*This proposal will make prep building more difficult, as I usually look for date variety first, then check to see when it last appeared on the Main Page. I also look for date variety for the birth/death list, as that is more important in the OTD guidelines than the amount of births/deaths in each template. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 15:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
*This proposal will make prep building more difficult, as I usually look for date variety first, then check to see when it last appeared on the Main Page. I also look for date variety for the birth/death list, as that is more important in the OTD guidelines than the amount of births/deaths in each template. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 15:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
*:ok! Thank youf or getting back to me @[[User:Z1720|Z1720]]for sure if it affects the prep time, not worth it. Ummmmm I attempted to tweak the birthdays section in September 23, 2026 so that it appears births first and deaths afterwards and have consequently scrambled it into a weird formatting mess…so sorry! I will try and fix this error. 🙂 [[User:I&I22|I&I22]] ([[User talk:I&I22|talk]]) 15:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
*:ok! Thank youf or getting back to me @[[User:Z1720|Z1720]]for sure if it affects the prep time, not worth it. Ummmmm I attempted to tweak the birthdays section in September 23, 2026 so that it appears births first and deaths afterwards and have consequently scrambled it into a weird formatting mess…so sorry! I will try and fix this error. 🙂 [[User:I&I22|I&I22]] ([[User talk:I&I22|talk]]) 15:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
== Ikhouvanjou14 and balancing ==
For the past several months, {{u|Ikhouvanjou14}} has been swapping hooks for the OTD templates. They have done a great job finding new articles for OTD, especially in the births/deaths section. Unfortunately, I have had to move many of their selections to ineligible. Examples for upcoming OTDs are [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FSeptember_28&diff=1311955778&oldid=1310715144 September 28], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FSeptember_29&diff=1312159942&oldid=1311399979 September 29], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_1&diff=1312311459&oldid=1312200656 October 1], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_2&diff=1312313248&oldid=1311432524 October 2], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_4&diff=1312476101&oldid=1311595516 October 4], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_5&diff=1312850279&oldid=1311462146 October 5], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_6&diff=1313211744&oldid=1311869137 October 6], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_8&diff=1313492000&oldid=1312748923 October 8], although I could link more examples of previous OTD dates. In the past, I have never had to change this many hooks on this many dates after another editor has swapped the hooks: usually, I think I have swapped a hook once every two-ish weeks for minor reasons, not because of an orange banner or too many uncited statements.
After I have checked the templates and selected new hooks to replace the ones moved to ineligible, Ikhouvanjou14 will go back and swap hooks again, often using a “balancing” or “fixed” edit summary with no other explanation. Ikhouvanjou14’s edits are a very strict interpretation of the [[Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries#”On this day” guidelines|OTD guidelines]] by trying to include two births, two deaths in each template, as well as two women and two men. Their interpretation does not prioritise significant anniversaries or including pre-1900 dates if it breaks the 2 births/deaths and 2 men/women guideline, which does not follow the guideline priority established at [[Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries#”On this day” guidelines|the OTD guidelines]]. I cannot recall an instance where a hook I selected was moved by Ikhouvanjou14 to ineligible.
More importantly, Ikhouvanjou14 continually selects ineligible articles, which requires rechecks and increasing the work at OTD. When I recheck, sometimes I add more articles to “ineligible” that were selected by Ikhouvanjou14 and replace the hooks again ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_6&diff=1313324586&oldid=1313235947 October 6], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASelected_anniversaries%2FOctober_8&diff=1313767620&oldid=1313594598 October 8]), causing the “balancing” and rechecking process to repeat. I have started two threads on Ikhouvanjou14’s talk page [[User talk:Ikhouvanjou14#OTD for July 15|here]] and [[User talk:Ikhouvanjou14#OTD|here]], but I am still constantly moving their selected hooks to ineligible.
This desire for balancing was explained in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMain_Page%2FErrors&diff=1310864415&oldid=1310858080 this post] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMain_Page%2FErrors&diff=1309627974&oldid=1309627513 this post] at [[WP:ERRORS]]; other editors [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMain_Page%2FErrors&diff=1310914961&oldid=1310914319 expressed confusion] or stated that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMain_Page%2FErrors&diff=1310994405&oldid=1310990118 their interpretation of balancing is not required]. I think the consensus at ERRORS is that OTD should not follow Ikhouvanjou14’s strict interpretation, but I wanted to bring this here for further discussion.
