User talk:Jevansen

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere

Archives

/Archive 1 (2007 - 2008) /Archive 2 (2009 - 2010) /Archive 3 (2011 - 2012) /Archive 4 (2013 - 2014) /Archive 5 (2015 - 2016) /Archive 6 (2016 - 2017) /Archive 7 (2018 - 2019) /Archive 8 (2019 - 2020) /Archive 9 (2021 - 2022) /Archive 10 (2023 - 2024)

Copying from "Category:English cricket biography, 1920s birth stubs" to "Category:20th-century English sportsmen" at first sight seems reasonable, but it can lead to some anomalies, in that those whose connection to cricket came solely from writing about it or commentating on it, but who never seriously played it or any other sport, can find themselves categorised as sportsmen. E.W. Padwick is an example. I'm wondering whether I should delete the category in those instances. JH (talk page) 08:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks JH. I hadn't considered this. The category wouldn't be appropriate for Padwick I agree. I've moved him to Category:20th-century English writers instead. Let me review the others. Should ideally be only players or coaches. Cheers. Jevansen (talk)

Thanks. JH (talk page) 09:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:21st-century Turkmenistan sportspeople indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:29, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Irish male lawn bowls players indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason why you are mass removing (examples here and here, but many more flooding my watchlist again) categories that @Ser Amantio di Nicolao: only mass added a few months ago? These mass category edits (from both of you) are becoming increasingly disruptive. GiantSnowman 21:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, per WP:Diffuse (as stated in my edit summary). I found Category:England men's amateur international footballers and added it as a sub to Category:20th-century English sportsmen. Jevansen (talk) 21:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are these edits even being made in the first place? GiantSnowman 21:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I populating categories? That should be self explanatory. Jevansen (talk) 21:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, why are these categories needed? But also, why are you doing it like this? Why can't a bot do it? GiantSnowman 21:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not familiar with bots. For this particular method (cat a lot), it's often of case of looking at short descriptions within categories .. nationality, birth year etc (with this script) and select any appropriate articles to populate. Jevansen (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this isn't a bot task per WP:BOTPCAT. Jevansen (talk) 21:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask again - why are these categories needed? Where is the consensus for them to even exist, let alone to be (disruptively) mass added/removed? GiantSnowman 15:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is consensus required for category creation or addition? We have the CfD process and that would seem the more appropriate venue for this discussion. All I know is that this category grouping, which I didn't start, has existed for over two years without an issue. Jevansen (talk) 20:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century English sportsmen was created in June 2024... GiantSnowman 10:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century sportsmen by nationality was created in 2023. Jevansen (talk) 10:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023 - so about 18 months ago, and not "for over two years". GiantSnowman 10:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someone grouped them together in 2023. We have Category:21st-century Indonesian sportspeople created July 2022. So yes, over two years ago. Jevansen (talk) 10:29, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jevansen! I see that you remove all categories of "21st-century ... sportswomen". I guess there must be a reason, which I don' know yet. I am eager to know it so that I don't use of it in the future. Would you please simply explain the reason? Thanks. CeeGee 10:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey CeeGee. Not sure what this relates to. Can you link me one of the articles in question. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 10:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please check as an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armisa_Ku%C4%8D&curid=48482100&diff=1266768223&oldid=1265902894 CeeGee 12:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CeeGee: see section above where I highlighted the same issues... GiantSnowman 15:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CeeGee. Armisa Kuč has a diffusing subcategory. Category:Montenegro women's international footballers (a team only active in the 21st-century). Jevansen (talk) 19:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you deem it appropriate it remove the category of 20th century Liechtenstein politicians from a vast majority of the applicable articles and replace it with the member of the Landtag categories? Almost all of these people had a political career outside of being a member of the Landtag, and I fail to see how suggesting otherwise by constraining the categorization is productive. Please undo this. TheBritinator (talk) 03:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This is standard for diffusing legislators. You need to add a non-diffusing template to the subcategory if you don't want this to apply. For most, their (political) notability would be as a member of the Landtag, aside from those who were ministers or head of government. I checked everyone in Category:Members of the Landtag of Liechtenstein (1932–1936) before answering you and each mentioned the Landtag in the intro. We can also populate Category:20th-century mayors and Category:20th-century heads of government (or ministers) to capture others. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 03:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most, but not all. It still restricts their categorization by suggesting that they didn't have a political career outside of the Landtag, especially for the mayors and government members. As it stands I don't think the category is in need of diffusion. Or if it does, it needs to be more thorough than that.TheBritinator (talk) 03:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added it back to the five PMs (as we'll hold off on populating Category:20th-century heads of government). You will need to add the template I mentioned to all of the Landtag subcats, otherwise anyone could perform this same action. Thanks. Jevansen (talk) 04:08, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I will assist in doing a more thorough diffusion soon. TheBritinator (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. You're the subject matter expert, so happy to leave it in your hands. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 04:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nels Van Patten is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nels Van Patten until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

