User talk:Liz/Archive 29

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25 ← Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 → Archive 35

Re: social media traffic reports for patrollers

Hello, Liz. 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.

Hope we can find a time to talk! Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 22:28, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Responded to. Thanks for alerting me, Jmorgan (WMF)). Liz Read! Talk! 03:17, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. 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.

TL;DR: let me know if you have time in the next couple weeks for a meeting, and/or just want to coordinate via email or talkpage. Happy new year! Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 22:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Jmorgan (WMF), I haven't checked my email in a while due to the holidays and other stuff. I'll get back to you today. My apologies. Liz Read! Talk! 23:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good, Liz, and no rush! Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 00:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. 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.

Cheers, Liz! J-Mo 21:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy-deleted category

Hi. I'm RoadTyper, and I recently noticed that you have nominated the category Category:Articles with Mi'kmaq-language external links for speedy deletion, because it is empty. However, I disagree with this nomination, because there are plenty of articles, including the one about the language itself, that could be part of this category. I edited that article and added the category, but for some reason, it didn't show up at the bottom.

Is this because the category is currently tagged for speedy deletion, or what? I have had (and still have) my categories of my own nominated for deletion, but it wasn't speedy deletion, and the pages remained in the category until you had manually removed them. Would you mind filling me in on the major differences between regular deletion and speedy deletion? I'm kind of new here, so I could really use a lot of help. HighwayTyper (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HighwayTyper,
Empty categories are tagged for deletion unless they fall under a limited number of exceptions (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. Unpopulated categories for details). They sit in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for 7 days. If, after 7 days, the category is still empty, it is deleted. If it no longer is empty, the tag is removed. So, it is not "speedy" like most of the other kinds of speedy deletion which can face immediate deletion.
If the category is deleted because it is empty, it can be recreated at any time if there are pages that would be appropriate for it. This is not the case if a category has been nominated for deletion via Categories for discussion. If a category is deleted via CfD, it is normally not allowed to be recreated.
In the case of Category:Articles with Mi'kmaq-language external links, it is no longer empty so the CSD C1 tag has been removed. I hope this explains the situation. Liz Read! Talk! 05:09, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Re: Recent user talk page moves

Hi Liz, sorry for the mess and thanks for the deletions. I was planning to clean it up myself, but was trying to figure out how to restore my talk page archives first (the first 40 are now red links). I will work on that. Apologies and thanks again, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:23, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

No apology necessary, Ruhrfisch. Sorry for my message, I've been having a bad day and just got a bit irritated. If I can help you recover your archived talk pages, let me know. Liz Read! Talk! 04:59, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
No worries and I am sorry for the mess. I figured out where the archives are and am moving them back to the links from the archivebox. WIll stop soon and will finish the moves tomorrow. I've not done much on WP for well over a year and am sorry I messed up. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:32, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Magne Furuholmen albums (category)

Hi, I added the whole of Magne Furuholmen discography to Wiki so I was wondering if it is possible to add the category back. In the coming weeks it is my intention to improve the existing newly created articles. Thanks in advance Cat italia (talk) 15:58, 4 January 2020 (UTC))

Hello, Cat italia,
If a category has been deleted simply because it was empty, it can be recreated when it IS needed. If it was deleted due to a Categories for discussion discussion, it should not be recreated without a good justification. So, if it is the former, go ahead and recreate the category. I hope I've cleared this up. Let me know if you have more questions. Liz Read! Talk! 17:34, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. The category is no longer empty since more articles can be added. Thank you for your help! Cat italia (talk) 19:06, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
  • Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

G13

Hey Liz, saw you removed the CSD from User:Yonanale/sandbox. Just a note that the latest edit was from a bot, and bot edits do not reset the G13 clock, so the page is eligible. Best, (and thanks as always for all your good work), UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:45, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, UnitedStatesian
I wasn't aware that there were exceptions to the G13 rule and I don't see this information on the CSD G13 guidelines. All I could see was a warning notice that these two pages were not eligible for a G13 deletion.
If there is an exception to the G13 guidelines, the bots should be programmed to ignore bot edits and not to post notices that the pages are ineligible, I would think. Thanks for alerting me, I'll look into this. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
The relevant text from the CSD G13 guidelines is "have not been edited by a human in six months." Thanks for looking into it. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
For some reason, that qualification didn't stand out to me, I was looking at the list. I appreciate you pointing it out, UnitedStatesian, and I'll delete those two pages now. Liz Read! Talk! 23:02, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Mahatma Gandhi Central University protest

