Jump to content

User talk:Primefac/Archive 51

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51

Administrators' newsletter – January 2026

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

Administrator changes

added
readded Fathoms Below
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

PrimeBOT reordering banners as part of banner removal following a TFD

Hello Primefac. I am writing to you hear your opinion on PrimeBOT reordering banners as it did in Special:Diff/1330376050 and Special:Diff/1330388380, in a way which is less consistent with WP:TALKORDER. It appears to have its preferences for order, and these preferences do not seem to match TALKORDER. Is this due to some limitation or was it simply never designed with TALKORDER in mind? I partially reverted the first of those two diffs. —Alalch E. 19:32, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I suspect, much like this discussion from late last year, that this is an AWB issue (though that issue was because I was using an outdated AWB build, which was rectified by 31 Dec). I have a funny feeling that changes made to TALKORDER are happening much more frequently than changes to AWB's builds. Primefac (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)
Right, an AWB issue. I'll think about investigating this a little and bringing it up with ... AWB people. —Alalch E. 14:57, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

User:WebGap

Hi Primefac. Would you mind taking a look at User talk:WebGap? This user has posted on their user talk page that they're a digital agency that and has been given permission to update the article Amarula. I've been trying for a couple of months to explain WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY to them, but they keep putting it off for some reason. They say they understand what Wikipedia wants them to do and seem to have no problem with it; however, they always come back to try and directly edit again the article again. Is what they've declared so far is sufficient for Wikipedia's purposes or do the need to be more specific and actually name their employer? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Paid editing is one thing, sharing an account is another. I've blocked them until they can sort the latter part out. Primefac (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
Thank you for taking a look at this. Perhaps they'll sort things out now. FWIW, I just assumed they were speaking about themselves using "we"; It didn't cross my mind that the account might be shared. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Logo size

You beat me by about 20 seconds... Thank you. Went to fix it then was confused to find it was already fixed. Appreciate it! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:49, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Heh, just happened to have it pop in my feed right as I was checking new changes. Primefac (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Primefac (talk) 10:55, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Steward Health Care

Good day! I was curious about something I think you did but can't be sure of because I don't know how it works.

I'm a big contributor to this article and monitor it for vandalism, which has happened on occasion. Checking it today, I noticed that all edits prior to your recent contributions and going back to May '24 have been "suppressed". I'm curious if you did this and/or have any insight into why it was done - I've never seen that happen and so am curious what goes into that decision. After looking into reasons an article's history may be suppressed, I figure it had something to do with the insertion of references to legal documents. It would be good to know in case it resulted from something I did that I can avoid in the future.

Thank you for your assistance and contributions! Mangocove (talk) 20:01, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

You have figured correctly; some of the text you added was not appropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia itself. Primefac (talk) 11:58, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

yo please let me yap on random stuff in my userpage

i just want to yap and do everything wrong ok Nerd-in-history (talk) 20:17, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Nerd-in-history, did you read through the links I sent you? I removed that content for a good reason. Primefac (talk) 20:21, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
sorry dude it didnt even told me but ok i guess Nerd-in-history (talk) 20:41, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
oh my god im so sorry my brain just clicked in and i realise what i just did, Nerd-in-history (talk) 20:43, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
No worries, just wanted to double-check. Primefac (talk) 20:50, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Incomplete bot action

This edit removed the utm_* but left the gad_*. DMacks (talk) 02:14, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Ugh. I think I need to re-code the bot, because it seems like every time I run it there are new sets of trackers that weren't there before... thanks. Primefac (talk) 09:15, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for wrangling da bot! DMacks (talk) 16:40, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Providing block reasons

Hello Primefac. I'm some procedural concerns about how you blocked Eastmain following this SPI. Admins are required to provide a clear and specific reason why a user was blocked. In this case, the block log refers to the SPI. The SPI says nothing beyond "a connection" and "Technically indistinguishable", neither of which is a blockable offense on its own. Another issue is described as "unrelated"; nowhere is this marked as a CU block.

I assume that something you saw in your analysis of these accounts' behaviors or the CheckUser data justified the course of action you took, but as I cannot read your mind and do not have access to that data, I can't be sure. The subsequent LLM issues raised arguably make this a case of avoiding scrutiny, which could justify the block retroactively, but normally we expect admins to state a reason for their blocks up front. Please be mindful of how this appears to outside observers, like myself, and especially how this appears to the blocked user, whose initial appeal expressed frustration at exactly this issue.

A secondary concern, not grounded in policy but in community practice, is that we normally do not block editors indefinitely for a first-time sockpuppetry violation; normally the block on the "master" account ranges from a week to a month. I was surprised to see that the block of Eastmain was indefinite. Depending on the reason, an indef of the master may be justified, but again, I don't have the reason for the block.

Apologies if this comes across as harsh or overly critical; I only intend it as a gentle reminder of what's expected of us as admins, something I think we all could use from time to time. Toadspike [Talk] 13:07, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, you have some fair points. I've also thought about a few other ways this could have been achieved more reasonably, so consider this "lesson learned". Primefac (talk) 10:04, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2026

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2026).

