User talk:I dream of horses/2024/December
Antony King
[edit]Hola! Got to that conversation too late! One Emmy nomination, as I think you agreed, cutteth not the mustard. AfD result was correct IMHO... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Recent draftification
[edit]Hello, I hope you're well. I wanted to bring up your draftification of Incognito (2025 TV series), which occured 40 minutes after the article was created. It was, and still is unsourced, but per WP:NPPHOUR we shouldn't be draftifying articles that are under an hour old. I understand and sympathize with wanting unsourced articles out of main space, but at the end of the day, we need to be considerate of how it may come across as WP:BITEY to draftify an article too quickly. Especially considering that an article doesn't need to be complete to be in main space and editors are allowed to build them there if they'd prefer to.
Thank you for your work at NPP and the effort that you put in, it's very much appreciated! Hey man im josh (talk) 21:32, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh This has been bought up to me recently. I have concerns that NPPHOUR is being applied too rigidly, which might be a policy violation onto itself. I think the "spirit" of NPPHOUR is more about allowing time for an article and evaluating things on a case-by-case basis. Honestly, I'd feel better about this if this was more about when the article creator less edited, and not when the article itself was created. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 23:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- To my understanding, NPPHOUR does apply to when the article was last edited meaningfully, rather than the time it was created. In this case, that means you draftified the article 29 minutes following the creator's most recent edit. Additionally, they edited the article again 22 minutes after you draftified it, as well as later that day. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Significa liberdade Why are we waiting an hour, though? 29 minutes is plenty of time to read up on policy, find online sources in the event a new editor is writing their article backwards, etc. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- 29 minutes may be enough time for some editors to read up on policy and find sources but certainly not for all, especially for editors (such as newbies) who don't know where to look for relevant policy and/or may find themselves confused by the policies. Overall, the question is whether it's potentially more harmful for an article to be in main space (unreviewed and thus unindexed) for an extra 30 minutes or is it more harmful to bite a newbie. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:46, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, my understanding is "an hour from last edit" as well, though I'd probably only come after someone for getting in under an hour of the initial page creation, since those are highlighted on the page curation list so they're easy to avoid. Though I'm of the opinion that we should be waiting more than an hour, especially for draftifications, unless there's some obvious fuckery going on (like someone moving a page to mainspace after it was draftified via AfD).
- I remember NPP driving me completely crazy as a new editor, so I went back and looked at my early articles. I had MB swing through literally minutes after my last edits in a few cases, which I do remember finding annoying, since it caused me edit conflicts. Much worse, though, was the NPPers who, sometimes following NPPHOUR and sometimes not (I'm not sure when it first became "best practices" anyway), tagged the articles as needing more footnotes when they clearly met WP:MINREF/WP:WHEN, which I had very carefully followed. I don't think it bothered me any less when I had my articles mistagged hours later or minutes later. Which is all to say, I don't think it's any more or less bitey to draftify something in 30 minutes or 3 hours. But a lot of new editors don't break their edits up into smaller chunks like experienced editors tend to, often doing a whole dump of several new paragraphs at a time. My initial edits took me ages - I remember looking at the 500-edit bar for XC and thinking "evidently I've got this wrong, since no one would ever expect someone to be able to make 500 edits like this in a month".
- All of that is to say, I think draftification isn't going to be a positive experience for an editor no matter when it's done, but I do think we should be waiting for longer than an hour, just in case. Most of the time it won't make a difference, but every so often you'll save an editor (newbie or otherwise) from pressing "publish" only to find the article's been moved out from under them. -- asilvering (talk) 17:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Asilvering I actually agree that edit conflicts can be pretty BITE-y. I mean, we don't agree on how much time it should take vefore an edit conflict because no longer a reasonable expectation, but we agree on that. And yeah, it's odd, isn't it, how clean up tags are apparently exempt from NPPHOUR, given how upset I've seen a few people get over them, just inferring from how often they're removed without fixing the issues. Also, I swear, I remember a few newcomers from #wikipedia-en-help getting confused/upset over them; that might've been paid editors having an upset boss, though. It does make you reflect on how the subject of the article view the tags. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Significa liberdade Why are we waiting an hour, though? 29 minutes is plenty of time to read up on policy, find online sources in the event a new editor is writing their article backwards, etc. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @I dream of horses: The spirit of NPPHOUR is to be less bitey and more welcoming to new comers. Do you believe it's damaging to Wikipedia to give an editor a full hour to contribute to a work in progress article in main space? I believe it's far more likely to piss someone off and, based on old NPP habits where we waited 15 minutes instead of an hour, it leads to more community pushback against NPP and draftification as a whole if we are too quick on the trigger. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh, @Significa liberdade: First of all, let's acknowledge that the article that started this discussion was written by someone who has had 586 edits since 2017. They've created 13 articles in total. We were assuming they were a newcomer all along, but they aren't.
