User talk:Amakuru

Archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36

To keep discussions together, I've adopted the use of the {{ping}} template, and will reply here if you leave me a message. By using the ping, this ensures a notification will appear for you when I reply to your message. If I make a comment on your talk page, I will likely watch the page for replies, but please do consider using {{ping}} as well. If you do leave a comment here in response, I will respond here rather than returning to your talk page.

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hey there, I think we both tried to do the same round-robin page move at the same time. See S. M. Marikkar. Should I fix it, or will you? Toadspike [Talk] 17:51, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

tldr; the article now redirects to what was supposed to be the new title. The new title is a redirect to itself. So the article has been vaporized and we have two nonsensical redirects. Sorry for this mess. Toadspike [Talk] 17:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toadspike: ooh good grief, that's a silly mix-up, apologies for my part in that - we crashed right into each other! I think it's because I was busy checking the target history while you were moving the page, then I ended up moving the redirect right over the top of the article. HOpefully all sorted now anyway. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for cleaning up the mess! I knew my first round-robin move was gonna go wrong somehow... Toadspike [Talk] 18:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toadspike: He he, not to worry. I didn't realise that was your first one! I'm sure they'll go smoothly in the future, you did the right process anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:11, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you moving pages back that I had moved as per WP:CONSISTENT? The lists of international trips by presidents I moved were all in line with naming convention. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 03:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hemant Dabral: what naming convention is that? The moves you had made did not look uncontroversial to me - particularly changing the commonly used term "state visit" to be "international trip" doesn't seem in line with our usual naming conventions. Please start a WP:RM discussion if you wish to proceed with those moves. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are more articles titled "international trips", it has more search probability and to keep all lists in consistency this title should be used. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 11:53, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Hemant Dabral: clearly we need to iron out the nomenclature here, but that should be done through an RM if you wish to pursue it. If some articles have a bad title the solution isn't to move even more of them to have a bad title. "International trips" doesn't sound like encyclopedic tone, and also would potentially include holidays and suchlike which I don't think is the intention. "International visits" or "state visits" would be preferable.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not some articles that have the title "international trips", all of them are tilted that way except the one related to Nicola Sturgeon. And six others titled "state visit". There are about 100 articles titled "international presidential trips" and about 60 articles titled "international prime ministerial trips". Are we going to move all these back to "visits" or is it more practical to move these seven articles to "trips"? That's the reason I made the move, otherwise I wouldn't have done that. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 15:36, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hemant Dabral: I understand what you're saying, but you'd still need to explain to me why the word "trip" is the best choice here. I'm not here to implement the most "practical" solution, I'm here to build an encyclopedia which is the best it can be for our readers, and that means using the correct names for things according to our article titling policy. That may also mean moving other titles to be better as well. Consistency is a good aim to have if the thing you're making consistent is a good thing, but otherwise it isn't. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:46, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Amakuru. Do you think Lipid bilayer would be a good fit for File:Phospholipids aqueous solution structures.svg? Seems like it covers every structure and has several mentions of the bilayer (ofc), liposomes, and of micelles. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Cowboygilbert:... I'm actually slightly puzzled about this, because I literally started writing a POTD entry using that very article shortly before I filed the pic as unused, but then backed out because I thought the article Lipid bilayer was only covering one of the three things in the pic (since the bottom part of the diagram is explicitly labelled as "bilayer sheet". But you're absolutely right - it does cover the micelles and liposomes too, not sure how I missed that, and it's a GA too so a perfect choice for a POTD blurb. Feel free to revive it now if you like, otherwise I will do so in the next few days. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 16:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru, All good, . I'll probably construct something but I have been focusing mainly on media for my last couple schedules. Thank you! Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

thank you! - greetings from a trip --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gerda Arendt, I was also away over the weekend, nowhere very exciting though, just New Addington and walks in the surrounding countryside  — Amakuru (talk) 17:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing! - I uploaded pics of a trip that was a 10-day celebration of a 16 November event, but the day was also when a dear friend died. We sang Hevenu shalom aleichem at his funeral yesterday, and it was good. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Oo I think I sang that song at one point in my youth. Very sorry to hear about the loss of your friend, may they rest in peace. I took part in a performance of Fauré's Requiem yesterday with my orchestra, alongside a local choir. Very lovely and moving music I sang tenor in it many years ago. Sadly my uncle is nearing the end of his life and we may sing some of that Requiem at his funeral.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I sang alto in the Fauré years ago. Went out with my friend now widow and others, to the service pictured and food - a good time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! For a possible move review, I want to ask about the closing of the RM on "Talk:Białystok Municipal Stadium" (I have no experience with move reviews yet, so I started to write the same thing in the new RM on that page).