Arbitration

  • Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Interesting interaction

Do you have an opinion? I had originally considering not responding at all, since this is not atypical of interactions between this editor and me. If I am out of line, then perhaps I should not be contributing to this template. —Quondum 14:44, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I was waiting for you to reply, as you were the one to set the values, but I haven't had a chance yet to read through your reply or subsequent discussion. Primefac (talk) 01:31, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
I had engaged in debate, but as you might notice, this editor is just reasserting their perspective (that articles must blindly reflect the references used, as opposed to that reliable sources should be found to support the chosen content, keeping in mind context), with no interest in considering the reasoning that is presented; I find this recurrent behaviour frustrating. You'll notice that they proceeded without any support or consensus in a contested case. There is no point replying further, so I will not. Never mind; I tend to simply step away from anything where this editor becomes assertive/obstinate, which now includes regular updates of the template as the new CODATA values are published. —Quondum 12:08, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
Okay, I still haven't had a good chance to read through the discussion. Primefac (talk) 12:12, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

PrimeBOT run request

Hi Primefac! I was wondering if you'd be able to knock out a quick parameter removal run on Category:Pages using infobox football tournament season with unknown parameters, removing |defending champions= which was removed per discussion. phuzion (talk) 13:40, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Either someone's already working on it or the cat is still populating; I only see ~400 pages which is a bit small for my bot. I'll check it out this weekend and see if the numbers have grown any. Primefac (talk) 10:58, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, it was ~2600 last I checked. Someone must be working on it, thanks anyways! phuzion (talk) 11:43, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
that was me. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:56, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Better clarification

Moved to Template talk:Infobox fictional location

Primefac (talk) 01:12, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Unintentional UFC page creations

Hi Primefac, can you delete these three #REDIRECT pages that I unintentionally created, please. These fights are actually at Winnipeg, not Las Vegas.

Thanks! --Discographer (talk) 10:29, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 10:43, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, just letting you know that in edits by your bot like this one to Mornington Secondary College, the words "a discussion" link to Special:PrefixIndex/1339564077#Parameter_cleanup, when they should link to Special:Permalink/1339564077#Parameter_cleanup. Graham87 (talk) 02:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Ooft, good catch. Primefac (talk) 10:35, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Yeah looks good now, thanks. And I also made a mistake in my above message ... I should've linked to this edit. Graham87 (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

repurpose Template:So?

I'm doing some work on astronomy units formatting templates. I would need to use {{So}} as a shorthand for the unit Solar constant, which according to the IAU standard should be written as S☉, similar to how we already have {{Lo}} as a shortcut for {{Solar luminosity}} L☉. {{So}} currently redirects to {{Uw-soablock}}. Is it okay for me to repurpose it? Slovborg (talk) 00:41, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

It would probably be best to start a talk page discussion; the base template is used a ton but with it being a subst-only there's no way to tell how many people use the redirect as a shortcut. If you don't get much participation then it might have to go to WP:RFD, but start with the talk page first. Primefac (talk) 10:33, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Good point. I didn't really think about that. Slovborg (talk) 12:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

