Hello, Choucas Bleu, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete theWikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit theTeahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember tosign your messages ontalk pages by typing fourtildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check outWikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, orask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!Reyk_YO!20:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for expressing your interested over on WikiProject Merge. I often work on the merge backlog, usually working on tacking the tail end of the list. I generally tackle a month for a while, using the list atCategory:Articles_to_be_merged. Drop me a message on my talk, or a ping from anywhere, in case you'd like a hand with merging.Klbrain (talk)10:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections |Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase atWikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyonewho qualifies for a vote will have a week to use theSecurePoll software to vote, which uses asecret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies 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 tally during the election. Thesuffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on themain election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are nobureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on theelection 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, pleaseremove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm grateful for your closure and attention. I wish there had been more opinions expressed, but it was not for the lack of trying. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦20:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words. There was indeed not a lot of engagement, but that is often the case for merger discussions unfortunately; though in this case I think the result was pretty straightforward.Choucas Bleu (T·C)20:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just was letting you know that I assessed the article but then saw you already had so I reverted myself. Thanks for assessing it!Sheriff U3 |Talk |Con21:57, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah I was a bit slow in typing out the reply on the noticeboard, thank you for letting me know :)ChoucasBleu🐦‍⬛22:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I gave the page a once over and I think I removed a lot of the POV language. I scrapped a decent chunk of the political views section, I didn't like one of the sources used and some of the wording was too POV to fix.Carlp941 (talk)00:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks much better, definitely C-class now, good job :)ChoucasBleu🐦‍⬛14:07, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections |Renewal RFC phase

 You are invited to join the discussion atWikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase III/Administrator elections.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, pleaseremove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)06:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great spot aboutdoi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_321_24 likely being an AI-generated article. But on the surface this is at least a reasonably respectable journal right? (pingingWhatamIdoing to confirm). Just goes to show ... something.Bon courage (talk)13:28, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, honestly after looking around I am not sure... We have a redirect by the name of the journal that leads toAcademy of Family Physicians of India, and it does seem to act a bit like their in-house journal. The publisher isMedknow Publications, which is basically the Indian division ofWolters Kluwer. The journal was started in 2012, just after the publisher briefly made it toBeall's List but did not stay there for long apparently.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛ ⸱💬 ⸱📋17:42, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I pasted the entire Introduction section into gptzero.me, and it reckoned AI-generated (100%), as does zerogpt.net (100%). However my wife (a lecturer, who does perforce have to do a lot of AI sniffing for student work) wasn't as certain. Scary!Bon courage (talk)17:53, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The journal is not in MEDLINE. It is not in Scopus. TheirWP:Impact factor for 2023 was 1.1, which is I understand is on the low side of average for general medicine, and especially for an open-access journal. (However, it's not all the way to a "bad" IF.) The journal was started in 2011, which is another not-good-but-not-the-worst signal.

Overall, I think it's acceptable, but I probably wouldn't use it for anything extraordinary or unexpected.WhatamIdoing (talk)22:04, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't You Realize That People Had The Right To Have Their Own Opinions?!Mrclubgreentokyo (talk)11:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