4meter4 (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Suite1408, @Bearcat @Magiciandude@DanTheMusicMan2 @QuasyBoy @Ivebeenhacked 2600:4808:9C70:6A00:ECDF:71FB:62CE:2D8D (talk) 09:27, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dimadick @Adakiko @Aoi 2600:4808:9C70:6A00:ECDF:71FB:62CE:2D8D (talk) 09:28, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you organising a Zoom? Jevansen (talk) 09:50, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Clergy from Ballarat indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 00:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 5 § Category:Eponymous categories on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ User:LaundryPizza03. Christ ... not going near that one. Not even sure which one I'd have created. Credit to you for putting it all together lol. Jevansen (talk)

Hello! (Sherzodbek 2008-yil (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Dannel Malloy, Terry McAuliffe, Gavin Newsom, John B. Larson, Sabrina Salerno, Rubén Salazar Gómez, Mary Ann Esposito, Lidia Bastianich, Neil Gorsuch, Gregorio Rosa Chávez, Peter Neronha, Mike Scully, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Nellie Gorbea, Marty Walsh, Bill de Blasio, Billy Mays, Nathan Lane, John Roberts, Arne Duncan, Dilma Rousseff, Ed Markey, Marty Meehan, Bill Keating, Joe Kennedy III, Rosa DeLauro Lori Trahan, Maura Healey, Kim Driscoll, Jen Kiggans, Joe Crowley, Stephen F. Lynch, Robert P. Reed, and Claudia Fernández 209.140.48.22 (talk) 06:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AlsoWukai @Widr and @GoodDay209.140.48.22 (talk) 06:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maribel Guardia, Niurka Marcos, Susana Zabaleta, Amelia Vega, Edith Márquez, Karina, Maria Sorte, Lynda, María Isabel and Mariana Ochoa 209.140.48.22 (talk) 06:35, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jevansen @Magiciandude and @Dimadick 209.140.48.22 (talk) 06:36, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit to the article for Morton Gottlieb removed Category:People from Brooklyn as "diffused category removal", but didn't put him in any other category. As terrible as it is to have articles in a diffused category, the failure to spend the time to find (or create) the category where his article would properly belong means that this article is worse than it was before. Alansohn (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alan. I've checked the article. Morton has the diffusing Category:Erasmus Hall High School alumni. Given he has only seven cats, it was hardly Where's Wally. Maybe if you had spent the time reviewing the existing cats you wouldn't now look stupid? Jevansen (talk)

If you checked the article, there was an opportunity to place Gottlieb in an appropriate category, but that would have taken additional work and a tiny amount of actual thought. It's so pathetic that the lust for a higher edit count results in such sloppy work. Alansohn (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was there Alan? The only category you've added to his page since has been Category:Broadway theatre producers, a sub of People from NYC, rather than a diffusing category within People from Brooklyn. I worked through the Brooklyn category on several occasions during July 2023. If I remember correctly, it was vastly overpopulated with around 1,400 articles at the time. Gottlieb would have been one I was unable to find a more appropriate category for and this would still appear to be the case glancing at Category:People from Brooklyn by occupation, which isn't accommodating to Broadway producers. AGF? Jevansen (talk) 00:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it's Category:Erasmus Hall High School alumni, Category:Kent Place School alumni or this edit for Category:St. Anthony High School (New Jersey) alumni, one cannot assume that all students at a school necessarily live or come from the place where the school is located. Even a superficial look at the alumni in these schools would confirm that. These edits will be reverted and no further such edits should be made. Alansohn (talk) 12:33, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit to Category:Hackensack High School alumni is indicative of the problem. The school currently serves students from Rochelle Park and South Hackensack, and in the past has served residents of several other municipalities. It's not just that the information is in the article; This information is in the edit summary of the previous edit to the same category, which you should have read, but chose to ignore. There are dozens of articles where you arbitrarily decided to remove Category:People from Hackensack, New Jersey based on your erroneous assumption that all students of Hackensack High School are from Hackensack, New Jersey. You've created the same problem with Category:Tenafly High School alumni which still serves non-residents and even more so with Category:Dwight-Englewood School alumni, which is located in Englewood, New Jersey, but serves the greater area. Yes, some residents of Hackensack, Tenafly and Englewood attended the school in that municipality, but the careless assumption that all students at a school necessarily live or come from the place where the school is located is flat out wrong.

All of this information could have been readily discerned by reading the articles in question and could have been avoided by simply researching or asking, rather than merely assuming.

Please let me know your plan for addressing the errors that you have created. Alansohn (talk) 21:49, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Alan (with your title). Before each category edit, I checked each school article to confirm the school is and always has been located in the said location. I disregarded what area the school serves as this wasn't relevant to the reasoning behind the edits. Again, you seem to be having an issue with AGF. Instead of first inquiring, you jump straight to your assumption and make accusations. Eg "based on your erroneous assumption", eg above thread, eg your New Years Day rant).

These "from" categories have always been ambiguous and open to interpretation as I see it. Is it where you were born? Where you grew up? Where you live now? Where you spent a period of your life? (work or school). An example is the cat you added yesterday, Category:Broadway theatre producers, which is as already mentioned a subcategory of People from NYC. A producer could of course live in Newark, but I'd presume the logic is that they spend a vast period of time in the Big Apple regardless. We could of course have discussed this in the thread above, where you instead decided to insult rather than query the logic behind these very same categorisations.