I have written an article Mahatma Gandhi Central University protest which was accepted for article for creation on 27 December 2019 but some users copied text from references and links that's why this page was deleted due to copy right issue. I request you to undo the deletion and restoration the page. I'll remove all the copied text from the article and will write in my own words. It took almost 3 months to collect all the information and references to write this article. As Wikipedia plays a vital role in letting world know about the important things across the globe. Hope you'd love to help us in inclusion of one of the India's largest public universities protest to the Wikipedia so that whole world may know about it. Therefore, you are requested to think once more to undo the deletion and restoration the page. I'll try my level best to improve this article day by day and will be writing in my own words. Thanking you.--Rohitmishra111 (talk) 13:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rohitmishra111
I recommend that you ask the administrator who deleted the article, 331dot, to consider undeleting the article. That's typically how things work here. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 13:44, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

@Liz: The article Davido was under severe attack by more then one vandal today, can you put some protection on this article. And also can you block User:Ibwizzy, this person did much of the vandalism to this article.Catfurball (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Catfurball: Protection – OK. IMHO blocking would be prematurely severe; that user's first edit to the article was highly destructive, but in their next edits they did then start to put right part of the damage they had done. Clearly they did not realise how easy it would be to simply WP:UNDO. Talking of which, please would you also take a look at Help:Reverting, as it would be better if you would revert pages to the last good version, rather than undoing each vandal edit one at a time. – (WP:TPS) Fayenatic London 22:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Fayenatic is correct (as usual), Catfurball. Ibwizzy is a brand new account and Fayaenatic posted a warning which is what we do for beginners who make questionable edits. Liz Read! Talk! 23:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

2020(s) cats

Hi. I appreciate all the good work that you and User:UnitedStatesian do but can you just go a bit easy on deleting 2020(s) categories for a bit? We are bound to need things like Category:2020s in Philippine cinema that are part of a well-established series, and in fact it was filled with a subcat just three hours after you deleted it. We're seeing a lot of 2020(s) categories over at Special:WantedCategories at the moment because of the new year and new decade (I know myself how easy it is to miss that a new 2020 category needs a decade cat), and it's frustrating to see "obvious" categories like that getting deleted only for us to recreate them very soon after. Cheers. Le Deluge (talk) 11:23, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Le Deluge,
This happens every year. The problem is is that some editors start creating these categories very early, like in October of the previous year, when it is unlikely that they will be filled for months.
It's difficult to predict which of these categories will be filled imminently and which could be empty for months. But I get your point and will try to be more judicious in my deletion. It would also be good to notify UnitedStatesian about this as they do most of the empty category tagging these days. Liz Read! Talk! 17:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Consider me notified (via your ping, thanks); my only comment is that categories appearing on Special:WantedCategories are not an issue, since by definition they cannot appear on that list unless at least one page is in the category. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:47, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

96.233.204.98

May I please request immediate intervention with user:96.233.204.98. She clearly won't stop vandalizing until blocked. CLCStudent (talk) 16:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

It looks like Widr has already blocked this editor. Thanks for the notice. Liz Read! Talk! 17:03, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