- Let's also acknowledge that there's a risk of a low-quality article being abandoned the longer we wait, and such articles vary in the amount of risk they pose. It could range from anyting from a non-blatant hoax (embarrassing, but mostly to entirely harmless) to potentially defaming a living person.
- I think the pushback from the community is from a fear of confusing newcomers more than anything. Does waiting reduce that confusion? I'm not sure about that. Perhaps there should be some sort of welcome template that states "Hey, can you source the article you just created? Because otherwise, we're going to have to draftify it. Here's a list of resources you can turn to for help." Talking to them would probably help out a newcomer more than avoiding them. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 09:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
First of all, let's acknowledge that the article that started this discussion was written by someone who has had 586 edits since 2017. They've created 13 articles in total. We were assuming they were a newcomer all along, but they aren't.
– I do actually still think of that user as a relative newcomer, but I also believe the NPPHOUR courtesy should be extended to all users. As mentioned, you're explicitly allowed to draft your articles in main space if you so wish.Let's also acknowledge that there's a risk of a low-quality article being abandoned the longer we wait, and such articles vary in the amount of risk they pose. It could range from anyting from a non-blatant hoax (embarrassing, but mostly to entirely harmless) to potentially defaming a living person.
– Yes, and it was a work in progress, and not a hoax in this case.I think the pushback from the community is from a fear of confusing newcomers more than anything.
– It's that, and being unnecessarily disruptive by moving to draft space while people are working on things.Does waiting reduce that confusion? I'm not sure about that.
– Does waiting a full hour negatively impact Wikipedia in any way?Perhaps there should be some sort of welcome template that states "Hey, can you source the article you just created? Because otherwise, we're going to have to draftify it. Here's a list of resources you can turn to for help." Talking to them would probably help out a newcomer more than avoiding them.
– Nobody is advocating for avoiding users. We're advocating for ACTUALLY giving people a chance to work on what they're working on.- Seriously, what harm is there to leaving an article for a full hour when it's not a hoax? It's not indexed until marked as reviewed. NPPers just come off as assholes when we immediately jump the gun and move to draft space and it's the type of behaviour that pushes people away. We want to foster a more positive environment to help with editor retention, not immediately move something to draft space, and thus, take away our option to do so after they're done working at it and it's still not fit for main space. Then, instead of re-draftifying it, which we shouldn't do because we shouldn't draftify more than once, we're forced to send the article(s) to AfD or let them stand in main space in a poor state. Neither of those options is ideal. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:34, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh, I'm with you about how we shouldn't be jumping the gun and it pushes people away, but from my experience at least, I'm not sure waiting an hour is the thing that makes the difference. I say that as someone who thinks we really, really ought to observe NPPHOUR, and actually would prefer that we extended it. I know we all see draftspace as a chance to work on what they're working on, but that's because we know that often the alternative is a CSD tag (which will be honoured, unless one of the kinder CSD patrollers has mercy and declines it in favour of draftification). I think @I dream of horses's idea of a template that says "hey can you do this thing? if you don't do this thing within an hour, fyi, it might be draftified or maybe even deleted at any time" is a good idea. The maintenance templates don't really get the urgency across, or feel like an opportunity for dialogue between patroller and author. It would be really convenient if we could have some kind of "draftification warning" in the page curation toolbar. We could even have it set an alert (like the "this might be copyvio" etc ones) to show later patrollers that such a message has already been received. I wonder if this could cut down some of the community angst about draftification. -- asilvering (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh I'm totally fine with a template @Asilvering. My issue is that we should, at least, honour NPPHOUR. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh, Asilvering is correct; newcomers don't have the perspective that we do, but we do realize that often, draftification is an alternative to deletion. Hence my idea of some sort of template. I'm trying to come up with a solution that makes NPPHOUR make some sort of sensee while giving newcomers a kick in the pants. Heck, some of them will likely even ask for draftification if it's explained to them. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't care if it's someone with six figures of edits or someone making their first article, it still doesn't make sense to disruptively move a work in progress that's being worked on to draft space. Again, I support a template if someone wants to make one, but it does not benefit Wikipedia to draftify too quickly, it actively hurts it. That's the main/entire point of this discussion. If you think something else can be improved upon, fantastic. Hey man im josh (talk) 03:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh
I don't care if it's someone with six figures of edits or someone making their first article, it still doesn't make sense to disruptively move a work in progress that's being worked on to draft space.