PrimeBOT run

Any chance I can get you to do a PrimeBOT run on Category:Pages using infobox school with deprecated parameters (0)? Still populating, but would be awesome to get your assistance with this one as it could involve over 40,000 pages. Hope you are well! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:46, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac (talk) 12:09, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
Is there anything you need from me to facilitate this or is the code at the bottom of {{Infobox school}} sufficient? Let me know what I can do to expedite this one. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:56, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
I will let you know if I run into any issues. Primefac (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
Any chance you've had a chance to look at this? Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:57, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
Not yet; was a big cat and I wanted to make sure it populated, then I got sidetracked with IRL stuff this week. It's still pretty much at the top of my list. Primefac (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
Sounds great! I know how busy real life can get. Also, I know there is no deadline... Just looking forward to cleaning up this Infobox. Appreciate your help as always! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:04, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
My edit summary got clipped... I have reverted Special:Diff/1339531776. I am not in favor of including blanks in unknown parameter checks, but in deprecated param checks it is different. You are about to do a bot run to clean up all parameters. Why not do the blanks as well? Leaving the blanks just invites a dump of unknown parameters down the road when editors come along and fill in the unfixed parameters that remain. I've seen this happen literally thousands of times... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:29, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
The very short answer is because I do not like making a truly-cosmetic edit.
The general (if begrudging) consensus is that updating parameter names to avoid a hidden maintenance category – even if it means a "visually" cosmetic edit – is acceptable. For tasks like mine where I am usually doing exactly this, and at scale, I want to avoid as many "unnecessary bot edits" as possible (i.e. make an effort to appease those who are in the minority of said general consensus). Changing |foo bar=baz to |foo_bar=baz is a change that will affect a category regardless of whether |ignoreblank=yes. Replacing/removing a blank |foo bar= is only sometimes a non-cosmetic edit, and so I prefer not to do them.
Now, for this run and for this template, I will make an exception, because there are 71 parameters that are being deprecated, and on the balance of probability at least one of those should have a value to it (when I started running the task yesterday I think I counted a little less than 1% with all-blanks). I was also a few hundred edits into the run when I noticed, and the cat will likely not refresh completely until after the proposed run was done anyway.
I won't go on too much of a ramble about my thoughts about "blank wrong parameters leads to more unknowns", but from my own experience I haven't seen that happen (they also generally happen with a frequency low enough to clean up pretty easily). Primefac (talk) 12:21, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
I appreciate your stance on not making purely cosmetic edits. That is totally valid. Also appreciate your willingness to make an exception this time. If you wish to discuss the blank wrong parameters leads to more unknowns at any point, I'm happy to go into more detail on that and share my experiences on the issue. For now though I guess we can agree to just have a difference point of view on that issue.
In any event, thank you as always for the bot run you are doing. It is greatly appreciated! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:46, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
I'm curious: if only 1% of articles in the category have all blanks, maybe the very standard practice of ignoring blanks is the right thing to do. The bot would edit 99% of articles with undesirable parameter names, removing or fixing every undesirable parameter, whether it is empty or populated. That would surely achieve the goal without making editors grumpy. There is a small but loud contingent of editors who object loudly to truly cosmetic bot edits like only removing a bunch of empty parameters. The tiny handful of left-behind unsupported parameters that might conceivably be filled in later by clueless editors will (a) not display anything in the infobox and (b) assign the unknown parameter category. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
So the issue here, in a nutshell, is that there are A LOT of editors (particularly new editors) who will see |some param= and just fill it in with a value assuming it will work and not realizing that the param is actually supposed to be |some_param= (with the underscore). By not repairing those parameters, it is making more work down the road...
  1. New editors (particularly temp accounts who have never made a single edit) come to a page to update 1 value and just assume that the existing code will work.
  2. When it doesn't work, yes it populates a maintenance category but that process relies on someone (usually myself or User:Phuzion who also monitors unknown param categories) to come along and fix the mistake.
For the record, every day I come across a unknown parameters that were at one point valid parameters, but were at some point either removed entirely or were changed to a different value (underscore added, capitalization changed, etc.) But let me be clear, this is not a theoretical problem... I personally see it happen all the time. I'm happy to share diffs of this moving forward when it happens next (would be impossible to go back through my edit history to find specific diffs from the past).
When we are doing a mass cleanup like we are doing with {{Infobox school}}, I think it makes sense to clean up all the parameters, whether they are used or not. Now yes, there will be some purely cosmetic edits. But the vast majority of them are used.
I don't think there is any objection to the cleanup we are trying to achieve with removing these deprecated parameters, the disagreement seems be to solely on whether to clean up the deprecated parameters that are currently not used on a particular page.
My argument boils down to if we are going to clean up the ones that are used anyway, why not also do the ones that are unused at the same time to avoid the issues I mentioned above.
I will also mention that I have done this process to dozens of infoboxes. {{Infobox school}} is unique because of its high use count and thats why I've asked for a PrimeBOT run. But I have easily done 30-40,000 JWB edits fixing deprecated parameters and have not gotten a single complaint about COSMETICEDITS.
Just some of my thoughts. Respect both of you tremendously by the way, just have a different view in this case... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:45, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
FYI Primefac your edit summary is broken... Not a big deal but check the link on this diff for example... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/1339564077#Parameter_cleanup) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:46, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Whoops... I had been doing a lot of prefix searching just before that, AWB crashed and I didn't have the old edit summary saved, and I guess my fingers were faster than my brain. I always check to make sure the edit summary looks good, didn't think to check the link itself this time since it was just a restart! Primefac (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
my fingers were faster than my brain... Been there! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:19, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Just a reminder that you absolutely rock! Thanks for the bot run!!! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:49, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Always happy to help. Primefac (talk) 22:04, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
@Jonesey and Primefac: For the record, here is an example that just popped up of what I was talking about, ironically also {{infobox school}}. |mascot image= was long ago deprecated, but not removed from all uses (I should have asked for it to be included included in the recent bot run PrimeBOT did). So someone assumed it would still work, thus populating the unknown param category. Now not implying this is some disasterous problem, but it is why when we are doing a mass clean up of deprecated parameters, I push for cleaning up ALL uses, even those that are blank. This sort of issue happens for me dozens of times a day. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Account creation

Hi! Thanks for all you do. I am logged in and trying to create an account for an event attendee on Special:CreateAccount but was blocked. The block will expire 2032, which is not allowing me continue with account creation even after being logged in. I have refreshed, logged in but to no avail. Kindly remove the block so I can continue as I did not make any form of disruptive edits. Thanks and hoping to hear from you soon.-- Olugold (talk) 10:24, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Your rights as an event coordinator should allow you to create accounts despite the rangeblock, but since that does not appear to be the case I have granted your account IPBE temporarily, hopefully this will help. Primefac (talk) 11:20, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Unknown Params

Wanted to make sure you were aware of the explosion of Category:Pages using infobox rugby biography with unknown parameters (3). One of many categories I monitor. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:01, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Cause and effect, my friend. Primefac (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
Appreciate you cleaning up the category! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:10, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
Not a problem. Figure it was the least I could do after populating it ;-) Primefac (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
Haha! Keep up the good work! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:06, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Error