PDBe-KB

Hi Liz - I've recently come across this (former) article, which you nominated for speedy deletion last year. The grounds for deletion were: A7 - not important enough, and G11 - blatant advertising. I find these hard to understand as (a) this article is wikilinked in hundreds of biochemistry articles, and (b) it describes a community-driven reference resource (see Welcome to PDBe-KB). Can it be restored, or at least the original text made available somewhere for editing with a view to restoration? Colonies Chris (talk) 10:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Colonies Chris,
I've been out of commission for the past week due to illness and am just now reading on my phone which is very clumsy. As soon as I'm back on my laptop, I'll check out the deleted page later today. I'll see if it is possible to give you the deleted content on one of your user pages. Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Colonies Chris,
I have restored the article to keep the edit history and moved it to User:Colonies Chris/Sandbox so you can work on it. I'm glad you brought the request to me and I had the chance to revisit this decision because I think it was questionable on my part. In general, I think A7 and G11 are frequently judgment calls and I have removed my share of CSD tags when I think the article didn't meet the criteria.
I hope you can improve upon the article, maybe with the help of a WikiProject like WikiProject Molecular Biology. I wouldn't recommend just moving the page back into article main space because it could very well be tagged again. Thanks again for your inquiry. Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Liz - It obviously needs work. I'll try to knock it into an acceptable form. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
The page appears to have been copy and pasted back into mainspace, rather than moved back from the sandbox, which is unfortunate as that means history is lost (may also have copyright implications). --kingboyk (talk) 08:30, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Re: welcome back

Thank you :-) I'd gotten into some stressful situations on-wiki, and I couldn't think of a good way to avoid conflict...I figured the best way was just to log out and return after a few months. Nyttend (talk) 04:35, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I know exactly how you feel, Nyttend. When I first started editing regularly in 2013, I wandered into a dispute that I had no business weighing in on that quickly got me labeled as troublesome when I came to an editor's defense (which was a noble but, in hindsight, foolish decision). That editor got ended up getting blocked and I couldn't shake the association with them. So, I ended up taking a 6 month break and when I returned, everyone involved had either left, had also been blocked or had moved on to other subjects.
My recent break had to do with my health but I also found after returning that I had renewed energy for the project. So, I'm all for taking time off and then deciding whether or not you want to recommit. It's much better to take a break than get frustrated and act out. So, welcome back and I hope your stress levels will be much lower this time around. Remember that this is all voluntary and you can choose where you want to spend your time. If there is a certain area of admin work that you found tiresome or stressful, then work on articles or templates or do something more enjoyable. That's my 2 cents, for what it's worth. Liz Read! Talk! 04:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Recent deletion

Hi Liz. You recently G7-deleted F1 Manager (2010 Video Game) and then G8-deleted Talk:F1 Manager (2000 Video Game). I'm wondering if you meant to G8-delete Talk:F1 Manager (2010 Video Game), i.e. the talk page of the article you G7-deleted, instead. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 03:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Never mind. Talk:F1 Manager (2010 Video Game) has now been deleted by someone else (and the incorrectly capitalised Talk:F1 Manager (2000 Video Game) doesn't need to be reinstated). Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 07:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, DH85868993,
If you say this is straightened out, I'll take your word for it. Let me know if there are any problems. Liz Read! Talk! 15:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 37

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 37, November – December 2019

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
  • The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

  • Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
  • When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]

Arbitration

  • Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Empty, not empty

Hi Liz,

I kind of randomly came upon Category:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry - Gemstones today, which you speedied back in August as empty. However, there are over 300 pages in it currently. Since it's populated by a Wikiproject banner, it's certainly possible that a parameter was changed at some point (and maybe changed back). Normally, I'd just recreate the category, but I figured an undelete would be preferable in case there was any actual content on the category page (I can't really check, so have no idea). Thanks, –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 21:28, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for letting me know! There was no talk page to restore so you can make one if you care to. Liz Read! Talk! 23:56, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Archiving at AE

Hi Liz. Per this edit I have tried to restore the archiving instructions at AE which got clobbered (inadvertently) by this edit of 21:47, 30 January 2020 by MyMoloboaccount. I had noticed that the One-click Archiver was sending archived threads off into an unfamiliar place. For example, your recent one-click archive sent the thread to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Archive 260, a target I had never heard of. In my opinion, all of the AE one-clicks since 21:47 on 30 January ought to be undone. The usual location for archived threads is WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive. During this period the normal archiving bot User:Lowercase sigmabot III did not do anything at AE so in my view only the one-clicks need to be fixed.

