. I'd rather not violate sock rules. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

DYK for 8th National Eucharistic Congress (United States)

On 23 August 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 8th National Eucharistic Congress (United States), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that a 1938 Catholic procession featured 80,000 marchers and one blimp? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/8th National Eucharistic Congress (United States). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 8th National Eucharistic Congress (United States)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:04, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Baptism

Thank you for your thoughts on my edit to the Baptism article earlier this week. I do think there should be some mention of this "importance" aspect of baptism in the article. It is not a "personal perspective": it reflects the thought of Pope Paul VI as quoted, and Pope John Paul II made a similar point (see https://saintjohnpaulri.com/baptism-preparation). Weigel's article was moved from "Further reading" (where its relevance was not explained) to the body of the article. BobKilcoyne (talk) 05:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@BobKilcoyne: If you'd like to elaborate a bit on this, please consider starting a section at Talk:Baptism. I'm rather busy off-wiki, so I do apologize for the belated response. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 August newsletter

The fourth round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 29 August. Each of the 8 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 472 points, and the following contestants scored more than 700 points:

Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated. Contestants put in extraordinary amounts of effort during this round, and their scores can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 36 featured articles, 55 featured lists, 15 good articles, 93 in the news credits, and at least 333 did you know credits. They have conducted 357 featured content reviews, as well as 553 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 30 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed during Round 5, which starts on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Remember to claim your points within 14 days of earning them, and importantly, before the deadline on 31 October.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Infobox position

Howdy, do you know how to get the introductory paragraph of an article to appear above an infobox on mobile? I've tried to compare pages that have that to pages that don't you can't figure out a difference. The infobox always comes before the opening paragraph in the wikitext ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 18:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

(maybe it's just a draft vs main space thing) ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 18:07, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
@Darth Stabro: I'm assuming you're looking at Draft:Francis W. Kelly. The spacing looks correct on mobile and the legacy desktop view, but let me know if an issue persists; may pass it over to WP:TEAHOUSE's hivemind. Also, I can't compliment you enough on Patrick J. Hessian. That was the first DYK in a couple weeks that I saw and intentionally carved time out of my day to return to and read. Finding out that you were behind it was a happy surprise. Feel welcome to message me off-Wiki about anything project-related or otherwise on my other socials; my notifications are still on even though I'm taking a brief sabbatical. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Women in Green's October 2024 edit-a-thon

Hello Pbritti:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2024!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) 14:20, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

thank you for your contributions!! :D xRozuRozu (t • c) 04:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Bible Section on Jacobite Syrian Christian Church

Why did you revert my edits saying it was "Tangential at best to the main subject of this article"? It was literally in the section on the Bible, and I quoted secular sources. Halershes (talk) 04:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I struggle to see how a story about several copies of books is immediately relevant to a broader subject like an entire church. The story of the books may even be notable enough to warrant their own article, but they are almost certainly not relevant on the church's main article. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

History of Christianity

I have finally nominated the article. Please take a look if you can: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Christianity/archive1. Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Request for clarification on {{DYKproblem}}

Hi Pbritti, thanks for your feedback on my first DYK review! On that, you said to post {{subst:DYKproblem|[Name of article]|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the relevant user's talk page when you review a hook and don't pass it. Given that I've done a review for another DYK and still don't feel fully comfortable approving solo, I wanted to ask if you believe that {{DYKproblem}} would still be the appropriate message to leave, considering that my review not being a pass is entirely because of my own reservations and currently very limited experience, not an issue with the DYK nomination itself. Thank you again for your advice and assistance in helping me get rolling with actually contributing here on enwiki PixDeVl yell talk to me! 22:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

@PixDeVl: I'd love to respond more fully but I'm busy tonight with some work stuff (grading students' tests!). Will explain more fully ASAP! ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
No worries, feel free to take your time (as someone who condemns my own teachers to grading my tests, how they read my handwriting is beyond me, so if you have any people like me in your classes, I wish you the best of luck). PixDeVl yell talk to me! 02:05, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewing Articles

Greetings,

I am a fairly inexperienced Wikipedia editor, who has written some articles that I would like to see reviewed and possibly improved by a more experienced user. I'm reaching out to you because I'm somewhat familiar with you from twitter and after reviewing your profile you seem quite competent. I also believe that the articles would be of interest to you. They are Kilmore Carols, Church of San Juan Bautista (Ohkay Owingeh), and Hell Opened to Christians. The first and last articles I especially would like to see improved with regards to formatting: the "Songs of the Cycle" in the first and the "Contents" in the last would probably best be organized as tables; however, I do not know how to do this technically. Any advice about this would be welcome, as well as about all three articles in general.