Hi, There are problem in my AFCH script, can't load other declining reasons. Namita Tudu (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "other declining reasons". What are you seeing, and what did you do right before reaching that point? Primefac (talk) 19:36, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
When I open a draft through the AFCH script and click on the “Decline” option, I am only able to see a limited set of declining reasons. The full list does not load, and I am unable to select other standard decline reasons that are usually available. Namita Tudu (talk) 20:08, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
Has this always happened or is a recent thing? If it's a recent thing, have you made any changes to your Preferences, switched browsers, or anything like that? Primefac (talk) 10:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
The issue has been happening for the last 1–2 days. Before that, everything was working normally. After noticing the problem, I tried switching browsers to see if that would fix it, but the issue still persists. I have not made any changes to my Preferences, enabled or disabled any scripts. Namita Tudu (talk) 10:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Interesting. Novem Linguae, any thoughts? Primefac (talk) 14:39, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
I'm unable to reproduce. Would be helpful to get a screenshot, and an exact article to test, and a list of a couple of decline reasons that are included, and a list of a couple decline reasons that are missing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:51, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
 Resolved The issue is no longer occurring. Everything seems to be working properly now. Namita Tudu (talk) 09:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with the DK bot

Thanks for this. This bot has been trouble since day one. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I honestly forgot to keep tabs on it, otherwise I would have shut it down a long time ago, especially when the off-task editing started. Primefac (talk) 15:30, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for following up this time. I support whatever action you can take to stop this pattern of mess-making. I don't know if this is a CIR situation or something else, but it's not good. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:15, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2026

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2026).

Administrator changes

removed

CheckUser changes

removed Ks0stm

Oversight changes

removed Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, remedy 9.1 of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been amended to limit TenPoundHammer to one XfD nomination or PROD per 24-hour period.
  • Following a motion, the Iskandar323 further POV pushing motion has been rescinded.
  • The Arbitration Committee has passed a housekeeping motion rescinding a number of outdated remedies and enforcement provisions across multiple legacy cases. In most instances, existing sanctions remain in force and continue to be appealable through the usual processes, while some case-specific remedies were amended or clarified.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:36, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Template talk:Mapriver

(Sorry, this is a machine translation) Did you think it was a prank? Please restore the note page above. I'll add a reply. --Triglav (talk) 02:32, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

If you think the TFD was closed in error, you are welcome to request a review of the close at WP:DRV, but it looks like a pretty solid consensus to delete the template. If you need any of the content from either the template or its talk, I am willing to get you a copy of it. Primefac (talk) 10:22, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
The process seems complicated. I think I said something like "feel free to use it," so I won't comment any further. I'm sorry to have taken up your time.--Triglav (talk) 16:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
I could possibly be misinterpreting your request. If you need the content of the template (or the talk page) in order to implement a merge/update of the infobox river template, I'm happy to supply that. Primefac (talk) 16:23, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Garry Kasparov

Hi, can I ask your opinion whether (like the "Soldier F" section in Bloody Sunday (1972)) it is appropriate to move a section into a new article? I am referring to the "Politics and political views" bit which Talk suggests is too large now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garry_Kasparov Naturally, chess takes up the bulk of this Good Article, as you'd expect, but what do you think of the relative size of the 'Politics' bit? Finally, what would the syntax be for transcluding this putative new article in the main Kasparov article at this place: I assume it's similar to what's in the BS article but would be grateful if you'd let me know what to put at the top of that section if/when I move it? Thank you Billsmith60 (talk) 09:56, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Oof, the politics section is almost half again as large as the chess section; I'd say that splitting it out is probably appropriate. If consensus agrees that it should be split (I find it hard to believe it won't) then it should probably be created at Political views of Garry Kasparov. The content can largely be copy/pasted (giving appropriate attribution of course), but I think what you're asking about is what's left. I would probably use a {{main}} at the top followed by either a sentence or short paragraph summarising each of the existing sections. That way people reading the main article will get a general idea of the content but will be able to read the main article if they want to know more. Primefac (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Thank you very much Billsmith60 (talk) 16:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
I've made those changes. It took a bit of work but also updates some old dead sources. Do you mind if I refer you to the disruptive edits of user Gaga2222 on that page and, now, at Magnus Carlsen? Billsmith60 (talk) 10:28, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
Looks like they're rather enthusiastic about editing... not sure I'm seeing anything disruptive enough (at this point in time) to merit any sort of administrative action though; they largely seem to be playing by the rules, even if their editing is a bit erratic. Primefac (talk) 12:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Always

In re this: Always all the love, and eternal gratitude for all the times you've solved problems for me. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:09, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Awww, thanks! I do have to admit that the phrasing came about more because I am easily distracted by the song lyrics in my brain matching up with the syllables of my words... Primefac (talk) 00:24, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
My husband has the same problem with song lyrics. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:04, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Turkey medical cases

This template was not deleted. It may not have been added to the Tfd. Please see if this follows or requires userfication for the nomination you closed on January 24. ~2026-13909-16 (talk) 15:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Interesting, good catch. Primefac (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Mikemikev?