I wasn't aware of the edit summary you mentioned on Category:Hackensack High School alumni. I am one of those editors that doesn't review an article or category's edit history before making a contribution. This is an expectation I wasn't aware of and would be curious to know where this is written in policy? Thanks for pointing it out though, as another editor adding the very same category highlights the ambiguous nature of this set of categories. Jevansen (talk) 23:52, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take Hackensack High School, where the first paragraph says that "Hackensack High School is a four-year comprehensive public high school located in Hackensack, in the U.S. state of New Jersey, operating as part of the Hackensack Public Schools. Hackensack High School serves students from the Bergen County, New Jersey, communities of Hackensack, South Hackensack (80 students in 2011–12), Rochelle Park (120 students)." Or, even worse, Columbia High School, where the first two sentences say "Columbia High School is a four-year comprehensive regional public high school in Maplewood, in Essex County, in the U.S. state of New Jersey. It serves students in ninth through twelfth grades, as the lone secondary school of the South Orange-Maplewood School District, which includes Maplewood and neighboring South Orange."

Or take Newark Academy, which is located in Livingston, New Jersey, but started out in Newark, New Jersey.

Every single one of the schools I have pointed to currently or in the past had students from outside of the municipality attend the school.

You don't have to have read the edit history of the category All you had to do was to read the articles in question. There is no possible way that you could have done what you claimed to have done and correctly read the articles - "Before each category edit, I checked each school article to confirm the school is and always has been located in the said location. I disregarded what area the school serves as this wasn't relevant to the reasoning behind the edits."

You are obligated to take responsibility for all edits made using automated tools. All I ask is that you fix the problem you've created and to refrain from creating further problems by exercising far greater caution before you make such edits. Alansohn (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

... and my argument Alan is that if you attended Hackensack High School, located in Hackensack, you are a person from Hackensack, having spent a large period of your childhood in said place. So there's no "problem" or errors to fix. This is a content dispute. We clearly disagree on how the category is defined. Jevansen (talk) 01:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously?!?!?! If someone lives in Rochelle Park and attends Hackensack High School for a few hours a day from ages 14 to 18 they are now from Hackensack? Can you point to any consensus to pack this up? You've made millions upon millions of edits, surely you have some actual evidence to back up your position? Alansohn (talk) 01:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ User:Alansohn. Depending on your definition, yes. In that instance, both "People from Rochelle Park" and "People from Hackensack" could reasonably be added. As I said, it's open to interpretation. I'm not aware of official documentation around these categories one way or another. The cat description of Category:People from Teaneck, New Jersey for example states the inclusion of people "associated with" Teaneck, not just residents. Jevansen (talk) 01:32, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And you are therefore arguing that people who attend a college or university are from the place where it's located? All Yale University students are "People from New Haben, Conecticut", all students at the University of Michigan are "People from Ann Arbor, Michigan" and all students at the University of Texas at Austin are "People from Austin, Texas"? Surely, if attending a high school for a few hours a day makes you from that place, attending a college or university would fit your same definition? can you point me to your consensus to support your bizarre claim? Alansohn (talk) 01:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. To me the categories are more about where you spent your formative years or adolescence. But again, that's purely my interpretation. Where is your consensus that the category only applies to the location a person sleeps at night? Jevansen (talk) 01:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you get this from? High school is formative, but not college or university? Someone is unambiguously from the place where you live. Can you point to anything that justifies mass removal of categories based on your capricious decision that spending time in a school at any point in your childhood makes you a resident of that place? Alansohn (talk) 02:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd define formative years as childhood (pre teen), but we're really splitting hairs here. There's nothing unambiguous about this. If someone lived three years of their teenage years in Passaic, are they from Passaic? How many years is the qualifier? Jevansen (talk) 02:53, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Alansohn. Your edits are off base. Somebody isn't from Foo just because they went to school there.Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:58, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

—Note: This editor was blatantly canvassed on their talkpage here

Jevansen, you are treading on extremely thin ice here, having demonstrated a pattern of policy violations.