I'm a new page patroller who has six figures of edits. I have a decent idea of how to write an article, having evaluated quite a few. I'd probably write a decent article...but, alas, I'm among a niche few who has gotten to my level of edit count without having written an article. I'd be a gray-area 'newcomer' to article writing, if I decided to write one. /NotMad, just introducing myself. - I think the crux of the disagreement is determining if an article is being actively worked on, not whether or not it's disruptive to move an article that is being actively worked to draftspace. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sigh. Honestly, at this point, I'm banging my head against a brick wall, so I'm going to drop it after this message. It is disruptive to do so before the article is an hour old, plain and simple. Just remember that I tried to stop you from getting dragged to ANI, which is inevitable if you continue to draftify articles less than an hour old, as you seem to routinely do. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh And, again, my concern is that NPPHOUR is being rigidly applied. There eems to be little guidance as to where gray areas or nuance applies besides "blatant content issues." I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- (Also, maybe we can actually concentrate on that welcome template now.) I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:07, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh And, again, my concern is that NPPHOUR is being rigidly applied. There eems to be little guidance as to where gray areas or nuance applies besides "blatant content issues." I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sigh. Honestly, at this point, I'm banging my head against a brick wall, so I'm going to drop it after this message. It is disruptive to do so before the article is an hour old, plain and simple. Just remember that I tried to stop you from getting dragged to ANI, which is inevitable if you continue to draftify articles less than an hour old, as you seem to routinely do. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh
- I don't care if it's someone with six figures of edits or someone making their first article, it still doesn't make sense to disruptively move a work in progress that's being worked on to draft space. Again, I support a template if someone wants to make one, but it does not benefit Wikipedia to draftify too quickly, it actively hurts it. That's the main/entire point of this discussion. If you think something else can be improved upon, fantastic. Hey man im josh (talk) 03:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh, Asilvering is correct; newcomers don't have the perspective that we do, but we do realize that often, draftification is an alternative to deletion. Hence my idea of some sort of template. I'm trying to come up with a solution that makes NPPHOUR make some sort of sensee while giving newcomers a kick in the pants. Heck, some of them will likely even ask for draftification if it's explained to them. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh I'm totally fine with a template @Asilvering. My issue is that we should, at least, honour NPPHOUR. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh, I'm with you about how we shouldn't be jumping the gun and it pushes people away, but from my experience at least, I'm not sure waiting an hour is the thing that makes the difference. I say that as someone who thinks we really, really ought to observe NPPHOUR, and actually would prefer that we extended it. I know we all see draftspace as a chance to work on what they're working on, but that's because we know that often the alternative is a CSD tag (which will be honoured, unless one of the kinder CSD patrollers has mercy and declines it in favour of draftification). I think @I dream of horses's idea of a template that says "hey can you do this thing? if you don't do this thing within an hour, fyi, it might be draftified or maybe even deleted at any time" is a good idea. The maintenance templates don't really get the urgency across, or feel like an opportunity for dialogue between patroller and author. It would be really convenient if we could have some kind of "draftification warning" in the page curation toolbar. We could even have it set an alert (like the "this might be copyvio" etc ones) to show later patrollers that such a message has already been received. I wonder if this could cut down some of the community angst about draftification. -- asilvering (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- To my understanding, NPPHOUR does apply to when the article was last edited meaningfully, rather than the time it was created. In this case, that means you draftified the article 29 minutes following the creator's most recent edit. Additionally, they edited the article again 22 minutes after you draftified it, as well as later that day. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I want to edit and add a new entry with a topic. To make this new entry, do you have to wait a long time to review the information or is this process fast? --Poletbar (talk) 15:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Poletbar Your draft was reviewed (and declined...ouch) since you sent this message. So, drafts can be accepted/declined pretty quickly...or not. It depends on reviewer interest. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from Amache Spencer (19:10, 10 December 2024)
[edit]Hello my name is Amache I am trying to figure out how I can send Denzel Washington a message or if that's even possible --Amache Spencer (talk) 19:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Amache Spencer I don't know if it's possible, but it's not possible through Wikipedia. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Meow!
[edit]You are now a cat, no longer a horse, now say meow! (way too bored rn) ミラへぜ (talk) 00:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @ミラへぜ Funny! Now get back to work. /NotMad
I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from Drew Stanley (17:59, 11 December 2024)
[edit]I need help with how to address a personal attack against me on Augustine.
GongoraFan accused me of making an "abusive revision."
GongoraFan first edited this section [1]. This revision made it less clear. The reason that Augustine did not get married is not because of his conversion; it is because of his priesthood. Hence the original sentence. So I undid the edit [2] wihtout saying anything disparaging or critical. GongoraFAn again added the phrase without reading the sources [3]. When I fixed it [4], I was called abusive [5]. Drew Stanley (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 December 2024
[edit]- News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes
- Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5
- Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited
- Op-ed: On the backrooms by Tamzin
- In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial
- Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
[edit]
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Parkinson's disease on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 51, 2024)
[edit] Hello, I dream of horses. The article for improvement of the week is:
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Gulf • Volt Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
|---|
Hi, how can I add a study with the research results to an article which has a heading of the topic such that the topic is considered a "hypothesis"? --Deeann33 (talk) 15:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-51
[edit]Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Weekly highlight
- Interested in improving event management on your home wiki? The CampaignEvents extension offers organizers features like event registration management, event/wikiproject promotion, finding potential participants, and more - all directly on-wiki. If you are an organizer or think your community would benefit from this extension, start a discussion to enable it on your wiki today. To learn more about how to enable this extension on your wiki, visit the deployment status page.
