User talk:TechnoSquirrel69/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Re: Sea of Voices

Hello, I'd like to apologize for the edits in question. I am involved in the translation of articles from English to Spanish via the translation tool, but ever since there was an overhaul in the tool a few months ago, pages using certain templates for their references appeared with an error and I did this to bypass it, though I acknowledge that this was not ideal. I pledge to stop doing this and see another way to adress the issue. (I'll put forward the issue in the tool's talk page, and until it is addressed, I'll adds the refs "manually" or avoid those kinds of pages altogether.) Again, my apologies for the incoveniences caused. EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 22:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User talk:EdgarCabreraFariña § About your edits to Sea of Voices

No apologies needed, EdgarCabreraFariña, it was hardly any inconvenience at all. I assumed you had a reason for doing it, I just didn't have the context of what you were doing. Coincidentally, I saw this discussion that's currently open, which mentions that using list-defined references using {{reflist|refs=...}} markup (like I did on Sea of Voices) might not be compatible with the content translation tool. Would it help your workflow to change the markup to <references>...</references> in these cases? The best solution would be for the tool to just be able to parse the first markup, but would that be an acceptable workaround for now (assuming it works, which you're probably more qualified to answer)? By the way, thank you for working to translate articles into Spanish! It's always nice to see content I've worked on being able to help on other projects. :) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:39, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I just made the change, would you let me know if that did anything for the translation tool? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:44, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh my God, the thought didn't cross my mind! Now I tried it and yes, it does work! And thanks for directing me to that discussion, that was exactly what I was looking for. Yes, it seems that will be an acceptable workaround for now (given that I see that it's also proposed in the discussion).

By the way, I'm happy that you're happy with the translations. I just had a user a few days ago send me a message about it after I translated a bunch of Spanish football articles, though in their case it was a... weird message about how I was "stealing" their articles before (in a separate edit) adding a "I was just joking" PD (albeit the message was strongly-worded enough that a third user stepped in and issued them a 24-hour ban). You can guess how grateful I am for you being patient with me. Again, thanks. EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 11:03, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@EdgarCabreraFariña: I'm sorry you had a negative experience over your work; I can assure you that most of the content writers here don't have that kind of view, so keep up the good work! I'll keep in mind to begin using <references>...</references> syntax for list-defined references in articles I work on moving forward. If you're going to edit articles to switch one to the other so you can work on a translation, I would highly recommend an edit summary so other editors know why you're doing that. By the way, what's the issue that crops up with {{cite magazine}} and {{cite journal}}? That's another change you (temporarily) made that I was confused by. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:33, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69: No worry about it, just shared the experience for how... weird it was. Anyway, I'll most definitely have it in mind from now on too, and explain it in the edit summary to let everyone know. Oh, that one I feel even worse about: That one also didn't appear in the translation tool, apparently because there's no equivalent to the {{cite magazine}} template in eswiki, but there is one to {{cite journal}} which was similar (cita publicación). But then after trying the translation tool again after you told me you switched to <references>...</references> I found out I could've replaced the template in the tool itself, so as it turns out it was wholly unnecessary. EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 11:15, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Also, I know this is another topic but: Darn it, I didn't know that about pings either, thanks for the fix in the JTtheOG comment. EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 11:19, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

SPS tag

please see Autopatrolled discussion, thanks. Sswonk (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Noting that I've responded at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled § User:Sswonk (permalink). —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:26, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Findon 2018 article?

Hello! I am working on a source review for The Snow Queen this weekend, and I'd really like to check Findon 2018 (since the article uses it so much) but I can't access it through my library. Would you be able to share it by email? Thanks! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 00:29, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

@LEvalyn: I can indeed — thank you for volunteering to take that on! I can't attach files through Wikimedia emails, so if you'd like to email me, I'll reply with the PDF. Alternatively, you can direct-message me on Discord. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:38, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Cite Unseen September 2025 updates

Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. We are excited to share details about a big update we just deployed. With grant support from Wikimedia CH, we've added several new features, including a citation filtering dashboard, settings dialog, support for localization, and the ability to easily suggest domain categorizations. Cite Unseen now also lives on Meta Wiki, as part of our effort to serve all Wikimedia projects. Our source lists are now also on Meta-Wiki, where they can be collaboratively edited by the community.

