User talk:Redrose64#Oobi at Work

Hi, RedRose64, I'd like to talk about https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1272040047 this issue with the Victoria tram stop section of Manchester Victoria rail station's article. It's only a minor issue on what line(s) Victoria tram stop is on, but I really want to know what the problem is. I thought it be better to talk about this on a talk page instead of reverting each other's edits.

The lines that a tram stop is on is not exactly defined, but I have edited and reviewed every tram stop page related to Metrolink and used a common rule across all 99 articles: that the separate tram "lines" are defined by how they opened physically, and by line references across the network.

The different tram routes are different from the tram lines, and I'm certain that this is where the confusion lies.

You say that "trams to Rochdale bypass Victoria", and I agree. I don't agree that this means Victoria is on the Rochdale Line. The tram route from East Didsbury - Rochdale Town Centre operates through Victoria, yes, but the physical tram stop does not lie on the Rochdale Line's tracks. The Rochdale Line's tracks begin at Irk Valley Junction, like I said previously.

You also mentioned that I was implying that the line has no stops west of Monsall, and you'd be right. Again, the physical Rochdale Line tracks are at Monsall, but not Victoria. You also mentioned that this way would mean it's isolated from the rest of the network. I'm not saying that the Rochdale Line begins at Monsall, I'm saying it ends at Irk Valley Junction with the Bury Line. It would seem isolated if we were just talking about the stations, but I'm talking about the entire network, including the track.

You would be correct in saying the final stop for Rochdale-bound trams before getting onto the physical tracks would be Victoria, but this doesn't mean that the physical line begins there.

That's a long explanation, but I hope it makes sense, and I'd like if we could come to an agreement. Eccentral8688 (talk) 23:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Eccentral8688}} I'm not claiming that trams to Rochdale bypass Victoria. My edit summary, in full, was {{tq|so trams to Rochdale somehow bypass Victoria, then?}} It's a question, asking how trams from the centre of Manchester can reach the Rochdale line without stopping at Victoria. There are no other routes out of the city centre; they must run via Victoria. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

::There is no way for trams from the centre of Manchester to reach the Rochdale Line without stopping at Victoria. That doesn't mean it's on the Rochdale Line's tracks, though Eccentral8688 (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::You haven't replied back, so just to inform you, I'm going to redo my edit now. I have edited and reviewed every tram stop page related to Metrolink and used a common rule across all 99 articles: that the separate tram "lines" are defined by how they opened physically, and by line references across the network. In my personal opinion this seems fitting and makes more sense.

::The rule you're explaining would mean that Cornbrook tram stop for example, is not only on the Altrincham Line, but also the Eccles, Trafford Park, Didsbury (South Manc) and Airport Lines. This corresponds with the routes than run on the network as well, making the difference between "lines" and "routes" blurry and unclear.

::If you still think it's worth discussing, please reply, but in the meantime, I'm reverting the edit back and adding a small note. Eccentral8688 (talk) 00:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

That's my first time initiating a closure request, and I thought "initiated" refers to when the closure request is initiated, but I now know it's when the RfC was initiated. Thanks again for politely instructing me in the edit summary. Left guide (talk) 09:10, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Left guide}} Yes, if you think about it, there is no need to separately indicate when the closure request is initiated, because it's in the signature that you left when posting the request. This does confuse some people. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help regarding the MG M-type - MG Midget links - as I was working on the Cecil Kimber entry I had forgotten the "MG Midget" entry did not refer to all of the model's history.

Regarding the coverage of his death, the UK official death record lists his death as having happened at the hospital - but there's no reason to quibble - Thanks again! WmArbaugh (talk) 11:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much for pointing out the issue. I've shortened and clarified the RfC question without changing its meaning or the previous responses, please let me know if anything else is needed. Aeengath (talk) 16:20, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Aeengath}} I'm puzzled why in {{diff|Talk:Vasojevići|prev|1280625370|this edit}} you removed the numeric time value, replacing it with an unrecognised {{para|timestamp|11:01, 18 April 2025}} parameter, also why you removed the {{tlx|rfc}} tag; and increased the length of the RfC statement, which as I explained already, extends to the next valid timestamp. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