Updates for editors
- Users of the iOS Wikipedia App in Italy and Mexico on the Italian, Spanish, and English Wikipedias, can see a personalized Year in Review with insights based on their reading and editing history.
- Users of the Android Wikipedia App in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia can see the new Rabbit Holes feature. This feature shows a suggested search term in the Search bar based on the current article being viewed, and a suggested reading list generated from the user’s last two visited articles.
- The global reminder bot is now active and running on nearly 800 wikis. This service reminds most users holding temporary rights when they are about to expire, so that they can renew should they want to. See the technical details page for more information.
- The next issue of Tech News will be sent out on 13 January 2025 because of the end of year holidays. Thank you to all of the translators, and people who submitted content or feedback, this year.
View all 27 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, a bug was fixed in the Android Wikipedia App which had caused translatable SVG images to show the wrong language when they were tapped.
Updates for technical contributors
- There is no new MediaWiki version next week. The next deployments will start on 14 January. [6]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
MediaWiki message delivery 22:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
[edit]Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Username policy/ORGNAME/G11 in sandboxes RFC on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
How do I add links? --SciolyKS (talk) 17:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive
[edit]| January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to add a photo of a person to their Wikipedia page. The person in question was an executive with the Wells Fargo company in the 1860s. The photo is from the Wells Fargo archives. Am I required to seek permission before posting this photo? Is this necessary given that this person lived so long ago? Assuming written permission is required and obtained, does it need to be somehow displayed as evidence of permission? Thanks for your assistance. --JDSR1066 (talk) 13:16, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from CULTURE X RECORDS (18:50, 20 December 2024)
[edit]Hello how can I add me record label to Wikipedia as well as myself as a musician ? --CULTURE X RECORDS (talk) 18:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from Ms. Suzy Liz (22:30, 21 December 2024)
[edit]I am a professional journalist whose work has been published, over several decades, throughout Florida. I am also a native of Sarasota, Florida, and I hold a bachelor degree in political science from Florida State University. I, naturally, care about the veracity of information that is published, in any format. And I contribute on a monthly basis to Wikipedia. For all of those reasons -- and more -- I am concerned about the Wikipedia article on a Florida politician who is based in Sarasota, Bridget Ziegler. These concerns are the reason that, today, I created a Wikipedia account. --Ms. Suzy Liz (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- I have tried, without success, so far, to contact the editor(s?) who created that Wikipedia page. Ms. Suzy Liz (talk) 22:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
[edit]Your feedback is requested at Draft talk:Next Nintendo Console on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Top AfC Editor
[edit]
|
The Articles for Creation Barnstar 2024 Top Editor | |
| In 2024 you were one of the top AfC editors, thank you! --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
This week's article for improvement (week 52, 2024)
[edit] Hello, I dream of horses. The article for improvement of the week is:
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Jetty • Gulf Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
|---|
Gothic pop
[edit]Could you make a page for gothic pop? 2601:C7:C280:14C0:C4D7:C6CC:2AA6:5B27 (talk) 19:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Happy Holidays
[edit]
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025! |
|
Hello I dream of horses, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Abishe (talk) 21:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 December 2024
[edit]- From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting?
- Recent research: "Wikipedia editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality
- Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols
- Traffic report: Was a long and dark December
Question from Sophosvirtus (18:06, 26 December 2024)
[edit]How can I publish an article? I've already done the text. I just don't know how to publish... --Sophosvirtus (talk) 18:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
[edit]Your feedback is requested at Talk:Squad (U.S. Congress) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from BrushTurkey (08:01, 27 December 2024)
[edit]I tried editing a countries page to include their history of persecution from another country, but someone decided to take it down. I included sources and everything --BrushTurkey (talk) 08:01, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red January 2025
[edit] 
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 17:50, 28 December 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
How does one create a page? Or do I need to edit a bit before allowed that --Ramen1071 (talk) 23:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 1, 2025)
[edit] Entomology is the scientific study of insects.
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Architect • Jetty Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
|---|
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
[edit]Your feedback is requested at Talk:Israel on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from WelshLegend2012 (20:47, 31 December 2024)
[edit]Hello Wikipedia, I’d like to have your permission to edit and delete a lot of pictures, please? --WelshLegend2012 (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)