Some questions for the OTD page watchers:
*Is my interpretation of what is ineligible for OTD too strict? Common reasons why I move articles to ineligible are orange or yellow banners, birth/death dates not cited in the article, and too much text is uncited.
*Is Ikhouvanjou14’s interpretation of OTD balancing too strict?
*Should Ikhouvanjou14 be “balancing” or swapping OTD templates after another editor has checked the hooks, except in circumstances where hooks are ineligible? Would it be more appropriate to open a discussion on the OTD talk page, expressing their preference on what hooks to swap after the template is checked?
Opinions are apprecitated. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 17:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
 |
|
To make sure articles are not selected (bolded item) more than once, search for the article’s name at Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/All.
I hope this is an okay place to followup on PhilovGraves‘ quetion from WP:ERRORS. They asked, “9/11 is absent on the anniversaries, even though it was one of the most important events of today.
” regarding Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/September 11. It looks like the September 11 terror attacks had run for multiple consecutive years, so Ikhouvanjou14 removed them for 2025 to make sure they run on September 11, 2026, which will be the 25th anniversary. Now that is the 12th, I think anyone can add them back for next year, Rjjiii (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- I will, later this day. I have to work away from my laptop for the next hours. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 01:19, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- I swapped it back in, replacing another hook relating to the United States. CMD (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick responses, Rjjiii (talk) 01:24, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
1. List the most recent dates to appear at the top of the list
2. List BIRTHS first and Deaths last…
Thank you @GoldRomean! I&I22 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- This proposal will make prep building more difficult, as I usually look for date variety first, then check to see when it last appeared on the Main Page. I also look for date variety for the birth/death list, as that is more important in the OTD guidelines than the amount of births/deaths in each template. Z1720 (talk) 15:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- ok! Thank youf or getting back to me @Z1720for sure if it affects the prep time, not worth it. Ummmmm I attempted to tweak the birthdays section in September 23, 2026 so that it appears births first and deaths afterwards and have consequently scrambled it into a weird formatting mess…so sorry! I will try and fix this error. 🙂 I&I22 (talk) 15:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
For the past several months, Ikhouvanjou14 has been swapping hooks for the OTD templates. They have done a great job finding new articles for OTD, especially in the births/deaths section. Unfortunately, I have had to move many of their selections to ineligible. Examples for upcoming OTDs are September 28, September 29, October 1, October 2, October 4, October 5, October 6, October 8, although I could link more examples of previous OTD dates. In the past, I have never had to change this many hooks on this many dates after another editor has swapped the hooks: usually, I think I have swapped a hook once every two-ish weeks for minor reasons, not because of an orange banner or too many uncited statements.
After I have checked the templates and selected new hooks to replace the ones moved to ineligible, Ikhouvanjou14 will go back and swap hooks again, often using a “balancing” or “fixed” edit summary with no other explanation. Ikhouvanjou14’s edits are a very strict interpretation of the OTD guidelines by trying to include two births, two deaths in each template, as well as two women and two men. Their interpretation does not prioritise significant anniversaries or including pre-1900 dates if it breaks the 2 births/deaths and 2 men/women guideline, which does not follow the guideline priority established at the OTD guidelines. I cannot recall an instance where a hook I selected was moved by Ikhouvanjou14 to ineligible.
More importantly, Ikhouvanjou14 continually selects ineligible articles, which requires rechecks and increasing the work at OTD. When I recheck, sometimes I add more articles to “ineligible” that were selected by Ikhouvanjou14 and replace the hooks again (October 6, October 8), causing the “balancing” and rechecking process to repeat. I have started two threads on Ikhouvanjou14’s talk page here and here, but I am still constantly moving their selected hooks to ineligible.
This desire for balancing was explained in this post and this post at WP:ERRORS; other editors expressed confusion or stated that their interpretation of balancing is not required. I think the consensus at ERRORS is that OTD should not follow Ikhouvanjou14’s strict interpretation, but I wanted to bring this here for further discussion.
Some questions for the OTD page watchers:
- Is my interpretation of what is ineligible for OTD too strict? Common reasons why I move articles to ineligible are orange or yellow banners, birth/death dates not cited in the article, and too much text is uncited.
- Is Ikhouvanjou14’s interpretation of OTD balancing too strict?
- Should Ikhouvanjou14 be “balancing” or swapping OTD templates after another editor has checked the hooks, except in circumstances where hooks are ineligible? Would it be more appropriate to open a discussion on the OTD talk page, expressing their preference on what hooks to swap after the template is checked?
Opinions are apprecitated. Z1720 (talk) 17:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
