Femke is suffering from injuries. This may affect her ability to work on Wikipedia. Consequently, she may not be able to respond to talk-page messages or e-mails in a timely manner. Your patience for the user's recovery is greatly appreciated.
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of the enormous amount of work you have put into improving "Make technical articles understandable" and the subsequent RfC where you have remained calm, collected and collegiate in the face of travails which would have reduced a lesser person to a gibbering wreak. All of this is both admired and appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I really appreciate this @Gog the Mild. I expected strong opinions, but I didn't quite expect this. And I really value your input, too. Whether the RfC passes or not, I hope we can work together on further improving the guideline, as your comments really get to the crux of the matter. I probably should have spent more time pestering people to contribute to the workshop text, but alas, that ship has sailed for now. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:18, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, well. I was anticipating a chance at some stage to do a GoCE/FAC review style going over on it at some prepublication stage, but it was not to be. Let's jointly file it under "things I learned the hard way". Lordy knows I have a full load of those. The guidance is something which has long needed someone to sacrifice a month of their Wikipedia time to; I admire you for stepping forward. And handling it all with such sang froid. I would love to work on it with you at any stage, but I don't see myself wanting to commit that much time to something I consider to have a fatal flaw: if the guidance issues free "get out of goal" passes I am unlikely to motivate myself to ensuring that it does so in clear and succinct way. I imagine we'll both survive this somehow. It is much improved on what was there before. On the other hand I have discovered Femke's Challenges. Very tough, but I am a sucker for a challenge. On a skim I am on two ticks and a bonus, and need an O to get my user name; too many of my articles start with B! (Oroscopa, battle of anyone?) Relay Race - any reason why an editor couldn't have a go at that as a solo effort? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:46, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're quite aligned in the vision for the guideline: making sure that the guideline is not used to justify overly complicated articles. My feeling is that there is some limited space to do so, but that there will be resistance to this goal. For instance, there seems to be a group of people who thinks ONEDOWN is an impossible goal. I misinterpreted your silence at Wikipedia_talk:Make_technical_articles_understandable/Workshop#What_is_the_objective?, I should have pinged when I asked if there was more feedback a week before launching the RfC.
I'm glad to finally have a taker for the challenge! I like people working together, but I've added a new solo challenge for bringing vital articles to GA now as well. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:29, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you found it helpful! I started editing about a condition I had (long COVID), and noticed how much of women's health is in need of TLC on Wikipedia. Especially with attacks on women's healthcare in the US, I'm hoping this can be of use. Not yet at GA, and I discovered a mistake today I need to fix, but hopefully soon. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:45, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Femke - you seem to have a knack of fixing up the medical articles I need. A few months ago when someone dear to me told me they suffer from PCOS I had no idea what it meant and got pretty confused trying to find out. I just started reading the article again now and the lead is brilliantly clear. I was looking around the medicine project to award you a “purple placebo pill” or somesuch but perhaps they are too serious to have such things. Anyway I see you have already received a well deserved barnstar. Thanks again Chidgk1 (talk) 05:58, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to hear. I'm chasing million awards in terms of medical articles, so I do hope they will be useful for a wide group of readers. But I'm glad they helped you! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:49, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I was wondering why you reversed my cover image for the Klein Bottle? I took great care in visualizing and animating it so, that the Homology group is obvious, and specifically the difference between the two singular cycles. How is the current one better? Pekkog (talk) 07:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pekkog. Thanks for visualising it! Your edit was reverted by someone with a temporary account [1]. I'm not sure which one is better, but I got slightly confused what the moving lines represented in the animation. I'm not really involved in the article, you might have more luck discussing it on Talk:Klein bottle. Article talk pages are the best place to discuss article content (rather than a one-to-one on somebody's talk page). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:56, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ah, i mixed the edits up, since yours was the previous! Thank you for the clarification and the feedback! Perhaps, I'll write a better description! Pekkog (talk) 08:08, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Also, based off of Femke's Challenge, which I really had ought to participate in, I see you care about making Wikipedia easy to understand, which is also a bit of a passion of mine. In fact, I've written an essay on the subject, WP:Refrain from employing an interminable vernacular. If you'd ever want to, I'd love it if you'd pop over there, read it, and give me some suggestions if you have any! Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 22:33, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Ducks have a bad reputation on Wikipedia, given that association with socking. They remain masters of the air, land and water, however.
I love the essay :). I've been playing with the idea to organise a contest on writing accessibly. The idea is that people rewrite leads in pairs: one person familiar the topic, who does the actual writing, together with a non-expert who gives feedback until they fully understand. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The process will have a seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.
The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.
Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. Later, a user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.
If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
On December 9, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's totals during the election. You must be extended confirmed to vote.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which typically lasts between a couple days and a week. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (you may want to watchlist this page) and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate who has not been recalled must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and must also have received a minimum of 20 support votes. A candidate that has been recalled must have at least 55.0% support. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
I don't think that AGAB makes sense to use as a noun and it only describes the state at birth, not the rest of a person's life. I think it makes more sense to write "cis women" or similar.[2] Although in my experience very few cis women are capable of growing anything resembling a beard, my sister being a very rare exception. (t · c) buIdhe20:22, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair yes. A full beard is rare of course. I have been surprised at the number of stories I've heard about struggles with facial hair over the last months when I brought up pcos. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958
An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 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!
In the voting phase, the candidate subpages close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies to vote has a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's vote total during the election. The suffrage requirements are similar to those at RFA.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for a few days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a non-recall candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Recall candidates must achieve 55.0% support. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
Hello, Femke. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello, Femke. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kidney cancer, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)
.jpg)