Please see our newsletter on Meta-Wiki for full details. If you have feature ideas, notice any issues with our new updates, or have any questions, please get in touch via our project talk page. Thank you!

From SuperHamster and SuperGrey, 05:43, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

This message was sent via global message delivery. You received this message as you've been identified as a user of Cite Unseen. If you are not a Cite Unseen user, or otherwise don't want to receive updates in the future, you can remove yourself from our mailing list here.

Replies // via Wikitext Extension for VSCode ???

Oh my, I had no idea such a thing existed. I need to give it a try! RoySmith (talk) 10:10, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

@RoySmith: Indeed! You can find it at the VS Marketplace. It's been a really nice tool to have to edit offline for one reason or another. It can be a little janky, especially with keeping you logged in (case in point — guess the article!), but aren't we all a little janky? :) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:05, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Women in Green's 9th Edit-a-thon

Hello TechnoSquirrel69:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2025!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2025, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event with the theme What Women Do! 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 different occupations or professions (or broader roles in society) 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), Spookyaki (talk) & Alanna the Brave (talk)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Peer Review

(For some reason it won't let me respond in the peer review itself, so I decided to just copy my message below onto your talk page)

Hi! If you feel interested in providing comments/feedback, feel free to do so; however if you would like to close it, that's perfectly fine too! GrandDuchyConti 💜(talk) 12:48, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, GrandDuchyConti! I'll go ahead and close the review in that case. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

October 2025 GAN Backlog Drive

October 2025 GAN Backlog Drive
On 1 October 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog and to reduce old nominations. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed. Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

September thanks

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in September! - Today is the birthday of the 16th Thomaskantor after Bach, remembered. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Can I interest you in my 100th biography to the Main page in 2025, Siegmund Nimsgern? He, and next John Rutter for his 80th birthday in 2 days, and real life keep me away from the Christmas cantata. What do you think of adding from the sources you can access but I can't, and become a co-nom? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Forgot to get back to you on this! Unfortunately, Bach cantatas aren't really my area of expertise or interest, and even if they were, I have my hands full with current on-wiki responsibilities and with getting ready to move next week. You should be able to access the sources I mentioned, though, as I believed all of them came through the Wikipedia Library. Good luck with the FAC, whenever you get around to it! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:20, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Next week, as said. - In all previous source reviews, sources were questioned as possibly not reliable, and placed in external links (Mincham, Bishop, ...), and the focus was on those who published the cantatas such as Dürr and the Carus editor: people who know every measure. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:39, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

I added some in the article, and to the replies, - please check. I just found - and almost no surprise - that the cantata is scheduled to be sung by the Thomanerchor in the morning service on Christmas Day 2025 ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:07, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda, that sounds exciting! I'll try to take another look at the article by this weekend. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:34, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

John Rutter 80 today! I sang his major choral works with four choirs, and many of his uplifting anthems, 13 DYK? I watched him explain his Magnificat in person in 1998, and now see it on Youtube: he wore the same outfit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

My story today is about the principal violin of the Concentus Musicus; she would have been 95 OTD. I felt connected when the second oboist of our recent concert, of Haydn's Stabat Mater, said that he built an English horn for his performance of the work with the Concentus Musicus. - Concert weekend pictured in "places". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:23, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Woman of Steel GA

Hello, I'm aware WP:DCWC is virtually over but I never reopened the Woman of Steel (album) GA review because I frankly had no idea how to go about it or if I should expand on what was already written in the review, but I still have no idea what to do about it even though I wanted to at least make if sufficient somehow even if it has led to me not actually participating for the entire time in any meaningful way (aside from creating James Mange right now, if I could even nominate that for DYK) Iostn (talk) 22:29, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey Iostn, I'm sorry that the review made you feel discouraged about participating in the contest. If you're not enjoying the process of GAN reviewing, it's perfectly fine to let it be and find something else that you can apply yourself to better. If you'd like to keep working at it, though, I still think a GAN mentorship would be the way to go — having a kind, experienced editor show you the ropes is one of the best ways to improve. They might be able to put the feedback I left you into more context, but if you have questions about that, I'm happy to try and help as well. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:34, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Peer review for possible featured article candidacy