::@Redrose64 Yes I realised afterwards, I'm new to RfCs and made a few mistakes in the process. Structuring it correctly was more complicated than I thought, I couldn't get the acute accent to show up on RfC/History and geography then I mistakenly removed and then restored some important templates as I learned the formatting and tried using past RfC as examples. None of this was intentional I was just trying to follow your advice and ensure compliance with WP:RFCBRIEF but rushed it a bit too much. Apologies for any confusion this caused I'll take care to avoid this going forward. Aeengath (talk) 19:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:::{{replyto|Aeengath}} The acute accent problem is a known bug with {{user|Legobot}}, which maintains pages like Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography (the problem is that Legobot can't handle characters with Unicode values of U+0100 or higher - and ć is U+0107). I fixed it by creating {{-r|Talk:Vasojevi?i}}. On that matter, edits {{diff|Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography|prev|1280437326|like this}} are pointless - as explained in the notice displayed when you edited the page, Legobot will revert or overwrite any changes that it didn't make itself. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

::::I’ve been struggling a bit with all the technical aspects and it’s been tricky organising the RfC while making sure everything was properly in place. I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AVasojevi%C4%87i&diff=1280813768&oldid=1280753587 just posted on the TP] but I’m not happy with how the text looks. If you have a minute would you mind taking a look? Aeengath (talk) 16:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Been reverting an IP's edits to Merseyrail as I felt they were unconstructive - and as I suggested, they went to the talk page to discuss the edits.... but instead of talking about their edits, they've simply twice labelled me as a "disruptive editor", and on their talk page left this message - "Do not slap WPs at me, as if I do not know how to write and you do. Next you may be saying I am insulting or being personal as well - another ploy. My changes were 100% constructive correcting infactuals. The lines in the 1970s were not owned by several different railway companies. They were owned publicly by British Rail not privately owned. It read like there was only one route through the city centre. If you think that is good English, and promoting infactuals who should desist from editing Wikipedia." which I thought was rather insulting. Any suggestions on dealing with them? I don't want to take them to any sort of noticeboard for nothing more than a couple of edits... Danners430 (talk) 10:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

:Honestly too, it wouldn't be something worthy of wasting people's time at any noticeboard either :-) Danners430 (talk) 11:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

::Apologies, as the last time I asked for advice it went from reasonably innocent to pointy and personal attacks in the time it took to message yourself... I've given up and stopped engaging and just gone to ANI. Danners430 (talk) 11:28, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

:::{{replyto|Danners430}} I've been offline between 06:35 and 17:25 (travelling, working, travelling). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

::::No worries at all - we all have real lives :) Quite often things like these don’t go as rapid, so there’s time to leave a message on a talk page for advice… and others, like here, it’s all over in the space of an hour or so… Danners430 (talk) 18:07, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my mistake on Railcar mover. I meant to revert the external link added by the spammer, but I must have goofed and selected the wrong revision in the edit history. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

:Possibly not, the editor had self-reverted, and you reverted that revert. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up my tables at Selby rail crash, I admittedly have fairly limited experience with them so was relying on Help:Table quite heavily. Re. your comment on the background property, I found those properties on the help page: "Cell borders can be hidden by adding border: none; background: none; to the style attributes of either the table or the cell". Do you know if there's a better way of positioning those "Total" rows and columns? FozzieHey (talk) 18:53, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

:The background isn't hidden. You may need to adjust the "contrast" or "brightness" settings of your monitor to make it show up, but for me, it shows as the same shade of grey as the table background, which is a very slightly darker grey that the page background. The absence of borders makes it easier to spot the change in shade. Here's a demo that makes it clear:

:Valid values for the background properties are given at [https://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/colors.html#background-properties the CSS 2.1 specification] - where none means that there is no background image, which is the default state. To alter the background colour, you can use any valid colour value, plus the keywords transparent or inherit. But in this case, the two keywords will merely cause the cell to take on the colour of the enclosing element - the table row. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:09, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

::Ah right, I understand now, so the background property is redundant? I'll remove it, but I guess the look is fine how it is at the moment, just wondered if there was an example of how to do it "properly". FozzieHey (talk) 19:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