As to how to do it: the simplest might be to to through the history of AE, undo all the one-click archiving edits since 21:47 on 30 January, delete the page at WP:Arbitration/Archive 260 and just wait for the bot. Future one-clicks ought to work correctly since the instructions have been fixed. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Oh, man, Ed. I meant to clean up the page, not send discussions off into the ether. I'm glad you noticed. I have a little time now to sort out the archiving pages and the current discussions will not be closed and archived any time soon. Thanks again for noticing this and bringing it to my attention.
By the way, I discovered the archiving tool on my talk page was automatically archiving discussion threads to the archive which was the most empty and had the most free space, not the most recent archive page chronologically. So, I have ceased the automatically archiving of this page and still need to go through my talk page archives and sort through the discussions, putting them on the correct page. I guess sometimes these tools are a little wonky. Liz Read! Talk! 17:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 Done Well, that was simpler than I expected. Liz Read! Talk! 17:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! But in terms of the bot doing the wrong thing on your page, do you mean this bot edit of 5 January? The bot archives into a numbered file as designated in your current talk page header. Whenever the bot considers an archive to be full, it updates the number and saves it back to your talk page. Back on 4 January your talk page had 'counter = 23' in the header. When you do manual archiving you might consider updating the counter value each time. EdJohnston (talk) 17:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
What, you mean this is my mistake and not something I can blame on a wayward bot? I can see that there are things I forgot when I was gone for a year. Thanks, Ed. Liz Read! Talk! 16:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Well, being away from Wikipedia a year might help to improve your mood, when you are a person who spends much time in the admin spaces. EdJohnston (talk) 17:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Categories used by Template:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry

Please restore these 6 category pages:

Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for letting me know, davidwr. Liz Read! Talk! 16:34, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors 2019 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2019 Annual Report
Our 2019 Annual Report is now ready for review.

Highlights:

  • Overview of Backlog-reduction progress (a record low backlog!);
  • Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page;
  • Automated archiving of requests;
  • Membership news and results of elections;
  • Annual leaderboard;
  • Plans for 2020.
– Your Guild coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Doveman (Thomas Bartlett)

Hi there,

I'm looking for a missing article and your name is the most recent trace I can find of it so perhaps you can help. I've just noticed that the article about the American musician Thomas Bartlett, also known as Doveman, has disappeared. There are lots of redlinks to it as he's mentioned in a lot of articles, including Nico Muhly and The Gloaming (album). All I can find is a record that you deleted (G8) what seems to have been a redirect page to a nonexistent page Doveman on Jan 10 2020. And that the Doveman page itself was deleted in 2007! I know there was an article about this person, Thomas Bartlett, within the last year, but can't find it by any kind of search. The Thomas Bartlett disambiguation page has the redlink to Doveman. I don't remember the exact name of the article, unfortunately. Any help finding it would be much appreciated. Thanks! HazelAB (talk) 15:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HazelAB,
This is actually the second inquiry I've gotten about restoring this article since I deleted the redirect so I'm going to ping everyone involved and see if we can recover a version of the content that doesn't violate copyright. Here's the timeline of what happened that I can piece together from the contribution histories:
  • Jan. 2nd - Justlettersandnumbers changed Doveman article to a redirect to The Gloaming article
  • Jan. 2nd - Justlettersandnumbers tagged The Gloaming article for copyright problems
  • Jan. 9th - MER-C deleted the The Gloaming article for having unaddressed copyright problems
  • Jan. 10th - I deleted the broken redirect from the Doveman redirect to the now deleted The Gloaming article.
Justlettersandnumbers, would you object if I restored the Doveman article to before you changed it to a redirect? Two people have contacted me about restoring it in the past few weeks. We can tag it for its deficiencies so that editors can improve it. What do you think? Liz Read! Talk! 16:12, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Liz! I am of course completely happy for you to do whatever you think best here. I had not remembered why I redirected it, but now I see that I wrote "swathes of unsourced content, no sources to indicate independent notability". If HazelAB is confident that there are enough sources to support a page then all good; otherwise an alternative might be to restore a bare-bones version of The Gloaming (which did have some sources and is probably more notable), and recreate Doveman as a redirect. Over to you! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Liz and Justlettersandnumbers! I am confident that there are enough sources to support a Doveman or Thomas Bartlett page and will undertake to provide them if the page is restored. I would also like to see a bare bones version of The Gloaming (group) restored as they are indeed notable. I will undertake to improve their article too if this can be done. Thanks! HazelAB (talk) 12:53, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, HazelAB,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I've decided to restore Doveman and entrust you to look over the "unsourced content" and see if there are references available to support the claims in the article. As for The Gloaming, there were copyright concerns and I decided to restore that article and move it into your user space so you can find it at User:HazelAB/The Gloaming. I have deleted the bulk of the content so it is pretty "bare bones". I see you've been editing for 9 years and I hope you will look at the edit summaries and see the comments about questionable content. Good luck with your efforts to improve the articles. Liz Read! Talk! 03:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Liz! I'll get right to work on them today. HazelAB (talk) 13:07, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and question