I am working on improving the quality of a current good article, Ochaco Uraraka, so it can eventually become a featured article. I know about you through you placing a tag on another article I worked on, Noriko Takaya, in Special:Diff/1272002175, back when it was a B-class article. I also see that you regularly participate in peer reviews and featured article candidacies. Becauase of these, would you be willing to participate in the peer review for Ochaco's article at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ochaco Uraraka/archive3? Another user suggested I get more than one user to review the article before I submit it again for a featured article candidacy. Thank you most sincerely. Z. Patterson (talk) 22:52, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey Z. Patterson! I'm having a bit of a busy weekend, but I'll try to find time for this next week. Is there any particular area of the article you're seeking feedback on, or just a general look at the whole thing? Also, you mentioned that you're looking for opinions from editors who don't work in the anime and manga area, and I should let you know that I don't fall into that category. :) Let me know what you think! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:53, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69: I would like to have some reviewers review the Ochaco Uraraka article for readability based on the feedback I got from AirshipJungleman29 in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ochaco Uraraka/archive2. I am wondering what else I need to do beyond what I have done in her article so far based on the feedback I received from Wikipedia:Peer review/Ochaco Uraraka/archive3 so far. Thank you. Z. Patterson (talk) 01:15, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Great, I'll focus on the prose, though I will of course share any other points of feedback I have if I come up with them. I'll put it on the list to do this week, but please ping me if I haven't left my review by next weekend. In the meantime, I have an open FAC myself that's in need of prose reviews — if you have the time and interest, I would appreciate your feedback! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:15, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I plan to look at your open FAC at some point this week. 02:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC) Z. Patterson (talk) 02:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

As I said I would do earlier, I added points to address in your active FAC. I hope they help. Z. Patterson (talk) 23:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll be getting around to responding in the next few days, and I'm working on some comments for the Uraraka article as we speak. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:41, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Nomination for discussion of Template:Invisible list item

Template:Invisible list item has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:51, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2025

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

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:58, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia events in Seattle

In the Seattle area? There are several events occurring this week and over the next three months that may interest you. Wikidata's 13th Birthday Celebration on Saturday, November 1 at the Capitol Hill Branch Library. Please sign up here! This is a notification, not an endorsement: Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, will speak about his book The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last on Thursday, 10/30. Details are here at Town Hall Seattle's website. We will have meetups on these Tuesdays at Little Oddfellows in the back of Elliott Bay Book Company on Capitol Hill: October 28, November 18, and December 16. We will celebrate Wikipedia Day, marking the 25th anniversary of Wikipedia's debut, on Saturday, January 17. Details TBA.

01:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

October music

story · music · places

marked to be sung "Happily" - do you think you could return to the FAC and check what was added? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey Gerda, thanks for your message! I'm currently in New York for WikiConference North America, and not sure how much time I'll have on my hands to come back to the review until next weekend. Are there any major changes you've made since I had my last look and upheld my !vote? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:30, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Have a good conference! The major change is (to me) the reaction of other editors to the changes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:22, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Scheduling for December has begun, - can you please look at the cantata again? - My latest: Roberta Alexander, - listen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I realize you're in a bit of a bind here, which I'm sorry about, but I really cannot commit to a thorough re-review at least until this weekend as I'm catching up with work. I think the FAC and TFA coordinators are aware that my review is a little bit out of date, so you could talk to them about considering a closure in spite of my !vote — I'm not going to be offended by that. Also, note that there is already a TFA request for Christmas Day open. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:49, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I talked to coordinator Wehwalt (who had planned to rerun A Christmas Carol), and mentioned that a review was meant to come last weekend (that's what I understood). Perhaps you chime in there? And I saw a pending request for a 75th birthday, but the cantata has 300 years this years and is related to the feast day ;) - Another option might be to leave a comment in the FAC, rather than for an individual coordinator. Ceoil and Hog Farm looked at the sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:07, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I did mean that I could only dedicate that time on the weekend of the 25th or later; sorry if I didn't make that clear originally. I'll note my intentions at the FAC. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:11, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. - My story today is about a song a friend gave me, very literally: inventing a melody to a poem, singing and playing guitar. Yesterday's was about a great singer, and you can listen. In case you like Barber better than Mozart, try this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Can't believe that Toshio Hosokawa is 70 already. Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Today Sequenza III on Luciano Berio's centenary. You can listen with the score or to the first performer, Cathy Berberian (link in the work's article), - I couldn't decide ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