[1] ie the Doug hole.Doug Weller talk 19:31, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking about. Primefac (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
I was asking whether this was a Mikemikev sock. Doug Weller talk 10:54, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
They've been editing since 2005; that would be one hell of a good job to manage to avoid scrutiny for that long. Primefac (talk) 13:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Wouldn't this be their first en-wiki non-userland edit (2026)? But I'm also wondering it this is really the account Doug Weller meant, this one signs with "The Doug hole". ~2026-10830-00 (talk) 06:37, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
It looks like the link in the OP is not helpful. Searching Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia for "Mikemikev" shows a short discussion regarding the troll. Johnuniq (talk) 07:26, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, that would make more sense. Special:AbuseLog/43459072 was done by the same user, so while I am not familiar with this sockmaster the description given by Generalrelative would certainly indicate it. Primefac (talk) 09:25, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, their manner of mocking Doug and using "duck" wordplay in the username seemed to suggest Mikemikev to me at first, but I've never seen a Mikemikev sock go on to make a bunch of constructive edits afterwards. Could be he's mellowed out a bit or it could be someone else. In any case, I'd bet money this is block evasion, given the initial editing pattern (the trolling, first edit being a one-word statement on the user page, leaping right into back-end stuff, edit summaries containing way too much background knowledge, e.g. "Dead people should only contain subcategories", quoting things like WP:IAR in RfC discussion in the first 50 edits). See my comment on their talk page. Generalrelative (talk) 16:12, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Talk

Hey @Primefac, As in probation period for AfC i want to know a status of my approvals Abdullah1099 (talk) 15:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

My AfC log Abdullah1099 (talk) 15:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Carbon Mapper is a bit on the borderline, it looked like it had a ton of references but 60% of them were duplicates.
Draft:Magion 1 got moved back to draft because of AI issues; when reviewing references you don't necessarily have to read every single one of them, but at the very least should be opening them up and checking both the length of the text as well as whether it actually discusses the content (based on the edit summaries in the move it sounds like the refs failed both of those criteria originally). Otherwise things are looking okay. Primefac (talk) 12:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
I had given approval based on sources but after knowing that AI was used then i doubt my approval Abdullah1099 (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
You're still new at this, and if you've never had to deal with AI sources you'd not necessarily know to look for them. Don't worry too much about it, think of them as learning opportunities. Primefac (talk) 12:14, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, I am learning things related to AfC. Abdullah1099 (talk) 12:57, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Draft merge/redirect

Hello Primefac, I hope you're doing well. Could you please merge or redirect the history of the newly created Draft:Haiwaan (2026 film) into the existing Draft:Haiwaan? Thank you for your consideration. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 13:24, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

No; there was no copy/paste pagemove (i.e. the pages were created independently) so the only thing that should be done (if necessary) is to merge the content (following the usual attribution guidelines) and/or redirect to the better draft. Primefac (talk) 14:05, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Soccer player-cricketer

Is a person who plays both Soccer and cricket. Jamiewoods7 (talk) 11:49, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

That would make sense. Primefac (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

About you move

Hi! about you move from Ladri di Biciclette (band) to Ladri di Biciclette, are you sure Bicycle Thieves isn't the primary topic? Cavarrone 10:23, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Probably. Primefac (talk) 10:37, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Discussion re Template:National women's squash team etc.?

Was there a discussion that led to you moving {{National squash team}} and {{National women's squash team}}? I would have advocated for {{National men's squash team}} as the destination for the former, since it links only to men's teams. Putting the gender in only one name indicates that men are the default gender and women are "other". I'm sure there is a bias-related essay about it around here somewhere. – [[User:|Jonesey95]] (talk) 18:36, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Only a precedent I've seen over the years of not including "men's" in template titles, but I have no issue making things more explicit. Primefac (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
Thanks. I was unable to find an essay, but WP:CATGENDER touches on the idea of naming each gender when there are parallel sports categories. This seems like the same thing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, if I had to guess it started with a lot of "national X team" templates when there was either only a men's code or no articles for the women's, and then later the templates were updated to include the "men's". I probably should go through and change a bunch of the ones I've done in the past, but I'll definitely keep it in mind going forward. Primefac (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
Hi Primefac. Many pages on wikipedia have been corrupted due to the page move (i.e. just about ever year page relating to the European Squash Team Championships), can you please fix, many thanks @Jonesey95: MaugerFundin (talk) 10:41, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
There was a triple-redirect that didn't get sorted out, which has been rectified. Thanks for the heads up. Primefac (talk) 11:02, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal

FYI, you removed the tfd notice, but it has not been userfied or deleted yet? 15:20, 23 March 2026 (UTC) Frietjes (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me. That template isn't anything like the others, so I skipped it at the time because I'm honestly not sure if I can hold that template to the same close. Primefac (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal

Hello, you did not userfy Template:COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal and Template:COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal/core per the closure. ~2026-16635-23 (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

lol, WikiCleanerMan, see section directly above :) Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Infobox KAAC Team