:::What we want is the background colour of the table's parent. I don't know of an easy way to find that out except by possibly using JavaScript, and I'm no expert there. If you assume that the page background is white, and set an explicit background: white; declaration, this would give the "right" appearance for users of most skins - unless they switch to dark mode. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

:::{{replyto|FozzieHey}} I worked it out, in a kludgy way, with this edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

::::Ah amazing, thanks for doing that. My CSS skills are quite limited! It might be worth adding it to that Help page? I would have thought that having a "Total" cell on certain types of tables would be pretty common. FozzieHey (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::As I say, it's kludgy; and it also doesn't play nicely with dark mode. For those reasons I do not think that adding it to a help page would be at all sensible. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

{{User QAIbox

| image = Coltsfoot, Tegernsee.jpg

| image_upright = 0.8

| bold = story · music · places

}}

Thanks for fixing the bullets! - Today, 300 years of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1! - We sang works for (mostly) double choir by Pachelbel, Johann Christoph Bach, Kuhnau/Bach, Gounod and Rheinberger! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey Redrose64, can you check why one of the toolforge link I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=1282300839 provided here] is not getting inside the brackets? Kindly fix it. Thanks a lot! Abhishek0831996 (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Abhishek0831996}} This was {{diff|Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement|prev|1282308202|fixed}} by {{user|Anomalocaris}}. Basically, one closing square bracket was missing - but on a link earlier on, not one of the toolforge ones. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:19, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey there,

Id want you to contribute to the afd, if you don't mind and got some time. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vijayant_Thapar_(officer).

Thanks, have a great day. CaptShayan (talk) 04:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|CaptShayan}} Why are you sending this to me, when I am neither the article's creator, nor a major contributor? In fact, I have never before edited that article, or its talk page. Indeed, why are you sending similar messages to [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=CaptShayan&namespace=3&limit=4&offset=202503290510 several other people]? This can be seen as WP:CANVASsing. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@Redrose64, you recently checked some edits I'd made on the Help:Editing guide. I looked over each of your edits and I'd like to follow up on several because careful proofreading is a longtime priority of mine, as I know it is of yours.

_________________

1 -

TEXT: The VisualEditor option is intended as a user-friendly, "What You See Is What You Get" (WYSIWYG) editing aid, allowing one to edit pages without the need to learn wikitext markup.

WHAT YOU DID: You deleted the comma I put after (WYSIWYG).

MY COMMENT: I respectfully disagree with removing the comma, because the entire appositional phrase used to describe editing aid is “What You See Is What You Get" (WYSIWYG)" ... and so a comma is required at the end of that phrase.

_________________

2 -

TEXT: It is also a good idea to publish changes frequently, so that a browser crash or electrical failure will not result in the loss all your work.

WHAT YOU DID: You added of as the 4th to last word.

MY COMMENT: I agree but could have sworn I added it. I remember noting the need to do so.

_________________

3 -

TEXT: The reference is a footnote, appearing as an inline link (e.g. [1][2]) to a particular item in a collated, numbered list of footnotes, found wherever a template or tag is present, usually in a section titled "References" or "Notes".

WHAT YOU DID: You deleted the comma I added after e.g.

MY COMMENT: In all my writing classes, I was taught that a comma is always placed after e.g. and i.e. I was surprised to find in a quick online search for supporting style guidance that in the US, where I’m from, a comma after e.g. is pretty standard ... but not in the UK and other countries using British format.

That said, though — and to save you time pointing out that the article was written in British format after all — yes, sorry, I later realized that. When I began editing the article, it was only because I’d seen a few little issues pop up that I decided should be picked up on. Focused on them, I didn’t check to see which format prevailed in the article as I would have done in a traditional edit. Lesson learned for future unplanned editing.

Further comment: so often I see a mixture of national formatting in the same article and it's not always easy to know which was the original author's. To save later authors guesswork and time, I wish there were always a reminder to authors of new articles to put something at the top to indicate which format they plan to follow.

_________________

4 -

TEXT: You can still edit these pages indirectly by submitting an edit request: click "View source," then "Submit an edit request" at the bottom right, and an editor who is authorized to edit the page will respond to your request.