Do not feel in any rush about reviewing these articles, as I know you must be busy now that we are into the academic year. I just think you might be interested in taking a look at them. I hope, also, that this is not an inappropriate request, but I do think that Wikipedia is best edited collaboratively. Thank you for your time.

Best Regards,

DefeatingLine (talk) 14:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

@DefeatingLine: Absolutely glad to help! Let me take a look at the relevant articles and I'll try to get back to you before too long! If you notice I haven't replied here again in a few days, feel more than welcome to ping me once more! ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

September 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

The Working Man's Barnstar
This award is given in recognition to Pbritti for accumulating at least 10 points during the September 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 19,000+ articles and 35,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 26,884.6 points) completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

GA Notice

GA Notice
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Geoffrey Cuming in which you've been a major contributor, and has been nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
· · ·

Joseph Powathil

Hi. What the article says seems to refer to the fact that the subject had been homosexual since his youth. This is unsourced and defamatory for a Roman Catholic Archbishop. I am referring to the following sentence: "He was known as Pappachan in his childhood, and was officially known as P. J. Joseph." (oldid 1250336909). 87.0.122.205 (talk) 20:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

@87.0.122.205: Not sure how a nickname he used as a kid—a nickname that the church explicitly mentioned in their biography of him—would somehow be saying he was gay. Your claim that the state was unsourced was false. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Kosovo Security Forces

Hello Mr. Pribiti why my last update on that platform was delete by you, i put a refernce https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=878493251126917&set=pcb.878494387793470&__cft__[0]=AZWbBK4HJ4UHqGhv79wF_9PnPiA-NL55IqdKFaRAYLthpJ-KBc6vGpPBQpGCia9i44tzEp_poqCjo2zkaUAA3aikRoPnqp3pRSKD9hbkkM_zuzhoTjsOdw5x8aknotIBbwJTefVS7vaCBqdIGRyR73BuTrDr6nt8xuy-bYYB5Q2oyY5Hs9MsjYVP_eVVC6In5h0&__tn__=*bH-R, is Kosovo security soldeir during excerice "Steel 01" with this type of new Binoculars... Annazimberi (talk) 00:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

We don't usually list the types of binoculars used by militaries. Such details are generally nothing more than trivia. - ZLEA T\C 03:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Geoffrey Cuming

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Geoffrey Cuming you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dclemens1971 -- Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@Dclemens1971 and Rollinginhisgrave: I have Columbus Day (Monday) off from work and was going to spend at least the morning wrapping up addressing the Geoffrey Cuming and Ludwell–Paradise House comments. If necessary, I can expedite either/both. Please let me know if this timeline is acceptable to you two, as I know both have been a tad more drawn out and I don't like keeping people waiting. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Take your time, I didn't realise the 2O for Ludwell-Paradise House would come through at the same time when I suggested co-reviewing Geoffrey Cuming to Dclemens1971. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 00:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
No rush on your part as far as I’m concerned. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--NØ 17:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

@MaranoFan: Replied there! Thanks for taking those steps and look forward to wrapping up that review. By the way, your article writing style is a good mix of short and strong. Very keen to promote now, especially since I have not seen any sourcing issues beyond those we just discussed. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

My talk page

You're right. The IP is interested only in flamebaiting. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu: Good call. Putting it bluntly, that IP strikes me as a bit of a jerk who wants to distract you from your work. Your efforts are far better expended elsewhere. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Reminder: GA backlog drive

Hello! Just a reminder that, if you have time, you are welcome to join the GA backlog drive; it runs until the end of October. You are receiving this message because you signed up on the drive page but have not yet listed any reviews. We hope to see you there! Either way, happy editing! —Ganesha811 (talk) 05:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

RE: Draft:Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos, Zabrđe

Hello, I just saw you rejected the submission of the draft. Accepting that one source related to the church as institution in general may be considered related, I wanted to ask what other sources you claim to be unreliable and maybe why do you personally think those sources are unreliable? Best wishes. MirkoS18 (talk) 05:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC) The issue was resolved and the draft is accepted.--MirkoS18 (talk) 08:59, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ludwell–Paradise House

The article Ludwell–Paradise House you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ludwell–Paradise House for comments about the article, and Talk:Ludwell–Paradise House/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Rollinginhisgrave -- Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 10:04, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Geoffrey Cuming