1. You have violated WP:NPA in this edit, "Maybe if you had spent the time reviewing the existing cats you wouldn't now look stupid?".
2. You have violated WP:AGF by assuming that an editor who had edited the same set of categories and removed the same "People from FOO" categories in alumni categories could only be here because they are have been canvassed.
3. You are ignoring clear consensus that going to a school in and of itself does not make you from that place.
4. You have been making mass edits in violation of this consensus, knowing full well You must read and understand all relevant Wikipedia policies and abide by them when using this tool; failure to do so may result in you losing access to the tool or being blocked from editing.
   You have been asked to fix the consensus violations and have refused to do so. Per WP:BRD, you have been bold in asserting incongruously and without any evidence that attending a high school makes you from that place and your edits are being systematically reverted by multiple editors. Your task now is to find consensus to support your claims. You have made millions upon millions of edits and you have no claim of ignorance of Wikipedia policy. Alansohn (talk) 18:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. "It's so pathetic that the lust for a higher edit count results in such sloppy work" is certainly a personal attack if you want to play that game?
2. There's no assumption. You posted on their talk page because you knew they supported your view. "In November, you had made this edit to that same category, with the edit summary "Going to school somewhere doesn't make them from that place. Per consensus." This editor effectively undid your edit." ... is what you said.
3. & 4. I've asked you to show me evidence of this consensus and you haven't. Jevansen (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're so off base. I reverted[1] an edit of yours long before AlanSohn posted to my talk page.Lost in Quebec (talk) 23:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lost in Quebec: I stopped looking at notifications as the reverts tallied up .. happy to take your word on that. Regardless, it would appear Alan was also not aware of this when he canvassed you, given how the post was framed. But anyway ... I've added back the category for those alumni you linked, as well as others for which the addition of the diffusing category has been reverted. I still don't agree and have yet to see evidence of a past discussion about this (re consensus), but it's not worth arguing about further. Let me know if I missed anyone. Jevansen (talk) 04:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, In the past I've seen you've created a number of Super Rugby player lists. I've been looking to fill in the remaining gaps (mainly SA teams) but having worked on the Cheetahs list today, I haven't been able to find any player information prior to 2014. This means 1997 and 2006-2013 players are all missing. Did you have an accurate archive for players you used for this as all the SA sites sourced are all deadlinks now and Rugby Database has nothing. Thanks Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:44, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rugbyfan22. I did use Rugby Database for most of those lists (due to spamming efforts some years ago, the site was blacklisted and I couldn't add the citations). Unfortunately they don't cover RSA and I couldn't source a reliable list for any of their teams elsewhere. There's a sparsity of good online rugby stats sites as you'll know ... it's hard enough finding up to date stats for current international players since espnscrum went bust. You're best hope would be to put each club url through https://web.archive.org/ and look at earlier versions to see if they ever kept past player lists. This is how I was able to populate the pre Super Rugby era lists for NSW and Queensland. Jevansen (talk) 21:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, I'll take a look at the archives and see what I can do. I'll create from 2014 onwards and then try and add the missing gaps. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are sorting articles from People to Sportspeople sometimes. You're doing fine but I want to make sure you know something.

Sports executives, like general managers, owners, aren't sportspeople unless they were some form of athletes or on field personnel (Baseball or football managers, Umpires, etc). These persons are businesspeople. If you're unsure of what I'm saying, look at Category:Sports executives. It isn't subcategorized sportspeople.

The same applies to sports journalists. They can go in writers, mass media people, etc but not sportspeople unless they were some form of athlete or field personnel.

I haven't seen you do this but other editors have done this miscategorizing. If you come across it, please fix it. Lost in Quebec (talk) 11:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, thanks. Have been coming across a bit of this particularly with the US categories. Think I even saw a mascot once. I've move them to a more appropriate category next time I stumble on one. Less clear regarding the on field personnel. I would ordinarily include them, yet if we were to go by Category:People in sports, we have Category:Sports coaches and Category:Sportspeople separate from one another? Jevansen (talk) 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. On field personnel can be murky. There are quite a few sports coaches, usually from before World War II, who were never athletes. I have no problem with them in sportspeople. They can go in a sports coaches from Foo category but few towns have enough entries for that. Umpires and referees are less clear IMHO. I consider them officials but not athletes. I think there is a unstated consensus to put them in Sportspeople and I'm not going to argue with it. The other argument is they are athletes. Ice hockey refereeing for instance requires lots of stamina and footwork. I know, I did some ice hockey referee work when I was young.Lost in Quebec (talk) 12:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I am Gillian Pryce from Jamaica, I am saddened by the passing of my late grandfather that I never to the chance to meet him, but I heard he was from Scotland In Wales England… please can u help me to find his family members which are mines too 173.225.243.229 (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please WhatsApp me 1876-558-9994 173.225.243.229 (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:20th-century Albanian novelists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:57, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've just added Solomon Mestel to the category "20th-century Australian rabbis". He was born in Galicia, and spent just seven of his eighty years in Austrlaia. Yes, the article says he was Australian – that has been on my mental low-priority to-do list for a while. Maproom (talk) 08:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Would agree with you there. Better classed as an expatriate in Australia. The problem is that Category:Australian Orthodox rabbis is the only category we have to identify him as a Rabbi "in Australia", although it is a sub of rabbis by "nationality". Not sure how else we can capture this? To correct you slightly, my only contribution to the page was actually moving him to Category:20th-century Australian translators. I've reverted this because his translation work was done after he returned to London, so "English translators" would seem a better fit, and his nationality was likely British at any rate. Intro needs changing. Maybe "Galician-born British rabbi" or "Galician-born Rabbi active in England and Australia"? Jevansen (talk) 09:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think either of those two would be fine. I hope to get around to editing the article soon. Maproom (talk) 09:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Second Test, 2000–01 Border–Gavaskar Trophy, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Second Test, 2000–01 Border–Gavaskar Trophy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this edit, I'm unsure of the enduring encyclopaedic relevance - guitar playing is a global phenomenon. What particular passport someone carries has a very minor influence. In what scenario would a reader want to see only British guitarists? 2A02:8071:184:4E80:3142:53E0:2484:94D5 (talk) 23:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering exactly the same thing with respect to Category:Cellular automatists. Why do we need to separate out the American ones? What is the benefit of all these non-notable category intersections? Why did you need to split a category of 66 articles into two? It just makes the category system cumbersome, confusing, and useless. One has to remember or look up every time which combinations of nationality, occupation, era, gender, ethnicity, etc. are used for each category, because they are all different. It is a mess and you are making it more of a mess. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:45, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David. It's away to diffuse Category:American computer scientists (2,000 articles) and is consistent with how other branches of science are categorised within Category:Scientists by field. Other methods are to divide by century, but this likely wouldn't be appropriate with computer science. Jevansen (talk) 01:55, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I question whether cellular automatists should even be under computer scientists at all. Most of the people in that category are primarily mathematicians and physicists, not computer scientists. So the net affect of your change is:

- Make categorization more of a pain for the bulk of the cellular automatists, including all the non-computer-scientists and all the ones listing another computer scientist subspecialty, with no improvement in diffusion to the American CS category (because all of these people were never in it or are diffused a different way)

- Make categorization outright incorrect for the American computer scientists who occasionally publish in cellular automata but primarily work in other specialties that happen not to be subcategorized under American CS (this includes me, by the way)

- Reduce the size of the parent American CS category only by the tiny number of people who are computer scientists primarily working in cellular automata

I think the costs far outweigh the benefits here. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:53, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it appropriate, you can remove Category:Computer scientists by field of research from Category:Cellular automatists, and I'd be happy to reverse those I removed from Category:American computer scientists. Jevansen (talk) 07:29, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Please reverse. But this removal also removes your rationale for your split of cellular automatists, so please reverse that also. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jevansen, I am trying to get on your level and go one by one through MOLeg. As it relates to current State Senator, Mike Henderson (politician), I cannot get his current position of Senator to go above his prior ProTem speaking position. Any help with this to get it in the right order? ProfPatMcKelvey (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you last updated Dani's page. I have a minor correction. The last sentence of the "Career" section states "At the time, she was working on the design of an Internet version of M.U.L.E." This is not correct. She was working on an Internet version of "Command HQ" with myself and Kevin Sigl. She desired to keep her involvement a secret from Microprose due to ownership issues. The interview with Halcyon was a dodge. I can provide emails between Dani and myself to back up the claim; although, I'd have to search through decades of backups. The last few do not show me in a good light due to that fact that she never told me of her health condition and was very spotty in her communications of the last few weeks. When I read of her passing, I was sad and wished that I could pull the last two or three back. I do not require any attribution, just want to set the record straight; although, it's not particularly misaligned. 73.90.139.150 (talk) 04:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to make FOOs by nationality and century category header. I just made a couple more, like Template:Lexicographers by nationality and century category header and Template:Philologists by nationality and century category header. I think I got the nested structure right, but you can also just tell me what you want it to look like, and I should be able to make the more complex ones for you. :) ^SMason_Garrison 16:18, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, thanks. These templates make category creation so much easier. Jevansen (talk) 20:35, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it! :) ^SMason_Garrison 23:16, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American ghostwriters has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you didn't lol. :)
Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 01:21, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ Valorrr. All good, didn't mean to bite. Thanks for your contributions. Jevansen (talk) 01:24, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I'll bite back. :) Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 01:30, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Murtaza Hussain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murtaza Hussain until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Longhornsg (talk) 05:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I see you update the Irish capped players on Wikipedia. I've noticed an error but don't have the formatting skills to correct it :-)

You correctly identify the "capping the previously uncapped" players exercise that the IRFU did in 2023 - I actually led the project. We actually capped 17 players (see https://www.irishrugby.ie/2023/08/14/irfu-to-cap-previously-uncapped-mens-internationals/ ) but only 12 are in your list. Quinn, Coveney, Carry, Dudgeon and Coolican are missing. As a result, each players capped from Frawley onwards is 5 out. (Jack Boyle, the last capped international, should be #1168 for example.

I published a book last year "From Rags to Riches" which covered the 316 Irish test matches from the game going professional in 1995 to the South Africa Summer tour in 2024 (which raised over 33K for the IRFU Charitable Trust)and dealt with the player numbering issue which heretofore had been incorrectly recorded (ie the 1,000 player is actually Luke Fitzgerald and not Jamie Heaslip etc).

