user talk:theleekycauldron

This talk page is archived.
To browse the archives, press "Show" and select the month of posts you want to view.

2020 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2021 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2022 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2023 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2024 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2025 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

White to move, so it's leeky's turn – check back later! (last mover: CopperyMarrow15)

Inbox

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

Sometimes messages slip through the cracks. Sorry about that! I keep this list to let me know what I still need to respond to – feel free to add your own name and message here if you're still looking for a response from me.

05:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC) fill out your thing at WP:REFLECTIONS – House Blaster (talk • he/they)
02:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC) Make a chess move – House Blaster (talk • he/they)
02:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC) ban houseblaster from my talk page for messing with the inbox format theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Internet culture advice

Hello, hope all is well. I've thrown together a draft on @RepJackKimble, a parody twitter account. I'm a bit iffy on both how it's written, and notability, though I think there is just about enough coverage over a decade to push it into the realm of notability. As a resident expert on internet culture, I was wondering I could interest you in taking a look, and letting me know your thoughts (or, if you want, making edits directly to the article). Thanks! All the best, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891: Hey, good to see you! If that's the most you could get out of those sources, I agree that it's probably just on the wrong side of GNG, but there's some works on Google Scholar that seem to have at least passing mentions? Can't access, so I can't tell, but they might be the extra push this draft needs. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 22:18, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm yeah, thanks. The only real scholarly coverage I found was this one, not incredibly substantive. A new Snopes article, sort of in the same vein as the others. I will probably go ahead and hang on to this in the userspace for the time being. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:09, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2025

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

Administrator changes

Interface administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

L235

Oversight changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

A new feature called Multiblocks will be deployed on English Wikipedia on the week of June 2. See the relevant announcement on the administrators' noticeboard.
History merges performed using the mergehistory special page are now logged at both the source and destination, rather than just the source as previously, after this RFC and the resolution of T118132.

Arbitration

An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 17 June 2025. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in June 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

notification to bureaucrats

Regarding this edit: just a suggestion, which I appreciate is unsolicited, so feel free to ignore it. Perhaps consider not using a smiley when posting a notification about an editor receiving bad news? I understand that it's directed towards the bureaucrats as appreciation for their efforts. To me it feels like a smiley isn't wholly suitable, but I realize that others may isolate the surrounding context to just "Many thanks". I appreciate any consideration you may have for this matter. isaacl (talk) 22:35, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaacl: Funnily enough, someone told me off-wiki that it read passive-aggressively. I meant it totally genuinely as a thanks to the 'crats, so I hoped that it was just a one-off reading! Apparently not – honestly, I'll just go change that. Thanks for telling me! and lest there's any doubt here, that was also meant genuinely. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 22:39, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't doubt the sincerity of the thanks (or the intent to limit the context to the thanks), so I didn't read anything passive-aggressive into it. I know how accustomed everyone has become to adding smileys of various sorts to try to convey emotion, so I understand how it can be reflexive. I might just be more old-school in writing style than others when it comes to delivering bad news. Thanks for your time and effort in this matter! isaacl (talk) 22:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]