• An editing respite
• Some useful things from a non-medical non-professional: Tom Brady follows the hydration route (1/2 of a person's weight in number of ounces per day, i.e. someone who weighs 180 pounds would drink 90 ounces of water a day), and look where it GOAT him. Then what about Linus Pauling advocating at least two or more grams a day of ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) divided into several equal portions (morning-afternoon-evening, personally I usually do three grams a day), you'd almost think he wanted people healthy. A daily fast of at least 14 hours (if someone eats at, say, 8 p.m., they then don't eat anything until 10 a.m. or later the next day) does some good stuff. And last but least, microwave an ear of corn for four minutes, with the husk left on — if two ears, double it to eight minutes. When you peel off the husk and eat the thing, you'll thank me later.
• Now you know: Saverland v Newton
• Remembering four of the last eight Earthlings to travel to the Moon, murdered soon after their return, sadly bookending the first two Moon pioneers murdered three weeks after arriving safely back on Earth.
• Maybe my best geek edit: A five cushion bank shot italicizing Star Trek and Buffy links on Wikipedia's Klingon language page (although...).
• An IP upon realizing that birds are dinosaurs, and a nod to our dinosaur brothers and sisters.
• Write on!: Don't kick the Ouija board
• An IP's inadvertent poetically sexist edit, which they quickly corrected
• Perhaps my best one-word edit (although...)
• Ho Ho Huh? A yule mystery, why none of these redirects to Christmas and holiday season (Christmas holidays, Holiday Season, the Christmas season, the holiday season, the Holiday Season, the Christmas Season, the Christmas holidays, and the Christmas Holidays) were created before 9 December 2024? My guess: Elves.
• Ready to check out the size of the Solar System? No small children or comfort animals on board please, and keep your arms and things where you can see them: If the Moon were only 1 Pixel (web-based scroll map scaled to the Moon being, well, 1 pixel)
• A sci-fi short story plot (dibs)

. . .Veiled Christ, a statue in Italy that depicts a knobbly-kneed Christ in the tomb, please give the image two or three clicks. This almost unbelievable 1753 sculpture ("how'd he do that?"), carved from one piece of marble, has one of only two Wikipedia article's which have to prove, with sources, that the artwork was not the work of an alchemist. Step right up, and don't miss the modern looking couch, the two tasseled pillows, or the crown of thorns and other torture things down by the feet. All carved from a single block of marble.

Literally steps away from Veiled Christ sits another "how'd he do that?" sculpture, also carved from a single block of marble (or created by alchemy).

p.s. While writing aloud about impossible statues carved from one piece of rock...who can forget flowers made of glass!

Watching Secretariat run his 1973 Triple Crown races in order while knowing three things: 1) Secretariat's trainer and jockey realized only after the second race that he could run full speed from start to finish. 2) While drastically being held back during the Kentucky Derby and Preakness, Secretariat still holds the fastest time in all three Triple Crown races. 3) Sham - the horse Secretariat trashed like a dancing bear in the Kentucky Derby - still holds the Derby's second fastest time.

Here's the 1973 Kentucky Derby...Secretariat's jockey holds him back...holds him wayyyy back, almost last. Next the Preakness...holds him back... And then: the Belmont..."He is moving like a tre-men-dous machine".

• ...winner of the 2017 "Shakespearean dramatic romantic tragic tale in six words" Heisman.

July 8, 2022: during three edits in three minutes an IP proposes marriage on the same page as the above masterpiece, creating his own. Wikipedians have a romantic side, even the bots, so nobody reverted until I did after two hours with a note saying that it should be enough time, and wished him luck. Does anyone know of an earlier proposal on Wikipedia, especially on such an appropriate page and so perfectly played out - he seemingly decides to marry her right there, between two edits. Film scene scenario worthy (Hallmark, are you listening?).

The docents ask people: "Find the cat". Letting the coolness of it lead me to break my oath as a Wikipedian, I now self-identify as a vandal. (in other vandal news, in 2023 an IP spent a great deal of time removing all the vowels from several articles. Wh ddn't thnk f tht?).

See and listen to Wikipedia edits as they occur. Designed by Stephen LaPorte and Mahmoud Hashemi of hatnote.com, the link was copied from a user page, don't remember where, but deservedly displayed on quite a few as well as having its own article. Just who is making all this noise? Well...

Here is Paine Ellsworth's subpage about how many Wikipedians can dance on the head of a pin.

	The Surreal Barnstar
	Salutations to the "smallest known dinosaur, bee hummingbird" guy. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Go D. Usopp, a nice surprise. You'd think that the information that the bee hummingbird is the smallest known dinosaur would be higher on the page, arguably important enough to go into the lead. The unneeded wording that editors added to carefully explain that birds are dinosaurs, a commonly known fact, seems undue. Brevity could trim the sentence to its basics and move it up the page, it does not need to carefully explain to the readers that birds are what they are. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:33, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed overlapping categories, lists, and navigation templates are not duplicative but they do duplicate one another. Logoshimpo (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Logoshimpo. Not always, or maybe usually. They all have their strengths, and the human mind is better able to understand one of the three more than the others. They are welcome examples of what is good about original Wikipedia. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused by what you mean by "original Wikipedia".

I understand you are an editor of Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates ([1]) but I think you fundamentally misunderstand duplicity versus duplication. Please take a look at [2] where you say that "Categories, lists, and navigation templates are three different ways to group and organize articles. Although they each have their own advantages and disadvantages, each method complements the others". This quote only summarizes the guideline and is not precise enough to be used as an argument in discussions. Logoshimpo (talk) 05:30, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It sure is. And by original Wikipedia I mean features which were originated before the habit of viewing the site on mobile, when desktop and laptops were the sole reading platforms. Navboxes are not shown on mobile, so, original Wikipedia. I'm not sure if categories make the cut or not, but the fact that navboxes are not seen on mobile make mute some containment arguments which editors still use. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:06, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Moot? EEng 12:50, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose both work, if you give a hute. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:39, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the redirects to Template:Most populous urban areas of Norway:

• Template:25 biggest cities of Norway
• Template:42 most populous cities of Norway
• Template:30 most populous cities of Norway
• Template:40 most populous cities of Norway

Not a lot of edits were made to the redirects; the most one had were 4. There wasn't an ideal number or any consensus as to how many cities should be included on to the template. This is new information I wasn't aware of during the deletion discussion. I don't see any keep arguments there at that discussion that weren't WP:ILIKEIT in nature. Logoshimpo (talk) 03:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And what about containment arguments. What are those? Logoshimpo (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By that I mean, for one example, that some editors remove items from 'See also' saying that they are duplicates of a navbox listing. They act as if the navbox covers and substitutes for See also items. Since navboxes are not seen by 70 percent of readers, that reasoning fails common sense. Thanks for asking. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it over? I think it's over. Thanks for sticking with us through the rock fiasco, I took your words to heart. Hopefully we can all move on now. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 12:34, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for your good work MediaKyle. Rock and roll, Poole style. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:37, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article Caring for the Lagoon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as Unreferenced for 13 years. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. A Google search found only similarly named lagoons. Fails the relevant notability guidelines. Lacks significant coverage.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 20:07, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]