User talk: Paine Ellsworth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
head of giraffe
'Wikipedia is a community effort of staggering proportions!'
Mop with crown.svg

I am not an administrator. Wouldn't mind being one, although don't really want to be. Wouldn't mind being an admin because I deeply respect many admins and have been helped by them many, many times over the years. I also respect (tho' do not always agree with) the community vettings at RfA that often show the ultimate trust of an editor. Don't really want to be an admin because I guess I'm just too old to go through that sometimes grueling community scrutiny.

So I shall remain a non-admin caught between two worlds... the world of the admins, which means I'm expected not to close controversial discussions (which I sometimes do, sometimes don't), and the world of less experienced editors who don't want me to close the "easy" discussions (which I also sometimes do, sometimes don't), and save those for them. If it's in the backlog, then it's fair game!

Anyway, if you have come to ask about one of my RfC, RM, MRV or other discussion closures, you are very welcome here! I am usually inclined to reopen a discussion if the outcome was "no consensus" and when I am asked to do so (not so much if I found a consensus – doesn't mean I cannot be persuaded with a good, sound argument)! Please be very clear about your intentions and do not beat around the bush. Thank you for your deeply respected concerns!

'they help us keep our minds sharp!'

Recently registered?[edit]


    Learn quickly how to journey into and through this awe-inspiring reference work!

Older collapsed discussions
Discussions and notifications... → click the section title in the Table of Contents (ToC) above, or click [show] to see all the discussions
The following are closed discussions. Please do not modify them. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Signpost: 03 April 2023[edit]

RFC close[edit]

Hi Paine Ellsworth, thank you for your close. Even though the wording has been slightly modified from "and the 1991 nationwide uprisings" to "and the suppression of the 1991 uprisings in Iraq", they still both mean the same thing, which means the statement remains a problem for the lead. Enough sources have been provided in that RFC to show the statement is disputed, and a majority of editors in that RFC also agree that this content is better suited for the body of the article where different narratives can be better explained. - MA Javadi (talk) 09:04, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello editor MA Javadi. Let me look this over and then give you a full response. Thank you for your patience, because I have a lot on my plate these days, both on and offline. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 08:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it is the case that "a majority of editors in that RFC also agree that this content is better suited for the body of the article where different narratives can be better explained", then there should be no problem with removing or changing the wording. If there is still a problem with that, then a fresh RfC should be opened to deal with it. The old RfC can then be referenced with a link to it. Hope this helps. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 19:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invitation to participate in WP:TCC[edit]

I, Paine Ellsworth, invite you to participate in The Core Contest.
Each participant improves one vital or core article during a ≈45 day period, with monetary rewards at stake!
This is an excellent opportunity to make a "bang-for-your-buck" improvement to Wikipedia through a burst of focused effort that will be felt most by the casual user. See a fuller explanation here.
Hurry up and reserve an article now!
08:05, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
To invite other editors, place the following on their talk page:
==Invitation to participate in The Core Contest==

Ref. User talk:Aza24#Invitation template for WP:TCC

Invitation to participate in WP:TCC_2[edit]

I, Paine Ellsworth, invite you to participate in The Core Contest.
Each participant improves one vital or core article during a ≈45 day period, with monetary rewards at stake!
This is an excellent opportunity to make a "bang-for-your-buck" improvement to Wikipedia through a burst of focused effort that will be felt most by the casual user. See a fuller explanation here.
Hurry up and reserve an article now!
08:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
To invite other editors, place the following on their talk page:
==Invitation to participate in The Core Contest==

Ref. User talk:Aza24#Invitation template for WP:TCC

Move request re-opening[edit]

Hello, I am wondering if the move request on this page could be re-opened, and possibly approved. A personal family member teaches electrical engineering, and I never heard him use the term Sheffer stroke. Indexcard88 (talk) 08:11, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello editor Indexcard88. Let me look this over and then give you a full response. Thank you for your patience, because I have a lot on my plate these days, both on and offline. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 08:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I understand, because I myself did a double take. Thank you for coming to my talk page! I am trained in digital electronics and was instructed to call it a NAND gate. The problem though is that the article is about a term used in Boolean functions and propositional calculus, not in electronics nor in electrical engineering. Unless sources can be provided to show that the common name is something else in Boolean functions and propositional calculus, then the article's title, "Sheffer stroke", should stay where it's been for more than twenty years! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:08, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Paine Ellsworth: may I impose on your kind clarifications again, to tell me how to "unstick" the above move request? With the new update to WP:NCWS (added last sentence of lede, per consensus resolution here), the reason given for the prior (contested) move from "alphabet" to "script" appears to vanish. I noted this at the bottom of the move request thread. Does it still need to linger until May 8? – .Raven  .talk 13:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To editor .Raven: thank you very much for coming to my talk page! The seven-day relist period is about to elapse, so resolution should hopefully come sooner than later. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed it did! Thank you very much! – .Raven  .talk 02:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
my pleasure! Paine  02:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello P.E., please, if you have some spare time, would you check something for me - it's a protected template inclusion request here? I would really appreciate it, but thank you anyway and in advance. ౪ Santa ౪99° 21:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, editor ౪ Santa ౪, and thank you very much for coming to my talk page! Definitely plan to look into that template and your request. It's been awhile since I've worked with that template and its sub-templates, so please be patient while I refamiliarize myself with it. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Superb, thank you very much, and take your time, of course. Please ping me for any questions you may have regarding agency, links, parameters, and so on. ౪ Santa ౪99° 01:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
my pleasure! Paine  02:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive[edit]