STOP CENSORING USERBOXES!Mrclubgreentokyo (talk)11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TALK me, Why?Mrclubgreentokyo (talk)11:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Do not useWP:CAPSLOCK.
2. I did not delete anything or censor anything, merelynominated a few userboxes for deletion.
3. I do not owe you a response, especially when you barge into my talk page failing to beWP:CIVIL.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋13:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Why Did You a few userboxes for deletion?Mrclubgreentokyo (talk)13:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Please go to theMfD thread, I see you have already found it so there is no need to discuss here.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋13:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   But No Reason To Delete These Userboxes.Mrclubgreentokyo (talk)13:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Please Don't Repeat.Mrclubgreentokyo (talk)13:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Choucas0, Thanks for your recent contributions atWikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment. Your efforts are appreciated! Cheers,JoeNMLC (talk)14:18, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, of course, and thanks to you as well for the kind words :)Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋16:21, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well,this ended as no consensus (for the second time), and "survived" its third MfD nomination. Can't say that I'm much surprised... —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}21:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sundostund not so surprised indeed, but it was a honest attempt. It is not looking so hot for my nomination either. I suppose the participation at MfD doesn't help, both in terms of number of people, and who actually cares about userboxes getting deleted or not. I still think in the future we will see a shift that will lead to their disparition, but not soon.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋12:40, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know. I'm still puzzled in a way, since the participation in previous nominations was quite larger than this time; yet still, the outcome is the same, with this userbox "surviving" in both situations... Anyway, I share your hope that in the future things will change regarding this; also, I can agree with the need to delete at least 70–80% of the targeted content in yourUBXhitlist (and there's certainly enough room for that list to be expanded). In the end, I firmly believe that all the userboxes espousing any kind of extremism and intolerance should be extinguished, period. —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}22:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly it is somewhat mind-boggling that your last sentence is not consensual over here, but Wikipedia is a special place by most accounts, for better or for worse. I am going to try not to be too discouraged, and hopefully I can still attempt a slow building of "jurisprudence" by getting the worse ones through the line. Since you mention the "hit list", please do feel free to add terrible boxes you see in the wild to it! There are a lot of them that are not so easy to find as the ones I initially added, and from what I see a lot that are even worse might be flying under the radar, so we might as well also add the ones we do have a chance to get deleted today.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋10:02, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, that sentence is not consensual because various kinds of extremism and intolerance tend to hide behindWP:NOTCENSORED (in the same way as various extremists in the US are using theFirst Amendment as protection). That's a real problem around here, but hopefully it will be sorted out in the (near) future. As I see it, what we need is our own version of the "German solution" (§ 86a StGB). Anyway, please try not to be too discouraged, and continue your work! Of course, I will add some other controversial userboxes to the "hit list" when I stumble upon them; thank you for your permission to do so, as you are the "owner" and the creator of that list... Also, I must say that I was surprised and shocked when, several years ago, I noticed how much variousneo-Confederate userboxes were common and accepted around here; it prompted me to become co-author ofWP:NOCONFED. Thankfully, that anomally has drastically changed since then, with most of such userboxes being deleted. —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}12:58, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to check out some ofpro-Soviet andpro-Cuban userboxes, and possibly add them to the "hit list". —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}13:21, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It may be interesting to you to seethis counterpart of your "hit list"... —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}16:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting for sure, a few of them could definitely join mine (as a few on the userpage itself to be honest). I have momentarily suspended the crusade against bad boxes and so with it the updating of the list, but I will come back to it sooner or later. It is just difficult to believe success, even minor, can be attained with the ideas still dominant at MfD.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋21:05, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I thought you would find it interesting... as for the crusade, I can only urge you to resume it sooner than later. Trust me, I know all too well how disappointing some of MfD discussions can be. Like yourself, I hope that the majority mindset at MfD will change, and that people will be far less reluctant to delete obvious (political) trash than they are now. But, keep in mind that, thanks to MfD, a good amount of trash was already removed over the past several years, and I have seen some of that myself (by either starting MfD discussions, or voting in them). I certainly understand how you feel after seeing the outcome ofthis, but move on and continue your great work! —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}02:14, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the words of encouragement, they are appreciated :)Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋08:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to hear your opinion aboutthis, and do you see it as something that might belong to the "hit list"; I did not want to add it before consulting you. IMHO, it is one thing (and is perfectly normal) to be interested in a historical person, but saying that you admire them is something very different, and basically implies that you endorse their worldview and actions. —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}21:30, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with you there, including on the interpretation. Historical figure worship is always somewhat troubling to me because it means treating chosen individuals as above the fray and thus not evaluating them by the same standards as the rest of society. If it was up to me I would like to see this specific one gone as well, as for all the boxes supportive of politicians and particularly US presidents ; however I feel like this has to be a long term goal, so inclusion can wait in my opinion (by the way, I have not done that yet but I do need to include some of your earlier suggestions).Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋08:45, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to underline that, in the case ofJulius Caesar, admiring him would essentially meanwhitewashing thegenocides that he committed during his campaigns, as well as his role in thecollapse of theRoman Republic... Some may disagree with me, but I don't seepresentism as something negative, on the contrary; that is why I createdthis userbox some time ago. —Sundostundmppria^{(talk /contribs)}22:13, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections |Call for Candidates

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions atWikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Candidates.

Here is the schedule:

• July 9–15 - Call for candidates
• July 18–22 - Discussion phase
• July 23–29 - SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

• The requirements to run are identical toRFA—a prospective candidate must beextended confirmed.
• Prospective candidates are advised to become familiar with the community's expectations of administrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewingsuccessful andunsuccessful RFAs, reading the essayWikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates, and possibly requesting anoptional poll on their chances of passing.
• 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 isno official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.
• Administrator elections are also avalid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at thetalk page. A separate 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, pleaseremove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the articleCentauress and Faun you nominated forGA-status according to thecriteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofRollinginhisgrave --Rollinginhisgrave (talk)13:09, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yourgood article nomination of the articleCentauress and Faun haspassed; congratulations! Seethe review page for more information. If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofRollinginhisgrave --Rollinginhisgrave (talk)11:26, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections |Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the July 2025 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 18–22 - Discussion phase (we are here)
• July 23–29 - SecurePoll voting phase
• July 30–c. Aug 3 - Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages are open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as arequest for adminship. You may discuss the candidates atWikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Discussion phase.

On July 23, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use theSecurePoll software to vote, which uses asecret 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 beextended confirmed to vote.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last approximately four days, or perhaps a little longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on theresults page (you may want to watchlist this page) and transcluded to themain election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and must also have received a minimum of 20 support votes. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are nobureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on theelection 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, pleaseremove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you wanted to address the merge request for the manyCoptic calendar articles. Is this still the case? It's one of the last items that still needs to be processed atWP:PM before we can clear out the drive-by requests, so I'd like to know if that one is receiving attention.Thebiguglyalien (talk)🛸17:13, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien Hey, yes it is still the case. I'm away from my desktop computer for the weekend, so it's not convenient to do it on mobile, but I will do it when I'm back. Feel free to mark the request as answered, as it falls into the obvious cases where a discussion is not necessary.Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋20:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections |Voting phase

The voting phase of the July 2025 administrator elections has started and continues until July 29 at 23:59 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase atWikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 23–29 – Voting phase
• July 30–c. Aug 3 – Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyonewho qualifies to vote will have a week to use theSecurePoll software to vote, which uses asecret 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. Thesuffrage requirements are similar to those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for approximately four days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on theresults page (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to themain election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are nobureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on theelection 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, pleaseremove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On9 September 2025,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleCentauress and Faun, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatCentauress and Faun (pictured) puzzled critics for inverting the traditional motif of the centaur carrying away a nymph? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Centauress and Faun. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Centauress and Faun), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

♠PMC♠(talk)00:06, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections | RFCphase

The RFC phase of the July 2025 administrator elections has started. There are 10 RFCs for consideration. You can participate in the RFC phase atWikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/RFCs.

Any questions or issues can be asked on theelection 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, pleaseremove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)12:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(This message was sent toUser talk:Choucas Bleu and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

Hi and thanks for your recent participation in AfD. I would like to hear your thoughts about the process. Please checkthis survey if you are willing to respond. FYI I found your participation via XTools.Czarking0 (talk)02:24, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]