Content deleted Content added
Category changes |
→ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new section Tag: |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 510:
I'll just add that because going to CFD can be a laborious prospect (discussions are sometimes open for weeks or even months before they are closed), it's not uncommon for editors, even those who work extensively with categories, to just empty out categories so they will be tagged for CSD C1 speedy deletion even though this process is discouraged. It's just much faster so it is tempting for many editors to just do this themselves rather than having a deletion or rename discussion at CFD. I hope this helps with any questions you had. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 22:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
:CatChangesViewer can (and has always been able to) retrieve changes up to 30 days. If it goes back only "2 or 3 days", it means there was no activity in the category between a few days ago and 30 days ago. [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 16:25, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
::{{ping|Nardog}} Thanks for the clarification! (And your tool is great.) [[User:JoergenB|JoergenB]] ([[User talk:JoergenB#top|talk]]) 16:28, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2023|2023 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2023#Election timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|Wikipedia arbitration process]]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2023/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1187132049 -->
== [[Attic Records (disambiguation)]] ==
Hello {{re|JoergenB}}. I'm copying this here in case the Talk page is deleted, so you can still read it...
:Hello {{re|JoergenB}}. "Attic" and "ATIC" aren't the same thing. They are spelled differently and capitalisaed differently. "ATIC" should appear in See also because it is a related item: [[MOS:DABSEEALSO]] "Some entries may belong in a See also section at the bottom of the page: ... Terms which can be confused with Title ... Less likely to be confused alternative spellings of Title ...". So See also is the right place. I agree there is a risk of confusion, which is why [[Attic Records]] has {{tl|distinguish}} hatnote. It's highly unlikely a reader landing at [[ATIC Records]] actually wanted [[Attic Records]], but you could put a similar hatnote there. That leaves a disambiguation page "that have titles ending in "(disambiguation)" but disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page" which is a [[WP:G14]] candidate. In summary, "Attic Records" isn't ''ambiguous''. [[User:Shhhnotsoloud|Shhhnotsoloud]] ([[User talk:Shhhnotsoloud|talk]]) 08:27, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
::So, {{ping|Shhhnotsoloud}} I think your interpretation of the dabbing philosophy misses the point. Dab is done when there is risk for confusion (not easier resolved elsewise); not necessarily because the items are identical.
{{cot|title=Actually in this case not very important details:}}
::Different capitalisation is not very relevant (since anyhow often different people capitalise the same word differently); which I think is a main reason for
the guidelines in [[WP:DAB#Different spelling variants]]:
::::''If the titles of two articles differ only in capitalization, pluralization, spacing, or punctuation (as per WP:DIFFCAPS or WP:PLURALPT), the articles each should contain a hatnote to link to each other: for example, Ice cube and Ice Cube.'')
::Now, "atic" and "attic" do differ in a [[gemination]] (or, more properly, a graphemic duplication). This could motivate creating two dabs, one for "atic records" and one for "attic records", if there were many instances of both. In that case, those two dab pages could have been collected by '''See also'''s. However, this was not the case here. You still could have placed one item under a '''See also''' heading, if e. g. that item contains further word(s) than the title; but in this case there was really no use of such a heading. Therefore, if you wished to split the items in the generally approved manners, you could have divided the dab into a part referring to the "atic" spelling, and the other to the "attic". (There are indeed dabs with such kinds of splits; although hardly with just two items, one in each part, I think.) However, as there were so few items, a much better alternative would have been to start the page by "'''Atic Records''' or '''Attic records''' may refer to...". (So e. g. the spellings '''Mojave''' and '''Mohave''' at the beginning of the dab page [[Mojave]].)
::However, these discussions in this case have only a minor 'academic interest', since however you presented these two items should not have any influence on the keeping or deltion of that page.
{{cob}}
::''The important point is simply this:'' You left two items on the dab page, since (as you have confirmed) you accepted that there could be some confusion between them. (Whether they were under the same heading or not on the page is completely irrelevant.) Therefore, you could not reasonably demand a deletion of that dab ''with reference to that [[WP:G14]] clause'', namely:
:::*''Disambiguation pages that have titles ending in "(disambiguation)" but disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page.''
::'''The page disamiguated not "only one extant Wikipedia page", but two'''. It still disambiguated them, after you had put one of them under a '''See also''' heading; and you left these two links on the page precisely since you recognised the (small, you think) possibility that the article titles ''could'' be confused. Your redisposition of the dab page had no influence on this fact.
::On the other hand, there are ''other'' criteria for deletion, which did apply—and applied equally strong before and after you did the redisposition of the page: With just two items being dabbed, employing hatnotes for a (factual) disambiguation is very often preferrable. See [[WP:2DABS]] for some details! Implicitly, you referred to ''this'' situation when you wrote:
::::I agree there is a risk of confusion, which is why [[Attic Records]] has {{tl|distinguish}} hatnote. It's highly unlikely a reader landing at [[ATIC Records]] actually wanted [[Attic Records]], but you could put a similar hatnote there.
::(I indeed shall do so.)
::Now, ''this'' argument is perfectly reasonable, whether or not the two items on the dab are kept under the same heading. (However, in this case, the "primary subject" discussion is less relevant, since the (small) differences in spelling and capitalisation makes it unecessary to add distinguishing parentheses to either title.) So why didn't you use it?
::I can see just one potential 'trouble' with employing the approved procedure, namely, that you cannot employ a ''Speedy deletion'' criterion. The reason of course is that such a dab page is not automatically pointless. A page containing two linked items with short distinctions between them does serve as a disambiguation page, while one with just one or zero such items doesn't. This means that whether or not a two-item dab is unnecessary depends on the contents on ''other'' pages. However, the dab indeed is unnecessary, if you have put hatnotes on both pages (and the titles of those two pages do not need additional qualifiers within parentheses). You might suggest adding a "speedy deletion" criterion for this situation, in order to simplify handling. Until this is added, however, you'll just have to follow somewhat more tedious procedures; or, e. g., add the {{tl|One other topic}} to the dab and leave it at that (although IMO this would not be quite appropriate in this case). [[User:JoergenB|JoergenB]] ([[User talk:JoergenB#top|talk]]) 02:33, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2024|2024 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024#Election timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|Wikipedia arbitration process]]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 -->
| |||