You can contact me at feargalorourke@gmail.com. All the best Athlonedub (talk) 11:11, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Feargal. Well done on the project and thanks for pointing this out. I've added these players and fixed the cap numbers. We're missing opponent and date of first cap for those five players, as I couldn't discern this information from the source (only the year was listed). Do you know which Victory International they debuted in? Jevansen (talk) 12:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is edit; [2] is a not a bad idea. I would recommend adding the Category:People from the North Shore, Sydney to be a subcategory of Category: North Shore (Sydney). You can easily do it. I can tell from your editing history that you like to make category changes. Cheers Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article William Beatty (rugby union) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Played three (3) games. Relatively unremarkable and SIGCOV unlikely

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JayCubby 22:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Hana Adamcová 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/2025 May 22 § Hana Adamcová until a consensus is reached. FromCzech (talk) 17:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:North Korean sportspeople by province indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Mass media people from Dundee indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American philosophers of mind has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Psychastes (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize and $250 worth of prizes for architectural articles. If you are interested in winning something to help you buy books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for articles which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:12, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

... for all your great work on royalty categories! The project is being improved considerably with that. Best wishes, SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Thanks a lot. Jevansen (talk) 00:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 6 § Burkinabe on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Hassan697 (talk) 11:38, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tim Allen (footballer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Allen (footballer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Darkm777 (talk) 01:47, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interested to know the premise you give for deleting this category from Horace Walpole - I grant you that just because he published a book about Richard III (which was accredited) does not make him an historian - but what qualifies in that category in the 18th century, given that most historians of the day were gentlemen amateurs.Geneus01 (talk) 07:10, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Geneus01. I'm a bit confused by your question. You argue he is not a historian, yet take issue with it being removed?

It was removed as he was populated in a subcategory (Category:18th-century English antiquarians). Jevansen (talk) 08:07, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:African Games gold medalists in swimming indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:21st-century Burkinabe sportspeople indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey User:Liz, looks like this has to do with a recent CfD which resulted in categories with "Burkinabé" being renamed to "Burkinabe". The century categories are usually relying on templates to assign the parent categories, in this case Template:Sportsmen by nationality and century category header and the sportswomen equivalent, where this change seems to be causing the issue (not populating categories). Category:21st-century Burkinabe sportspeople should be a container category with the sportsmen/sportswomen categories. If you encounter other Burkinabe cats which appear empty keep this in mind. Pinging template guru User:Smasongarrison re how to rectify this. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 06:33, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! So this rename is affecting every category that uses `{`{Title demonym`}`}. There should be an easy fix... let me dig it up. ^SMason_Garrison 15:29, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit I think that one was missed. [3] I used this search to help dig up some vistigual names: [4] ^SMason_Garrison 15:45, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Great work. Jevansen (talk) 01:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ^SMason_Garrison 03:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for your tireless work, creating and filling categories on the project. It seems like I run into your work every day and night of the week. I keep thinking that our categorization must all be done by now but you keep finding more and more missing category trees. They add so much to help organize our articles. Thank you for your 3M+ edits! Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Liz, much appreciated. Jevansen (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Asian Games gold medalists in swimming indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you restrict your tagging to those articles you are actually planning to develop? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Jevansen (talk) 06:47, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Were you planning to tag every woman in the encyclopedia? Has the project asked you to do this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:48, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, because the vast majority are already tagged with WP:Women or their occupation specific project. There are 350,000 pages for WP:Women alone. This would indicate previous tagging hasn't been restricted to articles one is "planning to develop". I'll always review the project specific guidelines over what qualifies to be tagged, but I never confer with a WP every time I undertake a tagging task, nor have I ever been asked to. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 07:13, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jevansen (talk), most of the pages for which you are adding 'Active pol' are not actively running for office or... recent ones. Elections in many of these states were over a year ago. So just wondering if the tags are appropriate... in good faith before they are reverted. thanks and happy editing! Davidindia (talk) 07:20, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. A fair observation David. I took the inclusion criteria from Category:Active politicians, which gives a wider more literal definition of "active", whereas I see now the tag when displayed reads as "... in office and campaigning for re-election". The Indian politicians included should be restricted to incumbents serving terms beginning 2024 or 2025, so still recently elected. I think these are still people we'd want identified for watchlists, even if not strictly meeting that criteria? Jevansen (talk) 08:21, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh. ok. Got it! Thanks a lot! Davidindia (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Farhan Ul Arshad

Mainspace move request Zona2 (talk) 10:39, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Jevansen for adding Rob Swigart, Pat badani, and Micheal Takeo Magruder to the WP:Bio/Arts & entertainment work group. Should we be doing this for all of the electronic literature writers and critics? I can do this with our lists from list of electronic literature authors an critics. Thank you LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 15:32, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes that would be great. They would fall under the remit (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment#Writers and critics). Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for adding the Roger Blench article to this workgroup. I'm hoping the workgroup can do something with this article? The article has been nominated for deletion before but the decision was to keep it. There are some longstanding issues with the article. For one, the notability criteria for academics do not appear to have been met. Furthermore, the article has long had issues with relying on self-published sources -- including for evidence of Blench successfully obtaining a PhD at all (his dissertation requires special permission to access). As these issues still haven't been addressed, maybe the workgroup can look into it? BlakeALee (talk) 15:43, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blake. This is certainly something you could raise at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia. I'm not involved in the task force myself, beyond assisting with project tagging. Jevansen (talk) 01:23, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For making so many edits. Even the smallest edits have a great impact! - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:05, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind. Thanks a lot. Jevansen (talk) 02:07, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, the EAP parameter should be in the Cricket template, and the blp parameter should be in the banner shell template. Confusing I know. I have moved the blp parameter to the top so it is clearer — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:23, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Argh.. Thanks for picking this up Martin. I'll look out for rogue BLP parameters going forward. Jevansen (talk) Jevansen (talk) 09:00, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 19 § Members of the Australian House of Representatives by term on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. TarnishedPath^talk 10:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have removed the 21st SA musicians category from some musicians' articles. If I may, what is the reason behind that move? dxneo (talk) 16:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I removed this per WP:DIFFUSE as they also had Category:21st-century South African rappers. Jevansen (talk) 22:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. dxneo (talk) 22:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 23 § Fijian medical doctors on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 18:18, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jevansen, I would like to request that the article Vishvaraj Jadeja, which currently refers to the cricketer, be moved to Vishvaraj Jadeja (cricketer), as I have created a separate article titled Vishvaraj Jadeja (speed skater). Since there are now two notable individuals with the same name, I believe a disambiguation page titled Vishvaraj Jadeja would be appropriate to help readers find the correct person.