Hi Primefac. Would you mind taking a look at Template:Infobox KAAC Team? It's already been deleted once (User talk:Whpq#Question from HE Sports Desk (23:02, 24 March 2026)) but seems to have been recreated. The creator is a new user and the template is being used in Boyle County High School#Academic team, but it looks very different from what a template page typically looks like. Perhaps it's OK, and I'm not out to get it deleted for what it's worth; I just thought it would be a good idea for someone more familiar with templates to look it over. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:58, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

That was a terrible deletion (I have restored the original page and you will note that it is just an infobox). I'm not sure what you mean by it looks very different from what a template page typically looks like -- it looks to be working perfectly fine at the Boyle County page. Am I missing something? Of course, I'm fairly confident this new infobox duplicates a half-dozen others and can probably easily be replaced by them, but I'm headed out at the moment so I can't investigate further at this time. Primefac (talk) 10:28, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
Most of the template pages I've seen seem to have a documentation page in which the syntax is visible to the reader. So, I guess that's what I meant when I posted the bit about it looking different from most other template pages I've seen. Templates aren't really one of the things I work a lot with, and this one does seem to work as intended; though, I can tell if there's image parameter for it like there seems to for most infobox templates. Anyway, thanks for taking a look at it. Once again, I wasn't asking you to try and get the template deleted again; rather, I was only doing so because you've been very helpful before when it comes to questions about templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
The syntax for the template seems to have |image= and |caption= parameters, but I can't seem to figure out how to get them to work. If possible, I think adding the image of the 2025 team being used in Boyle County High School#Academic team in the infobox would be better than adding it as separate syntax (either as a gallery or thumbnail) to the section. Can you tell whether images can be used with this infobox template? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:31, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
It has a |logo= param not an |image= param, as seen in Special:Diff/1345421395. Primefac (talk) 00:45, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of that. When I clicked on "Edit" to see the syntax for the template, I saw what looked like a |image= in position 16. Anyway, thanks again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
There is, but it's inside of the invocation for Module:InfoboxImage, which then has a |image={{{logo}}} call. It's all about the nesting! Primefac (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
I now see how it's intended to work. Thanks again for everything. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:05, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Napoleon Murphy Brock article

Hello. In the thread where the repeated deletion of the subject's rape conviction was discussed, you seem to be the only editor still active on Wikipedia. The source is official and beyond doubt, and the material should be included per the BLP guidelines. Please review. Thanks! Dastard noise (talk) 16:32, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

And yet, nothing has changed. Primefac (talk) 19:03, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Bot run?

Howdyyyy. Hope you are well. Jonesey95 and I have been working on deprecating and cleaning up params in {{Infobox officeholder}}. Would love help cleaning out Category:Pages using infobox officeholder with deprecated parameters (0) whenever you have time. The category should be pretty well populated at this point. Thanks in advance! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:36, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Ooft. I'll see what I can do. Primefac (talk) 21:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Much appreciated as always! Also, keep forgetting to tell you. Great job cleaning up Template:Infobox rugby biography! So much better. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:44, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Just wanted to bump this... If you have a chance to put a dent in this that would be stellar! It is a big one. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
I'll try to get started on it this week. Primefac (talk) 09:52, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Width enquiry

Hey Primefac, I hope you are well, it's been a while, good to see you around still :D - I remember our works together and your excellent bot, and I have an enquiry about the width of Template:Infobox school. I remember before (around the time when Infobox UK school was merged), if a logo or image was added to the infobox, it would not affect the default width of the infobox itself (the default width of the infobx was the same as the implemented mapframes). The only way the infobox would increase in width size was if the |logo_size= or |image_size= parameters were used where the size inputted was larger than the default width of the infobox itself,

I can't find any discussion that allowed for this change to happen, and I'm coming across articles like this school where an image was added without using |image_size= that has increased the width of the infobox. If you removed the image, the infobox goes back to its normal size (same size as the implemented mapframes), any ideas? :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 08:37, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

If you're seeing that happen, it is most likely due to a change to {{infobox}} itself, might be worth asking there. Primefac (talk) 08:53, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
You could be right, I had a look at some other articles with other infoboxes like BT Tower where the same thing is happening. If this is the case for all infoboxes now, I think I will just leave it as it is; the image only ends up being a tiny bit bigger than the mapframes so not much of a problem. I may raise this up at a later time, thank you Primefac 🙂 Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:10, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
Depending on how long you were away, this change may be due to the increase in the default image thumbnail size that happened a few years ago. I may be able to dig up relevant links, or you can try searching the VPT archives. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Happy April Fool's Day!

a rainbow trout fish

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

- Have a good day anyway! - SimpleObjects-9ei ❄️/☃️/🥶 13:52, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy blanking?

