User talk:FaviFake

{{User:SuggestBot/config|frequency=weekly}}

{{User:SuggestBot/config|frequency=weekly}}

== Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #244 is out: Milestones; Some major issues hopefully resolved ==

There is [[:f:Special:MyLanguage/Wikifunctions:Status updates/2026-04-16|a new update]] for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we celebrate 4000 functions on Wikifunctions and 1000 abstract articles on Abstract Wikipedia, we announce that we should have fixed some major issues with the websites, we inform you on our latest outreach activities, and we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check [[:f:Special:MyLanguage/Wikifunctions:Status updates|our archive]]!

Enjoy the reading! -- [[User:Sannita (WMF)|User:Sannita (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Sannita (WMF)|talk]]) 10:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

== ''The Bugle'': Issue 240, April 2026 ==

{| style="width: 100%;"

| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |

{|

| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]

| width="100%" valign="top" |

* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2026/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''

* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2026/Articles|Last month's new featured and A-class content]]''

* Book review: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2026/Book reviews|Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at four works]]''

* Timeline: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2026/This month in military history|This month in military history]]''

|-

|}

|}

''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 12:51, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

== Edit conflict ==

== Edit conflict ==

3. It cherry-picked a random public *trite* comment that you agree with to terminate a random public *effortful and relevant* one that you don't agree with, which A) is dishonest disguise for your own administrative pronouncements and B) violates the well-known wiki article rules on what acceptable sourcing is. For a moment I thought it must be an LLM summary, then I realized in shock that this is an official admin pointing to a random peanut-gallery insult/fallacy as the "cause" for their own admin actions, and using that as the "summary" of truth/opinion. There's no perceptible or demonstrated reason why that comment should be given more weight than 40 people sincerely genuinely contributing to a discussion. [[User:RandomEditor6772314|RandomEditor6772314]] ([[User talk:RandomEditor6772314|talk]]) 20:20, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

3. It cherry-picked a random public *trite* comment that you agree with to terminate a random public *effortful and relevant* one that you don't agree with, which A) is dishonest disguise for your own administrative pronouncements and B) violates the well-known wiki article rules on what acceptable sourcing is. For a moment I thought it must be an LLM summary, then I realized in shock that this is an official admin pointing to a random peanut-gallery insult/fallacy as the "cause" for their own admin actions, and using that as the "summary" of truth/opinion. There's no perceptible or demonstrated reason why that comment should be given more weight than 40 people sincerely genuinely contributing to a discussion. [[User:RandomEditor6772314|RandomEditor6772314]] ([[User talk:RandomEditor6772314|talk]]) 20:20, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

:Thanks for your message! There seems to be a few misunderstandings here. I'll try to go through them in no particular order:

:*Whether I agree with any of the changes proposed in those sections is irrelevant. Editors do not close discussions based on their own personal opinions.

:*When I say "as presented", I'm specifically referring to the fact that these varied proposals were created inside an RfC with a very narrow scope. These proposals were not {{tq|1=relevant}}, as I explained in the closure ("The Requested Moves process and any other new proposed processes fall outside the scope of this RfC"). They should be posted at the appropriate venues, such as [[WP:VPR]] or [[WP:VPI]], so that {{tq|1=the merits of what was said}} can be discussed more freely and be seen by more interested editors to help build consensus.

:*None of these proposals were {{tq|1=highly active discussion[s]}}, which is partly why I closed them. Before you commented on most of them, the most recent reply on each proposals was from 2 days after it was created.

:* I did not close your or any other proposals based on how "chaotic" they looked, and i have not attempted to write a {{tq|1="summary" of truth/opinion}}, as the closure was procedural.

:* "{{tq|1=the well-known wiki article rules on what acceptable sourcing is}}. It can't be so well-known because I don't know what you're referring to.

:*I am not an {{tq|1=official admin}} and [[User:oklopfer|oklopfer]]'s comment was neither {{tq|1=dishonest}} nor {{tq|1=a random peanut-gallery insult}}.

:If you want your proposal to be discussed further, you should move it to a more appropriate page, such as a noticeboard or a different page's talk page. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake#top|talk]]) 10:51, 19 April 2026 (UTC)