I invite you - before anybody else - to the peer review for BWV 110. I would like to see the open questions resolved before the 300th anniversary, FA or not, for the readers' sake. My first question is if I picked the right ones (confessing that I was not aware of anything being open besides the "scholarly references", - I thought I had answered the others), and then the questions I gave you today and you had no chance to answer. I'll invite more people on Monday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey Gerda, I think that's all of the questions from my review that need addressing. I don't really have much more to add, especially since, as I mentioned earlier, Bach isn't entirely within my area of interest. I think I've made my point clear on where I would like to see improvements in the article before I'd consider it ready to be an FA, so I'm going to leave the review for other editors to share their opinions. Even though I wasn't able to support the nomination, I appreciate you for your hard work on the article over the course of the FAC! Good luck with the rest of your project. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:47, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

I think I've also made my point clear: You asked why a certain book is not included, and I explained (yes, only today, because I thought that could not have been a serious question) why not. You could really help my understanding if you told me (in the PR or right here) if you understand my reply. To make answering here easier, I'll copy it here:

• You asked why the book "The Pathetick Musician" is not cited. Because none of the snippets indicates analysis of the cantata, - it seems mentioned as an example, p. 80: "the chorus is made to laugh on an active melisma on first syllable of the word 'Lachens". Why should this reference be added when other authors handled the same information in more detail (and in better English)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:18, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

  As I mentioned in the FAC review, if you have a good reason for excluding a source, please go ahead and leave it off. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:52, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

  Do you see what I see: that the particular ref would be detrimental to sourcing quality? Going further: I am afraid we may loose quality when we go by Google hits. I will check out two more sources, the recordings by the Netherlands Bach Society and the Swiss project around Mr. Lutz, which both come with insight/lectures by people who study to perform. Only, I'll travel tomorrow, and don't know how much time I will have for that. Yesterday was a biography in need (Glenys Linos), and today another (Benita Valente). Rehearsal now ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

In other words, I believe the reader is better served with sources by respected authors (with Wikipedia biography background), than additionally such a kafkaesque one sentence (almost nonsense) by no-name authors. More tomorrow, - I try not to work on Sundays, but understand that you are busy during the week. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:03, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

ps: I am a proud co-author of Franz Kafka ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Today's main page offers a Bach Cantata 299 years old ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

For curiosity, I checked its source reviews that you can easily find in the article history, one by Jimfbleak (2018), one by Nikkimaria and one by Aza24 (both 2022). A peer review with open questions including sourcing is open for BWV 110. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia events in Seattle (resending as 1st attempt had a bad timestamp and was archived)

In the Seattle area? There are several events occurring this week and over the next three months that may interest you. Wikidata's 13th Birthday Celebration on Saturday, November 1 at the Capitol Hill Branch Library. Please sign up here! This is a notification, not an endorsement: Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, will speak about his book The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last on Thursday, 10/30. Details are here at Town Hall Seattle's website. We will have meetups on these Tuesdays at Little Oddfellows in the back of Elliott Bay Book Company on Capitol Hill: October 28, November 18, and December 16. We will celebrate Wikipedia Day, marking the 25th anniversary of Wikipedia's debut, on Saturday, January 17. Details TBA.

05:28, 27 October 2025 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Discussions at Talk:Peanuts § GA/FA? and Talk:Charles M. Schulz § GA/FA plans

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Peanuts § GA/FA?. There's also a discussion at Talk:Charles M. Schulz § GA/FA plans, if you're also interested. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:33, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard § Houston Chronicle source for Emily Neves's birth date or birth year

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard § Houston Chronicle source for Emily Neves's birth date or birth year. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, TechnoSquirrel69. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

Editing from a temporary account

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

How to enable IP Reveal

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

WikiCup 2025 November newsletter

The 2025 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,604 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,075 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Arconning (submissions) with 860 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. History6042 (submissions) with 804 tournament points
5. Sammi Brie (submissions) with 635 tournament points
6. TheDoctorWho (submissions) with 386 tournament points
7. AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 373 tournament points
8. Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 362 tournament points

Our high scorers in the final round were:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,035 round points, mostly from 19 good articles and 21 did you know articles about athletes
• vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) with 819 round points, mostly from 13 good articles and 11 did you know articles about a wide range of topics from abortion topics to African cities
• TheNuggeteer (submissions) with 508 round points from 9 good articles, 4 good topic articles and 6 did you know articles mainly about Philippines topics, along with 19 good article reviews

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 2 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 106 good articles, 5 good topic articles, 178 article reviews, 76 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field during the competition.

• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, with 12 featured articles total, and the featured topic prize, with 9 featured topic articles in total
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize, with 10 featured lists total
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, submitting the only featured picture in the entire contest during round 3
• History6042 (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize, with 127 featured content reviews. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize, with 100 good articles total, and the DYK prize, with 147 did you know articles in total. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
• TheDoctorWho (submissions) wins the good topic prize, with 16 good topic entries in total
• Arconning (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, with 68 good article reviews in total

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• Sammi Brie (submissions), with 27 good articles in round 3, and 45 good article reviews in round 1
• Tails Wx (submissions), with 10 in the news articles in round 3

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 2026 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

WCNA

Hey! It was great meeting you at WCNA. Let me know if you want to chat about organizing user groups or anything else! Luiysia (talk) 18:24, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@Luiysia: Thanks for your message; it was lovely meeting you as well! I'll definitely reach out if I have questions about meetup things. And, of course, feel free to keep pinging me whenever you'd like a mass message sent out — it's always great to see editors getting together around the world. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:41, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Pinging

Thanks for the heads up. What to dO!!! I am unsure on how to fix my mistake. What is the correct template and also is it necessary for me to sign to enact the pings? Can I go back and just change the template? Buster Seven Talk (UTC)

Hey Buster7! Looks like you already fixed the issue (you used a compatible template and re-signed everything, which should have sent the notifications out). There's also this help page that explains it in more detail, which might be useful for future reference. Thanks, as always, for all the work you do at WikiProject Editor Retention! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:14, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Emily Neves § B-class/GA-class efforts

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Emily Neves § B-class/GA-class efforts. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

How's it going, Sjones23? Thanks for your message; I'll be a little busy off-wiki for the next while, so I unfortunately don't think I have the time to dedicate to a review at the moment. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:54, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

All's good on my end. You can always participate on the article's talk page to help out if and whenever you feel like it. There's absolutely no rush. Best wishes, sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:56, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

That's kind of you, Rafaelthegreat, thank you. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:55, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi. The maintenance templates are not what I would choose to do, that's not my style but a lot of people tag. As an opinion, re: the patrolling of topics, I see the Lynn book as notable by authorship alone, an important figure in 20th century music who was also a leader, writing about her close friendship with someone who I think you'll recognize is revered in American popular music. I didn't want to write with the prospect of any given day on this site, someone can point to "notability guidelines" that would seem to deny those facts. I still am wondering what you mean by "NPP people", so that is my only question currently. Sswonk (talk) 22:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled § User:Sswonk

Hey Sswonk, tagging is fairly standard practice for me when I notice things in articles in need of attention — again, this isn't an attempt to degrade your work, it simply lets other editors know what they can do to improve the article. I understand you might disagree with the expectations of the notability guidelines, but being familiar with them is simply the reality of creating articles on Wikipedia today, and one of the first things an administrator is going to look for when deciding on granting autopatrolled. On the topic of Lynn's book, it's important to remember that notability is not inherited. The book needs to establish its notability independently, which in this case would be passing these criteria, and I didn't think any of them had been passed for Me & Patsy Kickin' Up Dust (no, not criterion 5 either). And by "NPP people", I believe Sohom was referring to the participants of the new pages patrol project. Let me know if you have any other questions. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Right, actually the acronym NPP did come to me as "new pages patrol" after thinking about it. Loretta Lynn was a feminist leader and a brilliant songwriter. She worked against the very problem of sexual bias toward satisfying men, the gravity of centuries of patriarchy, that plagues Wikipedia. She is dead, Patsy Cline is dead, and still here in 2025 their words and opinions struggle against bias towards topics that are not the usual grist of universities and publishing houses. The blanket assumption that something not written on a site that is tied to a corporation or institution can be tagged "self-published" fits with the rise of AI and ultimately seems anti-human. Sswonk (talk) 16:02, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia does not exist to right great wrongs. I perfectly understand the desire to celebrate feminist stories, but we need to do it in a way that aligns with the project's other principles — more specifically, that Wikipedia is fundamentally reliant on the reliable sources we base it on. There's a lot of room within our policies and guidelines to counter systemic bias, but we don't take it any further than they allow. The necessary evil in that system is that the encyclopedia inherits the biases or gaps in knowledge that exist in the world around us. Wikipedia cannot fix those issues on its own, nor would it be its place to do so. I must admit I'm not following how AI comes into this. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:04, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I didn't volunteer to be the student here. Yet, "Again, Wikipedia does not exist to right great wrongs" is what Yoda insists we all bow our heads too. You are ridiculous, and I really don't want to have anything to do with you or editors like you if I had my choice. Anonymous, supercilious, pathetic. Take advice: stop donning the crown. To me your "policy" is to deface articles and embarrass other editors for kicks. You enjoy typing in a voice that you aren't justified in using. If you learn anything from me, someone who doesn't hide behind a fake name, it'll be to read a book before you dismiss everything about it. Sswonk (talk) 14:55, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

