• 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. if someone weighs 180 pounds hydrate 90 ounces of water a day), and look where it GOAT him. Then what about Linus Pauling advocating at least two grams a day of ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) divided into several equal portions (morning-afternoon-evening), you'd almost think he wanted people healthy. 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.
• 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 stuff 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 after the second race that the horse 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 their 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 a good page for it 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.

Breakfast with O’Keeffe Online: Analysis of a Painting. If you told someone about this video, they probably wouldn't believe you. Viriditas (talk) 10:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You make it sound mysterious. An hour long, so I'll not watch it now, but will keep the link. O'Keefe had an interesting childhood and teenage years around and near Madison, Wisconsin. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The video is about her work in 1945 and how it connects to the history of the US and New Mexico in that year. Viriditas (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a 1946 sequel? Randy Kryn (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Pelvis series ranged from 1943 to 1947. I would like to start working on the series, but I also wanted to work on several different articles as well. We will see how it goes. Could you take a look at pineapple mania and make some recommendations? I think pineapple in art can be split from it since that topic is so large. Viriditas (talk) 01:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit summary, I was cleaning up after finding the template out of place in the close up article and saw it was used in a couple of other articles. Where was the discussion you mention? I don't see anything at Talk:Pierre-Auguste Renoir. Belbury (talk) 17:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Belbury. The discussion (Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025#January 28Template:Renoir-BoatingParty-ImageMap - don't know why this didn't take, it is linked at the top of the image's talk page) was about keeping the image, which is only used on two pages, Renoir's and the painting. I can see your point about it not being needed on Renoir's page, but recall that the lead-up to the discussion included that one. To me it seems fine as a location, but please ask for others to comment if you'd still want to remove it from the artist's article. Thanks for following up. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 January 28 § Template:Renoir-BoatingParty-ImageMap —  jlwoodwa (talk) 16:50, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am generally no friend of See also, doubting that many readers get to such a section anyway. I reverted for an individual hymn by Luther, because the link to the list you added as See also sits prominently in the infobox on top of the image. Please don't add it to other hymns. See also should not contain links elsewhere in the article, which includes - to my understanding - navboxes. Please check yourself, and avoid duplication. I have no more time, sorry. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Am discussing this at the talk page of Nun bitten wir den Heiligen Geist. Please consider finding the time, you have a couple things wrong. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of clarifying what I may have gotten wrong here, you began two other discussions. - You seem to think that a list of items would make a reasonable See also for all the items on the list. Following that thought - that I don't share - we might have in a Bach cantata a See also of the sometimes several lists in which it appears (Bach's cantatas - church cantatas - Bach's church cantatas - chorale cantatas - Christmas cantatas), on top of navboxes including both the cantatas and the lists? I am not yet convinced that it is a good idea. Why would we advertise the lists in the articles of their items, at all? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting everything without anticipating or asking for reasons why I added the stand-alone List of hymns by Martin Luther to the See also pages seems a bit bitey (although understandable). I seriously did not see the link at the infoboxes (worded 'Hymn by Martin Luther', more of a summary, and the only way to tell it is to list of hymns is to click it) and posted the discussion at the hymn talk page before seeing your post here (I would have answered this one first if I had seen it. And I then posted at the list talk page after noticing that the article I posted at averages only 5-6 views a day). See also works well to up views of lists, and offers readers many more choices to explore the overall topics. Navboxes don't count for See also duplication because they are only available to 30% of readers (still a huge amount of views), and common lists, like this hymn list, can appear on both without a problem. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't revert "everything", but undid one individual hymn, explained in the edit summary, and explained again above. I then reverted others hymns for which the same explanations was valid, except two where I wasn't sure the link was present.

You didn't answer my Bach cantata question. Let's look at another example: do you think the List of 20th-century classical composers should appear as a See also for every composer listed? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, I saw your post at the individual hymn and answered you there, and then, popping my head up, saw the large number of reverts. The 20th-century classical composers list, I wouldn't link them to a See also but wouldn't revert if someone else did (that's a pretty big list, akin to something like 'List of Academy Award winners', although I'd probably add it to a few articles). Will take a look at the Bach question and come back to this discussion (but navboxes, as mentioned, do not apply as they only reach 30% of readers). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, what a Bach cantata collection! I bet lots of WikiBucks that including the list page on See also's would up the views on List of Bach cantatas a great deal (only 85 a day now). Navboxes don't count, they are only seen by 30% of viewers. The cantata list would work as a See also because it's about one individual and his creations and not, as the 20th century composer list, about many individuals linked together only because of a pre-set dating format. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have looked at one list, but many cantatas are in more than one, and often several are linked from the prose, including that one. What do you think of an experiment: have the See also in one Luther hymn and tell me if you detect a difference, worth an extra section with one line in the article. How about A Mighty Fortress Is Our God, the only one (still) in English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to be the main list. Your experiment should include the top ten or so hymns (by number of daily views) and run for at least a week. To me even one extra reader a day is worth an extra line. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]