Kindly assist with this move and disambiguation setup, or let me know if I should initiate a move request. Thank you!

( am Newbie here so i don't have create option)creation :

Vishvaraj Jadeja may refer to:

• Vishvaraj Jadeja (cricketer), Indian cricketer
• Vishvaraj Jadeja (speed skater), Indian long-distance inline speed skater

{{disambiguation}}

Novaclia 🌀 Novaclia (talk) 04:22, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is there a reason why you are adding thousands and thousands of "low-importance" level ratings to pages at bot-like speeds? No one will ever use this, all it does is pollute watchlists for no discernible benefit at all. [5] 500 such edits in 30 minutes or [6] in 23 minutes. Does anything at all work worse if these remain unassessed instead of low-priority assessed? Fram (talk) 07:49, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This is consistent with the project's tagging instructions. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Sports and games#Tagging articles. Regards. Jevansen (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. They "should" be added to the work group. They "can" be given a priority. You haven't answered what the benefit is of lindly adding "low" priority instead of having no priority at all. Nothing will change, nothing will improve, from your thousands upon thousands of edits. Fram (talk) 08:16, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, "can". Not "can't" or "shouldn't". Why does low importance exist as a rating if it is synonymous with no priority? Jevansen (talk) 08:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, people probably originally thought it was a good idea. But you still haven't responded: what is the benefit your edits bring to enwiki? Fram (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The rating level exists. The project instructs/suggests it is added to articles. I am adding it to articles. Jevansen (talk) 08:39, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, none at all. You probably don't even know if your rating is correct or not, seeing the speed you add them and the fact that all of them are "low". Please stop doing this or I'll ask at ANI that you are forced to stop. Fram (talk) 08:42, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please WP:AGF. It's more that I don't feel I need to justify edits which follow guidelines. If u want to do away with "low importance" ratings across the project, you should raise this at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Jevansen (talk) 08:53, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no guideline about blindly converting "no assessment" to "low priority assessment". That's not "assessing" anything. I have repeatedly asked you why you make these edits, your answer boils down to "because I can". So yes, if you restart with these edits, I'll raise them at WP:ANI. Fram (talk) 09:02, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please WP:AGF. You have no idea what went into compiling the list of names prior to the AWB run. Have about 800 to go, but happy to leave it at that. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 09:15, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can hardly have an idea or AGF if you refuse to give a decent answer every single time. Fram (talk) 09:31, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw that you have been one of the recent editors of the famous experimental trombonist Stuart Dempster's wiki entry. I am a music student and I trying to contact him for an interview. Can you give me a lead how to reach him ? thanks ! Gisubawo (talk) 19:58, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Any edit I would have made would be minor .. you'd know more about him than me :). If you haven't tried this already, I can only suggest you try his University of Washington email? I can't post it here but this can be googled. Good luck. Jevansen (talk) 22:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ! I’ll give that a try :-) Gisubawo (talk) 22:46, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your move of Category:Scientists by populated place into Category:Health professionals by populated place. Not all scientists are health professionals. Happy to chat about the merits of this, like I'm on the fence about the other move of Category:social workers by populated place. ^SMason_Garrison 16:16, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good revert. Category:Social workers does sit within Category:Health professionals, but likewise not fussed either way. Scientists though ... have no idea why I moved that category, other than to say it was accidental. Thanks Mason. Jevansen (talk) 00:26, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Good point re social workers. I've now placed social workers in both the by occupation category and the health professionals category. ^SMason_Garrison 00:37, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see that you added the Mol* page to the television WikiProject and I'm not sure why, given that Mol* is a molecular visualization software (i.e. for viewing protein structures interactively). Can you please clarify? Thanks! Biochemlife (talk) 14:45, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Biochemlife. Hi. I moved it to WP:Software instead. Not sure what happened. I segmented these lists in Excel and I'm wondering if perhaps the asterisk caused an issue with one of the formulas I used. Thanks for picking this up. Jevansen (talk) 21:07, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying and correcting. Apologies for bothering you about it – I just wanted to make sure it was an error (as opposed to me missing something) before reverting. Biochemlife (talk) 21:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to figure out the "scope" of the wikiproject, but the project page does not seem to clarify, as many do. It cannot be that every person who was born or lived in the U.S. is within the scope -- it should be people who made some kind of particularly American contribution, who somehow affected the history and development of the U.S. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Wikipedia:WikiProject United States states that the project covers "topics related to the United States". Seems to be broad enough that any U.S. national would fall within the scope. Ideally, you'd have the person in the state–level or occupation-specific task forces which make up the project. Jevansen (talk) 05:36, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this interpretation is not what was intended and would make the WikiProject less valuable. If the project intended to cover everyone born or who lived in the U.S., the creators of the project would have said so in the scope section. Nevertheless, happy editing. -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:14, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. It's pretty common across the board that a bio is attached to the WikiProject of the country corresponding to their nationality. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 06:26, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thank you for all the good work you are doing. Did you mean to insert blank |listas= fields in banner shells with your script? e.g. Talk:Natasha Dobrinen. This makes it an extra step for people to add the value semi-automatically with WP:RATER. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:31, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. It's beyond my AWB skills to auto generate the names in the field, so I was trying to make it easier for whoever fills it out at a later point. WP template instructions often ask to still add a blank "class" field if not assessing the page .. figured the same principle applied here. Apologies if this adds work. I'm not familiar with WP:RATER. Will leave the field out next time. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 21:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, apologies for my slow response! Thanks for this. Arguably it's an issue with RATER really, but I'm sure I raised it long ago on it's talk page before with no action taken. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:16, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have have Created the new Article of Nepalese Cricketer Lokesh_Bam ! Please Help to contribute it more / don't revert it to redirect page. ! Added Detailed information. MountainWriter42 (talk) 06:07, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jevansen,