I disagree with your claim that there is a consensus that is a commonly used name in English. Apart from the proposer, no one has claimed this – one supporter just said that is it more recognisable thant the current name, and one supporter argumented that English name is a standard for stadiums (which I refuted). No one has presented evidence for the statement that the suggested name is the most common or most understandable name. I suggested other names for the page that meet the supporter's request for the move, yet the page was moved to the name suggested by the original proposer. I think closing the discussion was premature and reasoning inaccurate.

I don't know if a possible move review is necessary (the new RM could serve its purpose), but one of the discussants is asking for a speedy close and asks me to deal with it through move review. FromCzech (talk) 09:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @FromCzech: and thanks for your query. Procedurally, talking to me first and then seeking a move review is the right approach. It's rarely appropriate to start a brand new RM immediately after the previous one closed with consensus, unless the first close was something like WP:NOGOODOPTIONS and editors want to explore in more depth between two possible names that weren't the original status quo. Otherwise, the correct course is to review or reopen the original discussion.

In this case the consensus appeared clear and I had closed it that way, there isn't really scope for a brand new RM, so approaching me rather than starting a new RM was the way forward. Since you've now done that, I am prepared to relist the discussion for a further week, since it does seem like there's more to dicuss and we want a settled consensus rather than something disputed. I'll reopen the discussion and close your new one now. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for quick response! FromCzech (talk) 11:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

106.222.202.189 (talk) 12:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amakuru, I kindly ask you to revisit the discussion on the title of Białystok Municipal Stadium. You previously moved the article under this name, recognizing it as the most appropriate and consistent with Wikipedia's conventions. However, after vacating that decision and relisting, I have provided additional reasoning addressing misconceptions and counterarguments raised by FromCzech. To summarize: "Stadion Miejski" is not a proper noun but a generic, descriptive term meaning "Municipal Stadium." This naming convention is used generically across Poland and does not denote uniqueness, as seen in other cities like Kraków or Poznań. Translating it into English ensures clarity for a global audience and aligns with established practices, as evidenced by stadiums like "Kazimierz Górski Stadium" and "Wrocław Stadium." Retaining the Polish term would obscure the meaning and set a problematic precedent for similar descriptive names. Examples from other countries further support translating generic terms for accessibility and consistency. The "Chorten Arena" sponsorship name remains secondary and is not a viable contender for the primary title. Given the weight of these arguments and prior support for the move, I hope you will reach a final decision to restore the English title, Białystok Municipal Stadium, maintaining the same rationale that initially justified your move. Thank you for considering this request. Paradygmaty (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to bring to your attention my comment on the discussion page regarding the proposed move. A key point is that even the official website of the stadium refers to it in English as "Municipal Stadium", not "Chorten Arena." You can see this directly here: Municipal Stadium in Białystok. I believe this evidence strongly supports the move to "Białystok Municipal Stadium" as the more accurate and neutral title. Paradygmaty (talk) 09:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amakuru, I added some curated summaries of the cities' histories to the two Old City DYKs. I quite enjoyed writing them. Did they address your comments adequately? Onceinawhile (talk) 10:06, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amakuru, please could you have a quick look before it is timed out? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You made the same mistake twice here and here. Do not repeat that. Taivorist (talk) 19:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Amakuru. Musk's suit against Altman/OpenAI/others has gotten continued coverage since the deletion discussion in early March: Bloomberg, The Guardian. It was detailed in a major piece on Musk in the Wall Street Journal yesterday [1]. I think the case easily meets GNG now. Would it be possible for you to put it back into article space? You are welcome to nominate it for deletion if you don't think it meets notability guidelines. Thriley (talk) 13:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message about this: Template:POTD/2025-06-23. Do you need a squib? It could be:

• Geraldine Ulmar was an American singer and actress, best known for her performances in soprano roles of the Savoy operas with the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company. In 1879, she made her debut as Josephine in Gilbert and Sullivan's H.M.S. Pinafore in Boston and soon joined the Boston Ideal Opera Company, where she remained as leading soprano for six years. Ulmar next was hired to play Yum-Yum in the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company's first American production of The Mikado, at the Fifth Avenue Theatre in New York, from 1885 to 1886. After this she played more Gilbert and Sullivan roles in New York, Germany and England. In London, she originated the leading roles of Elsie Maynard in The Yeomen of the Guard (1888), and Gianetta in The Gondoliers (1889) before leaving D'Oyly Carte in 1890. She remained in London to play leading roles in other works, such as O Mimosa San in The Geisha. She retired from the stage in 1904 and taught singing. She was married for a time to composer Ivan Caryll. The photo shows Ulmar as Yum-Yum in New York in 1886.