@Sswonk: I'm sorry that's the attitude you decided to take to this conversation, because I genuinely feel you've been doing good writing work, and because I'm not sure what you think you're going to accomplish by lashing out at me. There are so many things wrong with that message that I'm not going to respond to it. I will say, however, that regardless of what you think of me or the notability guideline, following the civility policy is not optional unless you'd like to find another hobby that brings you more happiness. Have a good one. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:45, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Using anti-vandalism rollback over contents dispute

The dispute at Next Adventure boils down to contents dispute. It appears that you used anti-vandalism rollback Special:Diff/1318242969 here, which marked as minor edit. This isn't appropriate. Graywalls (talk) 20:43, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Graywalls: The guideline outlining the use of rollback only prohibits a "no-summary rollback" ("MediaWiki rollback") during a content dispute, and mentions you can use scripts to get around this issue. I use RedWarn, which can insert custom edit summaries as I did in the diff you linked, functionally the same as using undo. Let me know if you have any questions! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:42, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Disagree that what you did constitutes "minor" edit. Graywalls (talk) 02:23, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I'd forgotten that rollback marks edits as minor. I would avoid doing that if I could, but it's not within my control, as it's a behavior set by the rollback software. I think the concern the community has with rollback is primarily the lack of edit summaries, not the small m in the page history, which I wouldn't consider as significant of an issue. If you feel strongly about this, though, I'm sure someone's made a ticket on Phabricator about this before, where you can communicate with the software engineers directly. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:22, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

In appreciation

		The Reviewers Award
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:56, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch, Gog! I'm glad it's been helpful. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:49, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2025

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

Administrator changes

Toadspike

• Elahrairah
• Juliancolton
• Magnus Manske

CheckUser changes

asilvering

Guideline and policy news

• The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
• Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

• You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
  • Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for taking the time to comment on the Featured Article nomination for Batman Returns Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

No problem, Darkwarriorblake, drive-by comments about formatting are my passion. Congratulations on the new bronze star! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:57, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Regarding Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Biography

Hello. If you are interested, can you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Need some help on the Biography task force's anime credits when you have the time? Thanks, sjones23 (talk - contributions) 11:23, 6 November 2025 (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) 12:24, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you again! It's an honor to be part of the club. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:47, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

why did you revert the best source?

on the jacob collier page yesterday, you reverted my reference link to the official list of nominations to a bloody news article. is that a "better source"? imo, i think not -- patently. straight from the horse's mouth, and that article will probably be deleted within a year or two, whereas the link to nominees of the GRAMMYs never die (at least according to past precedent spanning 3+ decades). cheers. Frutiger75 (talk) 08:13, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hey there. You may want to look at WP:RS and WP:V. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:04, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey Frutiger75, welcome to Wikipedia! I assume you were the person previously editing with this temporary account? I replaced the source you added primarily because I couldn't tell where that information was coming from (the URL bigcontent.io doesn't tell me much). I thought a link directly to the Grammys' website worked better, and like sjones23 said, is more obviously a reliable source. If the link ever goes down, it can be saved with an archive link or by citing one of the magazines that print the list of nominees instead. Let me know if you have any questions! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:35, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Macho

Interesting race condition. The edit conflict detection mechanism works if both users are trying to edit the article. But if two editors are doing different things to the article, they sometimes both go through, and that is what happened. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