I hope you're doing well. I recently came across your excellent work on English Wikipedia, especially your contributions to articles on Iranian artists. I was truly impressed by the quality and the thoughtful representation of their careers.

I was wondering if you would consider creating or translating an English Wikipedia article for Mahdiyeh Afshar Bakeshloo. She is a contemporary Iranian visual artist and researcher whose work has been exhibited internationally. I believe her artistic contributions deserve to be visible on the English Wikipedia as well.

Here is the current Persian article for reference:

https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/مهدیه_افشار_بکشلو

Thank you in advance for considering this request. Your help would truly support the visibility of Iranian contemporary artists on a global platform.

Best regards, 1374maafba (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my friend, I recently started participating in the Biographies project. While reviewing some items needing attention, I came across this talk page to which you added a biography|musicians template, but I don't believe it was intentional. Rather than changing something done by someone of your experience, I thought I would reach out in good faith. The article in question is Imperial (bank). Have a great rest of your day! Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 21:31, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. Well spotted. I must have mistook "bank" for "band". I've changed the WP to something more appropriate. Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dutch MPs 2023– has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Dajasj (talk) 08:04, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am humbled by the number of your Wikipedia contributions, but also confused why you marked Andre Dickens with an alumni category when no references to this status exist in the article. Do you have something to teach me about this guideline, or was your revision done in error? OceanLoop (talk) 15:49, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi OceanLoop. It's mentioned under the "Early life and education" section heading. Citation number seven. Jevansen (talk) 21:30, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how I missed that. Sorry and reverted. OceanLoop (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All good. Article has an unusual order. "Early life and education" would normally be the first section. "Personal life" should be further done. Jevansen (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jevansen,

Hope you are well! I would like to suggest the creation of a page for musician Ron Cha, an Indian jazz pianist, composer and performer known for his work with well known artists and his performances internationally in the jazz scene worldwide. His music has been covered by reliable sources such as Rolling Stone magazine, Indian Music Diaries etc and he has performed alongside renowned musicians like Ferenc Nemeth, Gregory Tardy, Benjamin Herman and Jacques Schwartz-Bart. He has contributed to this field and I believe his music and artistry deserve to be visible on the English Wikipedia page.

Thank you in advance for considering this request. It would be lovely to see an Indian jazz musician who is making a name for himself globally on this platform. 2001:1C00:5384:2B00:A070:6DC:16E5:41CA (talk) 20:50, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

4tert 140.213.75.116 (talk) 11:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about the book "Infantry Soldier", 1995 ? I just finished raading the book and looked online to see if he had written more. I am not a Wiki editor of any kind. -Hue Miller, Newport, Oregon, USA 2600:100F:A112:C40:180B:75AE:331:2D84 (talk) 06:03, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 5 § Category:Canadian animal sportspeople by province or territory on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 20:03, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Men's events at the 2006 Commonwealth Games indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:12, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Men's events at the 2010 Commonwealth Games indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:12, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Men's events at the 2014 Commonwealth Games indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Men's events at the 2018 Commonwealth Games indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Men's events at the 2022 Commonwealth Games indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 8 § Category:Canadian gymnastics people by province or territory on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:14, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jevansen! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Sport climbing at the 2009 World Games – Women's lead and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Your addition of a category may not be considered minor Kingsacrificer (talk) 12:28, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]