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
NPP Barnstar.png
  • On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Article patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
  • There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, can you do me a favor and close this dispute. The dispute seems to be resolved, but now it seems like it has deviated from its course with the people inquiring each other’s motives. Okiyo9228 (talk) 02:43, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Okiyo9228, and thank you very much for coming to my talk page! I would love to close that discussion for you, but it has long been a WP tradition that specific requests for closure must go through WP:CR. So if, after reading WP:CLOSE, you still think that discussion needs to be formally closed, then please request the close at WP:CR. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 03:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
“ Many discussions result in a reasonably clear consensus, so if the consensus is clear, any editor—even one involved in the discussion—may close the discussion” Does that mean I can close it? Okiyo9228 (talk) 04:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you think that consensus is clear, then yes, you can close it and suggest you cite the statement you quoted above, and where you found it, in your closing statement. Be prepared, because some editors may disagree with you, so you might have to justify your closure. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 04:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your help! Okiyo9228 (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
my pleasure! Paine  15:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023[edit]


Just to let you know, editor Captain Jack Sparrow, I do understand your PRECISION argument. I think one reason editors did not come to agreement on the two article titles is because, at present, Hindutva terrorism fails RECOGNIZABLE and is supported by PRECISION, while Hindu terrorism fails PRECISION while being supported by RECOGNIZABLE. If I've read the discussions correctly, there are some editors who want the Hindu terrorism title so they can broaden the scope of the article, which at present is pretty much all about Hindutva terrorism. They seem to want to add more subtopics to the article under the title of Hindu terrorism. This might be why none of the closers so far have wanted to change the article title from its current "Hindu terrorism". They seem to want to leave room for expansion of the article's scope. But you appear to want the scope to remain what it is now, so I wonder why you don't want to let those other editors begin to expand the scope of the article under the "Hindu terrorism" title? Just curious, really, and I would understand if you want to completely ignore and dismiss this inquiry. I really did mean it when I said I wish you the best going forward. We're all volunteer editors here, and I do respect your enthusiasm where WP improvement is concerned. Thank you very much for that! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Im not entirely opposed to expanding the scope, though I think the two should be separated. I havent given much weight to those arguments as those who want to expand the scope havent actually brought up incidents that would be classified as "Hindu Terrorism" . It has been about a month since the title was changed, yet the only meaningful content about Hindu Terror is the opening paragraph (and even that is in context of Hindutva Terrorism only). What I dont want is editors just hand waving and asking for time to drag out the process enough that people stop participating and they keep the contents and the title that they want.
And about the PRECISION argument, thanks for letting me know. What I was conveying when I talked about RECOGNISABLE argument, was that while Hindutva Terrorism may not be the most recognisable term, I didnt think it was obscure enough to invoke the policy cited. While we should look for a more recognisable titles, we shouldnt lose sight of other policies. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 13:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As an addendum, the idea that some editors are "expanding" the scope by naming it Hindu Terrorism is also flawed; It assumes that Hindutva is simply a subset of Hinduism, an argument inherently flawed as discussed on the talk page. Naming the article Hindu Terrorism isnt expanding the scope, it is misleading the reader as to the contents of the article. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 09:34, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Point taken, and while the fairly popular idea that Hindutva terrorism is a subtopic of Hindu terrorism is discussed, I find myself at a loss to know the precise viability of the specifics surrounding that idea. If you're correct, then a whole new light might be shed by a fresh RM, Hindu terrorism → Hindutva terrorism, to see if editors can build an actual consensus for one of those titles. I think that's where this is headed, and I look forward to the result! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:47, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would prefer a resolution in the MRV itself, it is getting pretty exhausting tbh. I would take part in the fourth fifth discussion if necessary, but it would be a lot of extra effort I would rather avoid. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 10:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm sure you are not alone in those thoughts, Captain Jack Sparrow, not alone at all. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 10:07, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Choice of words[edit]