WHAT YOU DID: You moved the comma I had put inside the closing quotation marks, outside them.

MY COMMENT: I agree, with comments similar to the last paragraph of #3 above.

_________________

5 -

TEXT: The two images under the title of “Two editing environments: Source Editor (wikitext) and VisualEditor.”

WHAT YOU DID: You removed the line spacing that I made between the images.

MY COMMENT: I respectfully disagree with the removal, on the basis of need for visual clarity for readers. The extra space to separate the images would stop them from ”running on” visually into each other.
_________________

6 -

TEXT: The edit toolbar image.

WHAT YOU DID: You removed the line spacing I placed underneath that image.

MY COMMENT: I respectfully but strongly disagree with the removal, again on the basis of visual clarity for readers — but this time because of the need to make clear which paragraph the image refers to. Without line spacing under the edit toolbar image, some readers could assume it goes with both paragraphs immediately above and below. Augnablik (talk) 11:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Augnablik}} Please provide diffs for the last two of these claims, which I cannot find in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:Editing&action=history&offset=2025032522000000&limit=5 my five edits]. Also, please don't shout. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:55, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

::Oh, no, shouting wasn't intended, RedRose. I used caps as I did just to make the long message easier for you to read. It never occurred to me that you might think of using caps that way as shouting.

::Perhaps the message was haunted, though — because even though it looked fine in both my Source and Visual Editors, when I published it I was horrified to see that some of the underlining was missing, and so all that extra formatting looked completely inconsistent. Now THAT did cause some shouting on my part: inwardly, anyway. I was hoping you wouldn't read the message till I could go back and fix it, but no such luck.

::I'll see what I can find to show you the diffs for the line spacing around the images. Augnablik (talk) 12:19, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Capitals, plus bold, plus underlining = undue emphasis. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

::::@Redrose64, good heavens ... yes, of course that formatting was to emphasize ... but at the risk of "undue emphasis," please remember what I shared earlier of the intention behind it. The message itself wasn't in caps, after all.

::::May today throw you nothing worse to deal with than this. Augnablik (talk) 15:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

::@Redrose64, after I went back to the article's History page, like you I noticed that you didn't make any edits about the line spacing work I referred to in #5 and #6. I think I remember now what happened that made me assume that you had in fact made those edits: I had responded to the four other issues that were definitely raised in your edits, according to the History page, and when I finished with those, I noticed the line spacing issues and just assumed they were also yours.

::So, please ignore #5 and #6 in my message. Sorry. A mystery. Not the first such by a long shot — like what I described going on in the first message I sent you earlier today that I'd checked several times in both the Source and Visual Editors.

::By contrast, I think I used only the Visual Editor to do the line spacing around the images; so I will go back and try again to add it in the Source Editor. Augnablik (talk) 17:26, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

OK, you win. That article can stay without a short description (or you could always add your own. I won’t revert it). Neiltonks (talk) 22:29, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:529 BC 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!} 04:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{ty}} --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

thank you for reverting the IP's edit on Vladimir Komarov, as it is a very important biography article on that Soviet Cosmonaut. I still like reverting vandalism too, because I don't want to spoil Wikipedia. I appreciate the efforts of rollbackers and recent changes patrollers like you. {{smiley|sad}} Gnu779 ( talk) 15:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to have been any point to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJesus&oldid=prev&diff=1286591872 this] at all. An anchor being present is not going to break the RfC bot (an incorrect RfC template would). Meanwhile, WP:FRS is directing people to "an RfC" at that page (without telling them what RfC it is), at an anchor that is gone, so directing editors to an actual RfC at the same page is actually useful.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:01, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:See [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Yapperbot&offset=20250420003200&namespace=3&limit=11 these Yapperbot edits]. They are going to the correct place.

:For several years now, I have been following the RfC listings and how Legobot operates to maintain them, and fixed quite a large number of badly-constructed RfCs. The effects of some of these screwups had spilled over into the RfC listings with, sometimes, quite horrendous consequences. In this case, an effect of JacktheBrown reusing an rfcid value that had previously been used at Talk:Asquith Xavier was to add {{diff|Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography|prev|1286417586|this entry}} to the RfC listings, which is plainly wrong.