The article Geoffrey Cuming you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Geoffrey Cuming for comments about the article, and Talk:Geoffrey Cuming/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dclemens1971 -- Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Rollinginhisgrave and Dclemens1971: Thank you both for your cooperation on these GAs. You two are pleasant and helpful people and I'm glad to have had you both as reviewers. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Thankyou, I was interested in doing a co-review at GAN for a while, to get expertise from reviewers outside of my specialty and as a structure to be able to generate mutual feedback on reviewing styles (what was missed, if anything wasn't a problem). I think it's very interesting with GAN that the interpretations of how the GACR are applied are so varied, which leads to such variance (and really begs the question of what GA status means). I also think given Dclemens1971 is clearly intelligent and experienced at Wikipedia, but newer at GAN, they might be able to have more confidence in being forthright in assessments having a second reviewer. I hope this wasn't too overwhelming for you having two reviewers, and that you will excuse this light manifesto I'm apparently using your talk page for. I'm not sure how successful it was as a project, but I've certainly learned from the experience. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 02:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
@Rollinginhisgrave I appreciated working with you and learning from your review approach. @Pbritti I have long admired your work on content creation (and I appreciated the reviews you did on my new articles before I was autopatrolled). Thanks for letting me practice on your work! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Trouted

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.

You have been trouted for: just because ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 14:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Darth Stabro: I'm certain I deserved this. Somehow. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm simply recalling my old bulletin board/IRC days and the /slap command. What fun it was... ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 17:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

DYK for The Hillbilly Thomists

On 17 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Hillbilly Thomists, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Hillbilly Thomists, a band made up of friars from the Dominican Order, reached the number-two spot on Billboard's bluegrass chart? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Hillbilly Thomists. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Hillbilly Thomists), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

About the Russian Greek Catholic Church

The members was written right underneath and said that there were about 3000 members that is my source Oujon (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

@Oujon: I see no source in the article for this claimed membership total. Do you see one or are you aware of one not presently included in the article? ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Candidate instructions

Administrator Elections | Instructions for candidates

Thank you for choosing to run in the October 2024 administrator elections. This bulletin contains some important information about the next stages of the election process.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 15–21: SecurePoll setup phase
  • October 22–24: Discussion phase
  • October 25–31: SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–?: Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the SecurePoll setup phase. Your candidate subpage will remain closed to questions and discussion. However, this is an excellent opportunity for you to recruit nominators (if you want them) and have them place their nomination statements, and a good time for you to answer the standard three questions, if you have not done so already. We recommend you spend the SecurePoll setup phase from October 15–21 getting your candidate page polished and ready for the next phase.

The discussion phase will take place from October 22–24. Your candidate subpage will open to the public and they will be permitted to discuss you and ask you formal questions, in the same style as a request for adminship (RfA). Please make sure you are around on those dates to answer the formal questions in a timely manner.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. Anyone can see who has voted, but not who they voted for. You are permitted and encouraged to vote in the election, including voting for yourself. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see your tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RfA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, you must have received at least 70% support, calculated as support ÷ (support + oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("'crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation as a candidate, and best of luck.

You're receiving this message because you are a candidate in the October 2024 administrator elections.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Special National Brigade article update

Hello. I'm reaching out to let you know that the changes you requested for my draft were implemented and I have resubmitted it for review a third time at this point after making adjustments to it. I will let you know that there is no Spanish version of this article. I did search for it on the Spanish version of Wikipedia, with help from Google translate, but I didn't see anything about it. I do not speak fluent Spanish that fluently, so I am unable to do that; so if you or someone you know speaks Spanish and who edits or writes articles on Wikipedia, please feel free to make one if you want. If it helps, I will tell you that the Spanish name for the Special National Brigade is BRIGADA ESPECIAL NACIONAL DEL MINISTERIO DEL INTERIOR. I just thought I would let you know that I resubmitted my draft. Thanks for the help. EAD98144 (talk) 21:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Our Admin Election Test

Hello there. As we're preparing to move from one stage to the next, this is just a quick note from one member of the test group to another, wishing you well in the process of this new alternative to RfA. It seems that there are more of us in this group than some in the community anticipated, so i hope that doesn't make the experience any the worse for all of us. Whatever our individual results, i thank you, along with the rest, for stepping up and testing this process; happy days, ~ LindsayHello 07:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Your well-wishing is much appreciated, LindsayH. If this goes south, I won't be too disappointed—perhaps two election cycles should have been planned! In the end, I'm glad for the opportunity for community consideration and hope to wield the mop with you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Just voted for you. Good luck! 🤞 Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your support, Mr Serjeant Buzfuz! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I was too late to add a note of support to your candidate comments. I enjoyed your article on the Scottish prayer book, and I enjoyed the collaborative process of working on the DYK review with you. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