Comment: Thank you for your recent advice. I have restored the Twinkle notify defaults. I thought it was optional.

Question: I've started studying AfD, PROD, CSD and the associated guidelines. I nominated my first PROD and was hoping you could comment on whether it is good, questionable or bad. Page is Tilak Raj. The article changed recently from one about a cricketer to a performer [2]. They might be the same person, but I think the page might have been hijacked. I think both "versions" fail GNG, and I believe both fail WP:BLPPROD, but due to the past version having references (none really meet RS), I tagged it as PROD due to the Scope section of BLPPROD.

Comment: It looks like my PROD from the question above created some activity on that page. Eventually, the page has been changed back to a cricketer and refs have been added (or restored).

I understand the constraints on your time and I appreciate any feedback you can provide.

Hope this finds you well.   // Timothy :: talk 

Hi, Timothy,
I understand your mistaken impression that notifications are optional. I once considered CSD notices optional for empty category speedy deletions because I thought editors were not invested in their category creations like they would be if an article they created was tagged for deletion. And then, an upset editor brought a complaint against me to ANI because they were angry they had not been notified about an empty category deletion. So, since then, I consider all deletion processes to require a notification.
And, from their point-of-view, an editor has no access to see their deleted contributions so if an article/template/redirect/category they created is deleted, they would have no record of it at all if they aren't notified it's been tagged. They can't go through their contributions to see what they've worked on because deleted contributions are only visible to admins. So, it's important to let them know what happened to pages they've created.
As for PRODs, my general advice is not to PROD articles that are currently in the process of being created and edited because the article likely will be changing soon, improving, and the criteria you cited for your PROD might no longer apply. I don't use PROD a lot but when I do, it is usually if I come across an older, obscure article from back in the day (2000s) when sourcing requirements weren't enforced and the subject of the article doesn't seem notable. Remember, PRODs are for "uncontroversial deletion" so if an article is currently being worked on by an editor, deleting it will not be uncontroversial, it will be actively contested! I hope that answers your questions. Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Upage

You still using that dell laptop? Or were you the one that said they dropped their laptop in water or something? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

How can you remember that comment?! Yes, I work on an 8 year old Dell laptop. I did drop it but not in water. It just made the internal clock wonky. What, may I ask, made you remember that random remark? Liz Read! Talk! 01:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
We were talking about, or you joined in on Don't Stuff Beans Up your nose, I think I pinged you on that comment on something, then you said your laptop has a wonky clock. If you Laptop's clock is still wonky I think it might be a dead CMOS battery... Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
It could be. But I'm getting error messages because my Windows version is no longer supported and there is no way I'm purchasing a new version of Windows for a laptop from 2012! Time for a new computer. Liz Read! Talk! 02:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Try Linux, at least it does not force updates on you while you work, and it's free, it's also system friendly and does not take much ram, I use Ubuntu, it's free! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:12, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Liz/Archive_29&oldid=998945764"