:One thing is absolutely certain: with one exception, nobody apart from Legobot itself should choose an rfcid value. Both Legobot and Yapperbot use them to uniquely distinguish one RfC from another. The one exception is when reactivating an old RfC on the same page, when exactly the same rfcid should be used as had previously been assigned. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi there,

I am contacting you as you left a comment on the Peer Review for One Direction. The article is currently at Featured Article Candidacy, and I would appreciate further comments to be redirected there. The link is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/One Direction/archive2.

Thanks, jolielover♥talk 08:44, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Jolielover}} If you check [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/One_Direction/archive2&action=history the page history], you'll see that I am already aware. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{ty}} --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:48, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

{{ombox

| name = First Edit Day

| image = 50px

| imageright = 50px

| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(to left, Gold, #FFF600);

| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;

| plainlinks = yes

| text = Happy First Edit Day!
Hi Redrose64! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Redrose64&dir=prev&limit=1 your first edit] and became a Wikipedian! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

}}

:{{ty}} --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:47, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{ty}} --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:Docklands Light Railway stations in the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham 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!} 20:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Liz}} Did you notice that the category was {{diff|Dagenham Dock railway station|prev|1289467344|emptied out of process}} just ten minutes earlier? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Regarding your [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Slam-door_train&diff=prev&oldid=1290085014 revert], I did read the (somewhat poorly written) article and tried my best to add a short desc. I would appreciate if you explained why it was wrong and provide a better alternative. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Not all slam-door trains are multiple-units. Indeed, until the introduction of the British Rail Mark 4 coaches in 1989, all locomotive-hauled coaches had slam doors. A significant number of these remain, mainly in the charter fleets. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you! Though I'm not sure reading the article would've helped, since it states {{tpq|A slam-door train or slammer is a set of diesel multiple units (DMUs) or electric multiple units (EMUs)}}. What do you think would be a better alternative for a shortdesc (since you definitely have more train-related experience than I). Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Just wanted to say that I appreciate your assistance there - I'm new to Wiki editing and still figuring how all of this stuff works. I didn't consider that the archive would need to be manually adjusted as well -- thank you! Gcollins94 (talk) 07:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Gcollins94}} One thing that you need to consider is that unless circumstances change, the next time that Lowercase sigmabot III runs, it will re-archive the thread that it archived last time. To prevent this happening, either post something to Talk:Cody Wilson#Regarding the facts at hand in the case of Cody Wilson, sex offender, and the definition thereof and sign that post, so that the most recent timestamp is less than 90 days; or extend the {{para|algo|old(90d)}} to something longer. Ideally, the RfC would not have been done as an entirely separate section, but as a subsection, so that it's clear that the two threads are closely related. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:33, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Yeah, when I posted that I was actually in the middle of getting assistance in the discord server. Such was my confusion at the time, I didn't actually know you could post a RfC within an existing thread. In hindsight, that would've been better and provided readers with much better context - I'll have to keep that in mind if I ever need to do this again, haha. Gcollins94 (talk) 10:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing that, I thought I'd deleted it but obviously hadn't. Much appreciated! 🙏🏻 Smallangryplanet (talk) 17:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey Redrose, long time no see! I must see about organising something in Portsmouth or Southampton as a half-way house for us both! Anyway, thanks for adding the latest Brighton meetup to all those various lists etc. I didn't know most of them existed! It seems like an awful lot of places to list things and steps to follow just to organise an informal get-together. Do you think there's scope to consolidate them or transclude a list from somewhere, or automate the process? Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{replyto|HJ Mitchell}} There's a list-of-lists at m:User:Redrose64, which I put together more than ten years ago after noticing that different people had different ways of publicising meetups. Somebody at Oxford once did say that there should be only one list of meetups, but the problems include: (i) which one should it be; (ii) how do we persuade those who favour another list to add their meetup to the 'standard' list; (iii) how do we draw attention to the 'standard' list when those interested in going to meetups might have one of the others watchlisted; (iv) how do we handle two different requirements (namely, which ones are upcoming vs. keeping a permanent record); (v) you can't transclude from meta to en.wp or vice versa. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)