As a retired IT engineer, I call them by their technical name of race conditions, and remember testing a few varieties of race conditions. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Interesting indeed! I wonder if it would be worth proposing some kind of conflict-warning functionality for the move page on Phabricator. That wouldn't be the only time I've heard of people getting confused by that page — I know of experienced editors who have unintentionally moved dozens of pages with a single click (the "move subpages" box is checked by default if you have the technical permission) or regularly forget to go down the drop-down list and move things into the wrong namespace. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Merging defunct WikiProjects

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Merging defunct WikiProjects. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 12:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Promotion of The Snow Queen (Kernaghan novel)

Congratulations, TechnoSquirrel69! The article you nominated, The Snow Queen (Kernaghan novel), 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) 00:06, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Woohoo!!! A huge thanks to everyone who reviewed the article at FAC — BorgQueen, Gog the Mild, Jo-Jo Eumerus, Nikkimaria, RoySmith, Vacant0, Z. Patterson and especially LEvalyn and Rollinginhisgrave — all of your comments took the article to a much higher quality than before, but also undoubtedly made me a better editor in the process. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:37, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations! Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Great work TS. If/when you have the time/inclination, I'd love to hear what you took from the process of getting an article to FA. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 04:26, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

For sure! One of my goals for this nomination was to learn more about the procedure of FAC itself — figuring out how to attract reviewers, how to understand and address their concerns, and the general timeline of things. Of course, my main learnings were related to standards for the article content, and it's obvious that FAC has higher expectations than GAN (which I'm slightly more familiar with), but I wanted to know which specific areas I needed to improve in. Among various other things, it turns out I had a lot to learn about American public domain law, which Nikkimaria helpfully guided me through (I also chatted with Jmabel about it a bit while at WikiConference North America). You've mentioned in your GAN reviews for this article and Miyazakiworld that the organization of ideas could be better, and I recognized that and asked for feedback on the problematic section in the peer review. You might be interested in this highlighting scheme I used to organize my thoughts when restructuring that section for LEvalyn's review:

I also feel that all of the prose reviews, yours included, gave me better sense of how to write engaging text within the boundaries of Wikipedia's very specific style. It's easy to fall in the trap of writing stuff that conforms with the MOS but ultimately does not keep a reader interested; I wouldn't call myself an expert at fixing that yet, but I'm improving. All of these are skills I can apply to future FACs I'm planning, and in that sense this article has served me very well, since I have some ideas brewing for more nominations in the next few months. Thanks for asking, and for giving me an excuse to journal a bit about the experience! :) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:14, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for writing this up TS, your highlighting seems a smart way to organize. I get an overwhelming sense of the similarity of the roads we are travelling on — being dragged through FA's image copyright requirements made me much more attentive in GA reviews (as you may remember from Miyazakiworld), and I have moved away from seeing article writing as primarily trying to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject, toward trying to explain the subject as clearly as can be mustered, which sounds similar to what you are describing. I do think that you naturally write engaging prose, so I believe some of what you write above is overstatement. Ping me into any of those noms that follow. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 08:58, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, and likewise for any articles you're planning on! I only realized that you were working on White chocolate after it had already been promoted, but I would love to have the pleasure of reviewing your work sometime. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations. Z. Patterson (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Four Award

I am pretty sure that you are now able to claim the Four Award as this article has been created by you, was featured on the Main Page as DYK, and was promoted to GA and FA status. You should check it out. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

@Vacant0: Way ahead of you! ;) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:53, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for your appreciation and motivation. It means a lot. MovieLoverFan (talk) 04:55, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

No problem, MovieLoverFan — thanks for the thanks for the thanks! Keep up the good work. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:54, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Hiiiii squirrelly squirrel

	Here squirrel
	heeeeerreee squrrely squirrely squirrely *click click click* hiiii buddy it's okay, you can take it, i won't hurt you i promisr heeeeerrrreee squirrelll hiiiii squirrely... Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

"Wait, that isn't a real nut... Two-dimensional images on my talk page can't provide sustenance! Run away!!!" —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:05, 11 November 2025 (UTC) (Edited. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:59, 14 November 2025 (UTC))

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the 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 site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Articles for Creation backlog drive