In the MRV, your choice of words has not been that of a good faith editor. It is likely not a violation of WP:NPA, but it is not indicative of a healthy attitude for a discussion. Focus on policy, not trying to berate editors. I hope you take this seriously. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 06:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You should talk. However we seem to be able to tolerate each other's shortcomings, and my guess it's because we both know that volunteer editing of an encyclopedia can be very rewarding in many ways, but it's not always the easiest thing to do. I would suggest editors stop trying to stick to their guns so hard and start trying to build consensus for a better title for that article – that's all the editors involved, including you and me. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 08:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You dont seem to have understood what a good faith discussion is, with your comment right after this being "you appear to be blind as a bat". Can you not discuss something without trying to berate others? The fact that someone has tolerated your comments does not excuse them. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't berate others. Others berate themselves, and I just point out their self-derision with the hope that, in the future, they will stop embarrassing themselves. As human beings many of us are sadly self-derisive without being aware of it. Your words give away the fact that you are blind to the truths of this situation. While I'm certain this is true, I'm also certain that just saying you are blind would not imprint on your mind nearly as deeply as being called "blind as a bat". The fact that you find that statement berating speaks volumes. You are much smarter than you consider yourself to be, Sparrow. So please consider how much easier bats get around than we do. They use sonar much better than we do, so they don't need "sight". Enjoy the wisdom! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 04:44, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Infobox album/color/sandbox/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q𝟤𝟪 21:08, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Honestly, it's stuff like this that makes me want to take all 6k templates and bung them into a single module... let people fight over the flags if they want, but put it into a smaller area. Primefac (talk) 13:17, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, and believe it or not, I've been through every template a few times sprucing them up. I've always been very impressed by the way the {{Country showdata}} meta was implemented, if not by its "non-country" applications. Russia is special with its many subdivisions: Republics, Oblasts, Cities and so much more. Then of course, there's the US and UK. Sigh indeed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:53, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Rcat template documentation pages has been nominated for renaming[edit]

Category:Rcat template documentation pages has been nominated for 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 the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 08:43, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Challenge on my G6 request of Gypsy Girl[edit]

Hi Paine Ellsworth,

I see you challenged my speedy deletion request that moves Gypsy Girl (disambiguation) to Gypsy Girl and categorized Gypsy Girl to Category:Redirects from ambiguous terms instead. I notice that 4meter4 has recently adapted the disambiguation page to remove Gypsy Girl (Television series) from the primary topic. Now that there's an on-going discussion on Talk:Gypsy Girl (Television series) to determine if it's the primary topic, I will make further move after the consensus was formed.

Do you have any reason except that? According to Wikipedia:Disambiguation, the disambiguation page should be moved to its base name if there's no primary topic. Otherwise, it could be adapted to a primary redirect to the primary topic. In either case, the base name shouldn't be linked to itself with the (disambiguation) qualifier. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 08:39, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I saw the move request with opposition and thought that the SD was jumping the gun just a bit. Agree that the redirect should not target the GG (dab) page for very long because the redirect can temporarily be considered malplaced. To be able to disposition the redirect correctly, we'll have to wait until the move request is closed to find out what needs to be done with it. Thank you very much for coming to my talk page, editor NmWTfs85lXusaybq, and Best of Everything to You and Yours! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:58, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rank of Endopterygota[edit]


There's a problem with the rank of Endopterygota, which you changed at Template:Taxonomy/Endopterygota. The article says it's a superorder, but it has two children, Hymenopterida and Panorpida, which are also said to be superorders. So I reverted the change to Template:Taxonomy/Endopterygota. However, the sources at Endopterygota seem to be more recent, so I wonder if Hymenopterida and Panorpida are no longer accepted? Peter coxhead (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks again, Peter! Well, Wikispecies still sees them, and both the Hymenopterida and Panorpida pages refer to them as superorders while referring to Endopterygota as a clade, so perhaps we should rank Endopterygota as a clade here on Wikipedia as well? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:16, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Clade. A nonspecific term meaning that you know that it's lower than a phylum but higher than a genus, but are otherwise unsure how it fits in. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, hardly better than "unranked", and yet it is still pretty widely used. Even at Template:Taxonomy/Endopterygota there are several clades listed in the Ancestral taxa listing. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 17:11, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Clade" is more specific than "unranked", in that it explicitly claims that the group is monophyletic.
The reality seems to be that there is no consensus classification for insects above orders (or even above families). I suspect that it's probably better to treat Endopterygota as a superorder and the problematic children Hymenopterida and Panorpida as clades because Endopterygota is a vastly more widely used term than the other two. Peter coxhead (talk) 06:53, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Peter, I respect that you know a lot more than I do about these subjects and will go with anything you say. If there seems to be no consensus among reliable taxonomy sources, then it's a tough call. Do you think it would help to have more eyes on this? such as other editors who watch the WT:WikiProject Tree of Life page? Maybe we should move this discussion there? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 03:58, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
More eyes is definitely a good idea. Maybe WT:WikiProject Insects as well? Peter coxhead (talk) 06:39, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has been moved, and a notification was given to WikiProject Insects. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 08:55, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request to add Outlook India's Emerging University 2022 ranking[edit]

Hello, please add Outlook India's Emerging State Private University 2022 ranking to Template:Infobox India university ranking. Here is the source[1]. I really hope that you will accept my request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Someone Apex (talkcontribs) 18:40, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To editor Someone Apex: thank you for coming to my talk page! Hope to find time later this morning to look into this. Have reopened your previous request. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 03:00, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To editor Paine Ellsworth: Thanks a lot!!

The Signpost: 5 June 2023[edit]