I presume [2] was an OTRS action but I don't see anything extreme in the discussion that the subject needs protecting from and if the issue is a PR based bio having socking in an Attempt to pervert our process I don't see that as legitimate. Could you please provide some context to your decision please? Spartaz Humbug! 17:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree, there is nothing too extreme in there, which is mainly the reason why it was simply blanked instead of RD'd or suppressed. I can't really say too much more but if you add in "alleged" before "socking" in your statement above, you might end up along the correct series of events that led to the blanking. Primefac (talk) 18:12, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Sorry

Wanted to apologize for this comment I made after a long day. As I mentioned in my follow up, could definitely have said that in a far less douchey way. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:57, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

No worries, I am no stranger to doing A Thing and then having someone come in and do something unexpected. Didn't take anything negative from it. Primefac (talk) 09:47, 3 April 2026 (UTC)
Wanted to make sure you were aware of Category:Articles using duplicate arguments in template calls (3) which has absolutely exploded.... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:35, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Question about my AfC Probation

Hello, I recently applied for AfC probation (again after a hiatus), and would like to ask for my probation to be reverted (essentially removing my access to the script), as the network that I use to do a majority of my editing has blocked auth.wikimedia.org (wikipedia's login page). I have attempted to appeal the block with my network provider, but no response has been given as of now. Since probation is reviewed, I figured that the small amount of edits I was able to make before the block would not be enough to allow for a applicable acceptance. How could one remove themselves from the probation list? Regards, Cooldudeseven7 💬 talk~📜 ctb~🖊️ gb 02:28, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 10:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
Thank you! Cooldudeseven7 💬 talk~📜 ctb~🖊️ gb 18:24, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2026

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2026).

Administrator changes

added
removed

Checkuser changes

removed Giraffer

Oversight changes

added Kj cheetham
removed Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the GSCASTE extended-confirmed restriction in the Indian military history case has been narrowed. It now applies to caste-related topics in South Asia, and the preemptive protection remedy has been amended accordingly.
  • The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been closed.
  • The arbitration case Maghreb has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 7 April.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

PrimeBot broke U.S. senator infoboxes

Hi. Just letting you know that the infoboxes of many U.S. senators are broken after PrimeBot mistakenly removed the "jr/sr = United States Senator" parameter in its latest run, for example see Special:Diff/1347282277. Davey2116 (talk) 04:54, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Will reply at the template talk. Primefac (talk) 08:28, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Major General Charles Frank Bolden

It should be noted that Major General Bolden was inducted into the Unites States Veterans Hall of Fame in 2024.


2024 CEREMONY | Mysite ~2026-21399-60 (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Cool? Primefac (talk) 21:15, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Infobox errors / question

Hello there! In PrimeBOT's recent parameter cleanup, I'm seeing errors in one specific pattern. It always happens when an original parameter has a weird line break in the middle of a link, like this, at Neptali Gonzales: 

| office7             = [[Regular Batasang Pambansa|Mambabatas Pambansa (Assemblyman)]] from [[Legislative district of San Juan–Mandaluyong|
San Juan–Mandaluyong]]

The parameter cleanup trims it to the part before the line break, resulting in this: 

| office7      = [[Regular Batasang Pambansa|Mambabatas Pambansa (Assemblyman)]] from [[Legislative district of San Juan–Mandaluyong

Those missing end brackets wreck the infobox.

I've seen this same pattern many times over the past few days. This is very far out of my area of expertise, so I don't know if there's a way to prevent it. I suspect there isn't, but wanted to do my due diligence in reporting it. The error is very easy for me to spot and fix, so no worries. Thank you! :) Jessicapierce (talk) 16:16, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

This is unfortunately one of those GIGO things that I just haven't ever found a fix for, because none of the AWB scripts/tools I'm using assume that a wikilink will be split across multiple lines. That, and it's a fairly rare bug so usually by the time someone points it out to me, the run is usually over. If you keep seeing it pop up in a huge number of places I'll see about actually putting something together. Primefac (talk) 21:42, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply - that's kind of what I figured. No worries, I'm definitely not seeing a huge number of these errors, especially as a percentage of the overall number of primebot edits. They're quick to fix (and make me feel useful). Cheers Jessicapierce (talk) 22:57, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Regex typo?

Something went wrong with Special:Diff/1303616146/1348415854. Introduced |p= when removing the |residence= param. Tiny thing but just wanted you to be aware in case it is a larger issue... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:19, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to guess that WikiFunctions.Tools.RemoveTemplateParameter cannot handle a named reference that uses multiple pipes and and = in the name. In other words, it looks like it saw <ref name="harvp|Lives|1965|p= 506"> and thought that the |p= was part of a new parameter instead of part of the ref. Not something I can really do anything about, but I'll mention it over at WT:AWB just in case someone has an idea. This could just be such a random case of GIGO that no one even thought to code it in (similar to the "hard return in a wikilink" issue mentioned above). Primefac (talk) 15:27, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
Gotcha! Just wanted to make sure it wasn't another case of the jr/sr error... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:32, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
It's probably related... thanks for reminding me. Primefac (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
Of course! Keep up the great work though and thanks. Happy Sunday. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:33, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Medal templates

per this tfd, sees like there are more in Category:Medal icon templates which could be nominated for TfD as well? Frietjes (talk) 17:12, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Oh my, thank you for that... I didn't even think to check the container category for similar templates; I was just looking at the three-letter ones. Thanks! Primefac (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Revdel?