GAN backlog drive reminder

Okay, I know you were busy for most of it (thanks for running, and I hope I can welcome you to the corps soon enough!), but there are still a few days left in the GAN backlog drive if you'd like to pick up some reviews. You only need to start the reviews this month, not finish them. Cheers! -- asilvering (talk) 17:20, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering: Oh, I didn't know about the start date part! Thank you for the info. I'll try to wrap up Talk:Santi Romano/GA1 and start a second before 31 October! ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:History of National Eucharistic Congresses in the United States

Hi Pbritti, after doing a bunch of article creation for the various National Eucharistic Congresses in the United States, we figured an overarching history article would be appropriate given that various developments over time—what started them in the first place, when laity were allowed, the post WWI and WWII hiatuses—rather than having those things buried in the articles. I started Draft:History of National Eucharistic Congresses in the United States but I think Maximilian775 thought just calling it National Eucharistic Congresses in the United States without the "History of" would be better; would love to hear your thoughts on the title and/or the article as a whole. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 00:17, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

That's a good question. I'm inclined towards Maximilian775's proposals for two reasons: brevity of length and broadness of scope. If you haven't consulted Wikipedia:Article titles yet, I'll run the proposals against the policy outlined there. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:23, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 November newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round being a very tight race. Our new champion is AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who scored 2,283 points mainly through 3 high-multiplier FAs and 3 GAs on military history topics. By a 1% margin, Airship beat out last year's champion, Delaware BeanieFan11 (submissions), who scored second with 2,264 points, mainly from an impressive 58 GAs about athletes. In third place, Generalissima (submissions) scored 1,528 points, primarily from two FAs on U.S. Librarians of Congress and 20 GAs about various historical topics. Our other finalists are: Sammi Brie (submissions) with 879 points, Canada Hey man im josh (submissions) with 533 points, BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 432 points, Arconning (submissions) with 244 points, and Christmas Island AryKun (submissions) with 15 points. Congratulations to our finalists and all who participated!

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 7 FAs, 9 FLs, 94 GAs, 73 FAC reviews, and 79 GAN reviews and peer reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2025 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Eastern Orthodox Church versus Eastern Orthodoxy

Hello! Regarding your revert: Eastern Orthodoxy encompasses the religion, doctrine, and traditions of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church is the largest institution associated with Eastern Orthodoxy. Therefore, I believe it is more appropriate to link to the Eastern Orthodox Church in this context. Cuvaj (talk) 17:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Both the canonical Eastern Orthodox Church and the broader categorization of Eastern Orthodoxy qualify as the second-largest Christian tradition. Since Anglicanism is not a single denomination but rather a religious tradition encompassing dozens (if not hundreds) of denominations, Eastern Orthodoxy as a tradition is more appropriate. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
You would be correct if this were the lead of the Anglicanism article. However, this is specifically the Anglican Communion article, which addresses only the churches in full communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, not all Anglican churches. Cuvaj (talk) 17:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Even within the Anglican Communion, there are separate denominations. However, given that it would be splitting hairs and you seem fairly certain that Eastern Orthodox Church is better, I won't get in the way of you restoring your preferred version. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:35, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! Regarding [2] and [3], they are now inconsistent with this redirect. Is that okay? Cuvaj (talk) 19:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Joan Taylor's Blog Post

I am not quite sure if you are aware yet, but I have a message on the talk page for the page Massacre of the Innocents where I try to respond to some of your objections for inserting her blog as a source. I would greatly appreciate it if you respond.

I would also like to apologize for sometimes inserting faulty links, and I will do my best to do better from now on. Silverfish2024 (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure you're wrong, because I'm interested in war issues. Gear495 (talk) 19:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
@Gear495: what are you responding to? ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Online meet - November 12, 2024

Wikimedia US Mountain West

We will host an online meet for Wikipedia users from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, November 12, 2024, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. We will have reports from WikiConference North America 2024. We hope to organize a North American Hub to support local activities. Anyone interested in the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. Help is available for new users, and all guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our invitaion list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pbritti/Archive_16&oldid=1258997000"