Hello TechnoSquirrel69:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in December!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than half a month of outstanding reviews from the current 2+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 December 2025 through 31 December 2025.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 3000 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:07, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

November music

story · music · places

Today I remember a singer who impressed me on stage. - Repeating: you are invited to the peer review after FAC, - In a poll, you could simply mark yes or no. It's an experiment. The piece has its 300th anniversary on Christmas Day, and should be as good as possible by then (sorry for some repetition). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:40, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey Gerda, I appreciate the invite, but as I've mentioned I don't have the capacity at the moment nor the interest to take on yet another review of this article. I think I've said all I have to say, and it looks like you're getting some good feedback from other editors! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:40, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I do get good feedback, and like to hear you saying the same. - I remember Brian Boulton (and others) asking in source review "what makes xyz a reliable reference?", and that trained me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Waking up: congratulations to the Snow Queen! I always liked that the girl has my name ;) - I could help you with WP:TFAR, or do you want to do it yourself? Would you agree that anytime soon would be better than some specific date? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the offer! I've saved a spot for next May, which I thought would be the most appropriate date. If I have any questions about the nomination then, I'll be sure to reach out. :) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:22, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the saving. I saw "May" without a day, so thought we had no specific date, - always learning. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:38, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I have three biographies on the main page today, miss a fourth one, nominated a fifth, that means little time for other matters. My places now include La Scala, - see music, Verdi three times, and twice in my story! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:11, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for support in November! - On St. Cecilia's Day - patron saint of music - I remember a composition by Benjamin Britten, and have a woman on the main page who illustrated songs, with a sense of humour. My places take you to Milan, my first visit to La Scala, and music features our latest choral Abendlob, with English music. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:12, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

I keep trying to get my Christmas present ready: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Unser Mund sei voll Lachens, BWV 110/archive2. If you have the time, please check again after I added things and sources, and rephrased for flow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:45, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Turkey

Buster7 has given you a turkey! Turkeys promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving! Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 18:58, 27 November 2025 (UTC) Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{subst:Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks a bunch, Buster7! Hope you're having a great Thanksgiving as well. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:59, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

The Republic Newspaper Office

I saw you pinged me here, but in the absence of a suitable template talk page, I'll respond here instead. Seems like the page was moved from "The Republic office" in 2019; the official National Register listing lists it under the name "The Republic", so maybe it should be moved back to "The Republic office". – Epicgenius (talk) 16:25, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey Epicgenius! I had only asked out of curiosity; you're probably the best suited to judge what the common name of the place is. If you'd like to move it back, feel free to adjust the hook to reflect the change. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:54, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69, thanks for the response, and fair enough. I'm not going to move the page just yet, but I might do it in the future. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

November 2025

Hi, TechnoSquirrel69. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 01:10, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey ~2025-31245-28, thanks for the note, and for catching my error for the second time in two months! Egg on my face; for some reason I keep thinking that CSD G14 applies to pages with one linked article. I'll send Atsushi Kobayashi to AfD instead. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:21, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

WP:PROD is more common, but your call. Also, one extra tag to remove per month is a drop in the ocean I would not worry yourself too much about it. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 01:22, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate that — keep up the good work. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:25, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on The Snow Queen (Kernaghan novel). Staraction (talk | contribs) 02:09, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch, Staraction! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

The Snow Queen (Kernaghan novel) scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 14 January 2026. 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/January 2026, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/January 2026. Please keep an eye on that page, as notifications of copy edits to or queries about the draft blurb may be left there by those who assist the coordinators by reviewing the blurbs. 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! SchroCat (talk) 10:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey SchroCat, thanks for scheduling this! I was thinking of nominating this in May as that was when the book was published. It's not a huge deal if it runs at another time, but is there a need for the coordinators to run it earlier? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:13, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi TechnoSquirrel69, There's no need for it to be run at any particular time (even on the publication date!) I went with it as it's more likely to be snowy for people in December than in May, so it seemed appropriately seasonal. If you're particularly married to having it in May, I can always swap it out, but a publication date isn't a particularly notable event for most people. - SchroCat (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

I like the seasonal snowy aspect, didn't think of it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:39, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of it either! Like I said, I'm not opposed to it running at any time during the year, and your explanation makes sense. Thanks for taking care of the blurb and queuing it! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:16, 3 December 2025 (UTC)