Should this be revdeleted? Unclear if promotion or personal, but without revdel the edit summary will remain visible in page history. Gamapamani (talk) 08:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but next time please email me or the Oversight Team. Primefac (talk) 11:03, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Thanks. I would have if it was clearer that this was personal information and not some sort of a promotion attempt (like if it was posted on a bio instead of a business communication article). Just having a number with nothing to tie it to seemed questionable in terms of needing oversight and potential risk of streisanding looked very low in this case. TBH the probability of getting chewed out for wasting your time seemed significantly higher. :) Gamapamani (talk) 10:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
Oh, I wasn't chewing you out (and I never will!), I always appreciate when people ask about things that might need suppression (even if they're borderline). I requested private communication in the future because for the two hours between when you posted and when I replied, a larger number of people than would normally have seen that diff would have been given a link to that information (via my talk page watchers). Now they're all lovely people but it's more a matter of principle than anything in that regard. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 11:01, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Help at Commons

Hi Primefac, hope you're well. At WP:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard/Archive_50#Desysop request (Dank), you asked me to let you know if I need any advanced permissions. I'm now back on the English Wikipedia, writing and reviewing at WP:FLC, mostly ... and to make it work, I need IP block exemption on Commons so I can upload images. (I already have WP:IPBE on en.wp.) Can you help, or hook me up with someone who can help? - Dank (push to talk) 14:05, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Commons IPBE are dealt with at commons:Commons:IP block exemption (and on the off chance you need it, GIPBE is at meta:Global IP block exemptions). Primefac (talk) 20:26, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Removing my editing from nations at the Olympics

Hey there, guess what? If you continue canceling my editing I will make sure to block you from my existence, because it's now personal and I guess all the editors on Wikipedia hate me now. I blame everyone of you for messing with my editings. I guess maybe I don't really belong here, or maybe you know something that I don't, but it doesn't matter because it's been done and I can't continue this anymore! If you stop messing with my editings then I will be calm. Mkess300 (talk) 13:32, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, we seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot. As I said at your talk page (and on the WT:OLY discussion) your edits to the infobox were breaking things; I am mainly trying to fix that issue. It's nothing personal. You're more than welcome to continue editing and improving Wikipedia, but if someone tells you that something you're doing isn't right (or that you should get consensus) please consider joining in the conversation. Primefac (talk) 13:35, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
What about removing the timeline tables? I've seen you done it in India and Bangladesh, and Pakistan maybe Mkess300 (talk) 13:38, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
Some are useful, some are not. If there are specific tables that you think should be included that have been removed, discuss the matter on the article's talk page; don't just edit war to keep adding it in. Primefac (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
But if I try to prove it, it's been canceled anyway. Mkess300 (talk) 13:43, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by "prove it", but I don't see any talk page discussions that you have started. If you think that those tables are useful, start a discussion and get a consensus to do so. Primefac (talk) 13:46, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
Teach me how to do it because so far I've been struggling with it. Mkess300 (talk) 13:49, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
Well, let's take a page I saw which had multiple people remove the table, Bangladesh at the Olympics. If you want to make the argument that the table should be included, go to Talk:Bangladesh at the Olympics and start a new discussion. I do note in one of your edit summaries you said This table is relevant because Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan before gaining independence, and before that these countries were a part of British India -- use that as your discussion starter, and see where things go from there. If no one participates after a day or two, consider posting a short note at WT:OLY using {{Please see}} to point people in the direction of the discussion. Primefac (talk) 13:56, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
Ok, I will try, thank you, and sorry for letting my nerves out towards you Mkess300 (talk) 14:04, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
No worries, I certainly know how frustrating editing can be sometimes. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Dup args

FYI looks like your latest bot run had an issue: Category:Articles using duplicate arguments in template calls (3). Not entirely sure what went wrong so I'm not sure how to fix... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:54, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

An example is this edit on 2011 Women's European Volleyball League. The bot changed the report parm from 12 to 11 OK. But it removed the total parm (old parm 11) for some legs but not others. Davemck (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, regex fail, wasn't expecting any of the params to have {{nowrap}} used... And I ran trials on about 100 pages (out of 400) before I kicked it over to automatic... Primefac (talk) 19:32, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
These things happen... Do you mind fixing pretty please? Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:40, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
Working on it. Primefac (talk) 19:40, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
🙇 thanks! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:41, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Recent template moves

Recently you moved...a lot (all?) of the ship-prefix based templates with the comment "expand name for clarity". Very few of these of these are spelled out in common use, and they will never be spelled out in their useage on Wikipedia. I would like to ask that you revert these moves (a few have, but then I saw the full scope of the problem) and if you still believe they should be fully spelled out to open a full discussion at WP:TFD. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:27, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

This is not about what will be used most frequently (which is why template redirects exist in the first place) but rather what someone will be most likely to understand/recognise if they are looking for something specific (or even just someone looking a similar template to one they've used before). "Template:Ecuadorian Navy Ship" is a lot more clear than "Template:BAE", and some acronyms such as ARC, HS, or SMS have multiple meanings. This is also why our template content guideline says similar. If you still think that this is somehow inappropriate or "wrong" I will start the necessary discussion. Primefac (talk) 08:39, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Primefac/Archive_51&oldid=1361413807"