Does it need to be cut? If so, by how much? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Ahecht
• DoubleGrazing
• Dr vulpes
• FOARP
• Peaceray
• Queen of Hearts
• Rsjaffe
• SD0001
• SilverLocust
• Sohom Datta
• ThadeusOfNazereth
• Voorts

• Ajpolino
• Fathoms Below
• Pppery
• Tamzin
• Worm That Turned

• Aervanath
• Christopher Sundita
• Dank
• Dennis Brown
• Dragons flight
• Fastily
• Graham87
• JaGa
• Kbh3rd
• Marine 69-71
• Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington
• Yamamoto Ichiro

Interface administrator changes

• SD0001
• Sohom Datta

Pppery

CheckUser changes

• Spicy
• TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.

Technical news

• Technical volunteers can now register for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon, which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. Application for travel and accommodation scholarships is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Yasuke (formerly titled Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has been closed.
• An arbitration case titled Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.

---

story · music · places

Today's story comes from a DYK about a concert that fascinated me, and you can listen! For my taste, the hook has too little music - I miss the unusual scoring and the specific dedication - but it comes instead with a name good for viewcount. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today: listen to Sequenza XIV. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Nice listening, it's been a busy week so glad to have a bit of fun of relaxation! Wishing you a good Sunday  — Amakuru (talk) 23:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, - we sang in choirs today. - On the Main page Jean Sibelius on his birthday. Listening to Beethoven's Fifth from the opening of Notre-Dame de Paris concert. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen today to the (new) Perplexities after Escher --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of this! Will listen again to the fifth from Notre Dame, it's a definite favourite, we played it a few years ago.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:28, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:03, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I come to fix the cellist's name, with a 10-years-old DYK and new pics - look for red birds --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today it's another great woman, soprano Sigrid Kehl, and I found a 1963 Christmas Oratorio detail. 10 years earlier than that cycle, Bach wrote seven cantatas for the 1724 season, based on seven songs, - my focus this year. Expect three stories for the three days they celebrated in Leipzig ;) - Enjoy the season! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:37, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you! We had a requiem mass for one of my relatives yesterday, who sadly passed away recently, with some lovely music including Ave Maria (Schubert). Glad to hear the update regarding Kehl and the cantatas. Wishing you and yours a fantastic Christmas season ahead.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sharing, also the sad news. As it happens, today is the birthday of my friend, the widow of Ury who died, who celebrates with mother, daughter, son-in-law and granddaughter. Believe it or not, but that Ave verum was her choice of a song for me (which is why I list it among the December songs on my talk.) I just updated what we'll perform tonight, - the choral pieces are those with a composer (besides the postlude). Enjoy! - Don't miss listening to the yt in my story. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My first Christmas story is about Gelobet seist du, Jesu Christ, BWV 91, 300 years today, and its song, 500 years old. Enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:30, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "restore status quo name WP:RMUM"? It's move after the United States article. You wouldn't use FR instead of France or IT instead of Italy etc. The United States are also a country with own name. Eurohunter (talk) 21:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eurohunter: hello and thanks for your note. Well, firstly the text you quote above is self-explanatory - you did a WP:BOLD move on the page and I reverted you remove as per the procedure outlined at WP:RMUM. Any potentially controversial move is subject to being reverted and it's then up to you and others to start a formal requested move discussion if you wish to proceed. Secondly, on the merits of the move itself, using "US" (or sometimes "U.S.") as a shorthand for the United States is vastly more common than using "FR" or "IT" would be. There are numerous examples across the project such as US Senate career of Barack Obama, US missile defense system in Asia-Pacific Region, U.S. state etc. where it makes the title more concise to shorten it. The title "Timeline of the United States intervention in the Syrian civil war" is already very long and it seems helpful for readers to make it shorter where we can by using the very well-known abbreviation. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Amakuru. Could you take a look at File:Giuseppe Arcimboldo - Four Seasons in One Head - Google Art Project.jpg and tell me if it's fine to schedule it? One of the articles that it is in, Synesthesia in art, contained parenthetical referencing which I don't know if that makes it main page material or not and the artist page is just littered with cns and tags. Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 21:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Cowboygilbert: thanks for the query, and I've got to be honest - I'm not really sure why this work doesn't have a page of its own... it doesn't really seem like either of the two articles where it currently appears really do it much justice in terms of covering any sort of detail on it, and it is surely a notable work of art in its own right (it's somewhat similar to The Four Seasons (Arcimboldo) but later and combining all seasons into one; it's also covered in sources such as [2][3][4] and doubtless others so shouldn't be too hard to construct something. Personally, given the state of the two other articles - one using deprecated parenthetical referencing and the other very badly sourced, I'd recommend holding off until such time as we can get an article together. But I suppose if you can construct something with what we've got and it's relevant to the painting and cited then I wouldn't entirely object. On another note, I'm always on the look out for things we can put up as little "jokes" on April Fools' Day (see Template:POTD/2025-04-01 for next year, and Template:POTD/2019-04-01 for a particular favourite of mine) so it we could maybe get it up to scratch by 1 April 2026 and then construct a blurb that's a little jokey while also describing the work accurately, that might be a nice date to use . Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 21:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't usually create articles that aren't related to pop culture lol. I'll toss it in /Unused and say that {{sources exist}} and it could be a separate article. I'll try to look out for an April Fools image though! Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 22:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did find the newly promoted FP and it might be perfect for April Fools! File:Albert Einstein sticks his tongue.jpg Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 22:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert: ha ha, yes, go for it!  — Amakuru (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Stafford station has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 11 § Stafford station until a consensus is reached. J947 ‡ ^edits 02:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving the articles I requested. In biology a taxon may have more than one scientific name but an author is expected to choose a name and stick to it. WP:Fishes project has agreed to use Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes as the guide to the taxonomy, including specific names. This means that if the article title is a scientific name then it should be the "correct" name, i.e. that used by ECoF, so I don't see how the article titles policy is being circumvented. Nun galileus is used because the genus name on its own would need disambiguation. Quetzal1964 (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Quetzal1964: yeah, thanks for the note and as I said, I'll not oppose these and I can certainly see the advantage of using a consistent approach to naming. My main concern was with respect to the WP:COMMONNAME aspect of the titling policy. From a brief look around it did appear like Oxynoemacheilus galilaeus was being used by a lot more different sources than Nun galileus. Some may be out-of-date of course, in which case a WP:NAMECHANGES situation is in play; what I mean is that in general I'm wary of relying on one source while avoiding larger usage in others, but in this specialised case it may be justified, and the WikiProject discussion seems to suggest editors are happy with that approach. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then I would suggest proposing Priestess (religious honorific) for deletion. There's no point in redirecting priestess to priest and also having this article. I would, incidentally, have no problem with its deletion, but currently information is duplicated. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:59, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Necrothesp: I agree that there's little value in that page. It is very short and the content that's there could easily be merged and covered in Priest. Be that as it may, however, there's no justification for end-arounding the recent RFD discussion which concluded there was no consensus to change the redirect at Priestess. Cheers and happy Christmas.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of that RfD! However, I would respectfully point out that it appears to have been over a different issue. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maliner: many thanks, and very kind of you to send this to me. Wishing you and yours a joyful Christmas and a great 2025.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I received a notification this morning regarding an OTD issue related to the 1987 Forsyth County protests article that I wrote a while back. After looking through the edit logs for Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 24, the only conclusion I can come to is that I mixed up the dates, putting the event under December 24 instead of January 24. It was an unfortunate oversight on my part. As I'm not too experienced with OTD matters, I wasn't sure where to send this response, but I nonetheless wanted to apologize for any issues that may have caused with the process. Thanks, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 12:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JJonahJackalope: no worries at all, mistakes happen... I was only worried in case there was some actual event that took place on 24 December that I was missing. Thanks for your contributions to the project, and wishing you a happy festive season.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Amakuru, 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. Happy editing, Jerium (talk) 14:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Jerium (talk) 14:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Psssst, I'm not sure if you ever thought to update it, but all of the works under your football section which use "Final" in the title link to redirects. I probably notice this stuff more than others based on the CSS I use to indicate when pages are redirects, which displays them in green. Also, the GA link for King's Cross Thameslink station is also a redirect. Not at all a big deal! But I personally like to bypass redirects when showing off my work and figured, hey, how often do people click their promoted content from their own user page? Hey man im josh (talk) 18:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh: ooh thanks, that's a good point. As you've guessed I hadn't notified this and can barely remember what's on the user page anyway. I'm in the middle of things right now but will update it to lowercase when I get the chance. Or you can feel free if you want to do it! Cheers, and wishing you a great festive season.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure no problem, bypassed those redirects for you. Oh, and also, if you are interested in having redirects highlighted and italized like I am (which I recognize not everyone is), the relevant code is at my css page. I hope you have a wonderful holiday season as well! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]