User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 82
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Administrators' newsletter – June 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Administrator changes
CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
- The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
Desktop is DOA...
So it'll be a bit before I'm up and running, as I'm going to have to order a new desktop and have it get here, and then get it set up. I have backups on hard drives from the old computer, but it may take a bit more time than usual to get them onto the new one ... given the old one is dead dead dead. --Ealdgyth (talk) 13:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
And we are sorta back to life...
New computer is here and am in the process of setting up. Will be a couple of days before I'm totally back up and running, but things are looking decent so far. --Ealdgyth (talk) 00:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hurray !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- and the backup drive with TimeMachine survived the death of the old computer and is now going to spend five or six hours restoring everything....but hopefully that’ll get me back to within an hour of the crash. Still will need a extra monitor to make up for the loss of the 30” Cinema Display but....--Ealdgyth (talk) 01:09, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- I wish a good recovery for the machines. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- and the backup drive with TimeMachine survived the death of the old computer and is now going to spend five or six hours restoring everything....but hopefully that’ll get me back to within an hour of the crash. Still will need a extra monitor to make up for the loss of the 30” Cinema Display but....--Ealdgyth (talk) 01:09, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Dimple Kapadia FAC
Hi there,
I have to say I disagree with your decision to archive it. The article has three supports, and many comments by Fowler, who was, as many others have mentioned on a mission to destroy the FAC. Yes, his username is all over the place as you can see. I was told that once I didn't comply with Fowler's demand to remove that one word he didn't like (which appears in sources and based on which he opposed the nomination), he'd do everything he can to destroy the FAC with empty and unconstructive comments. I was told that his username would be all over the FAC, and was advised to ignore him by different editors both on the FAC and on my talk page. I didn't ignore him, however, out of respect for the process, and addressed whatever little actionable his negative and dismissive comments offered, and additionally did reply to every single query to make it easier for you guys. HJ Mitchell tried to read his comments too and essentially dismissed them as a waste of time, finding only minor issues worth addressing. But it continued, and it's recently come to the point where he addressed other reviewers (or without "other" actually, because his was not a review), and even directly asked one of them, who opposed the nomination but was getting increasingly content with the progress, to not do strike his oppose (the reviewer did not comply with the request and eventually, after a meticulous source review, removed his oppose and even supported it now). I did notify the coordinators, including you, and the FAC talk page, of this inexplicable behaviour. I thought you (by you, I mean the co-ords) would use your knowledge and experience in dealing with someone whose single mission is already known to all. Shahid • Talk2me 15:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Please give me credit for reading the entire thing. I did indeed read it. And try to digest it. There are concerns within the whole entirety of the thing that do need addressing. There was an open review that was still finding issues. At this point, I judged it best to let the issues be worked out in a less contentious venue ... get with HJMitchell and Encyclopedus (sp?) on the talk page and get it worked out before renoming. I will admit that yes, the FAC got out of control, and that is somewhat on me (although why it's got to be ME that closes these gods-awful FACs, I'm not quite sure...)because of the computer issues I had. I'm sorry for that, but at this point, the FAC needed a lot more work and it'd been two months already. It had already spawned a rather nasty discussion elsewhere, and the tone of the conversation on the FAC was declining rapidly again. Whatever others do - the tone on ALL sides was declining and I judged it best to nip the problems off and let the improvements the article needs take place outside the FAC spotlight. May I suggest that you get all those who commented on the FAC to engage on the talk page and help you get it into shape. And please, understand that there is no shame in having an article not succeed the first time at FAC - you'll note I just archived one of my own FACs because I won't have time to deal with it while I'm trying to get caught up at FAC from my computer issues... so it's not like I'm not afraid to take my own medicine. --Ealdgyth (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- I do give you credit. But if you just considered the other reviews, the three supports, the fact that Harry was already happy with the changes made, that Encyclopedus supported the nomination (just an hour ago!), against someone whose comments were highly questioned by others, maybe the verdict could have been different. The tone is another thing, and I don't think that it should be a matter of consideration because it would mean everyone could step in and destroy FACs. I think you all are fully aware of Fowler's conduct. Shahid • Talk2me 16:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- I considered the supports, yes. I also found some stuff in Fowler's review to be actionable ... and that he had other unactionable bits does not make the actionable bits negated. And the tone had little bearing on it - except that we need to get away from commenting on the reviewers and purely on the article - which not only was F&F doing, but you are doing right above. Let's leave that sort of thing behind, please. --Ealdgyth (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- No no, I didn't comment on the reviewer, but on his reviewing skills. Anyway, the actionable bits were addressed, I really do wonder which ones you're referring to, hope not those which are purely based on his own WP:OR. Anyway, when can I renominate? Not sure I'll have time because I'm busy, but who knows. Shahid • Talk2me 16:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Get the article up to snuff on the talk page. Get with the folks who commented at the FAC (all of them!) and work out any remaining issues. It's much easier for a coord to see an article talk page that has worked through issues and a bunch of "We worked out any issues I had at the talk page, I support" supports, than a pile of nitpicking prose issues that makes the whole FAC page hard to read. --Ealdgyth (talk) 16:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, loved your "I did archive the Dimple FAC, but it was not so much because of your oppose but in spite of it" on the user's talk page. It means I wasn't being over-dramatic. Shahid • Talk2me 16:42, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks and a note
Thanks for the note at WT:FAC. I agree with everything you say, but just wanted to post a note about you not working on content. If I had to give up content work to do administrative work around here I would burn out. I hope you're not feeling under any obligation not to submit your work to FAC. And if the coordinator workload is high enough that you really can't spare the time, perhaps we could do with another active coordinator? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- It shouldn't be that long of a break - maybe a couple of months max. And mostly it's because I need to focus on off-wiki stuff. I do research/writing/editing off wiki so it's not like I need the wiki stuff to feel creative in that line of things. I'll get back to research here more in the winter, likely, when I'm more stuck in the house. Right now it's hard to stay inside when it's 65 degrees, sunny, with a light breeze outside... --Ealdgyth (talk) 18:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- It's mid-70s here, but if I step outside I'll get handed a shovel and pointed at a yard of mulch, so I'm working on articles instead. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:50, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- I need to week the veggie garden, but will do that when the spouse gets back to work sometime this week. --Ealdgyth (talk) 18:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Well, over here it's been all rainy so far but the main reason for me to stay inside and away from large Wikipedia work are the university exams. In one-two weeks they'll be over and then I can go back to my backlog. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
- I need to week the veggie garden, but will do that when the spouse gets back to work sometime this week. --Ealdgyth (talk) 18:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- It's mid-70s here, but if I step outside I'll get handed a shovel and pointed at a yard of mulch, so I'm working on articles instead. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:50, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
FAC Nomination
You look like you're fantastically busy, and so I probably shouldn't bother you. However, as my first FAC nomination for Hyborian War was going up in flames, you commented on the review with Gog the Mild and you also mentioned you had some sources for early gaming. If you're still interested in games from this period (and you have time), I'd be happy for a review. I'd rather see the second nomination go up in flames again vs. sit unreviewed for months, (although it did get an image review). Thanks for your time. Airborne84 (talk) 01:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Ping
May want to take a look at Mustang and the talkpage discussion. Montanabw(talk) 00:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Sybil (wife of Pain fitzJohn)
The article Sybil (wife of Pain fitzJohn) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sybil (wife of Pain fitzJohn) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 14:01, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:08, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.
Technical news
- Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community. - The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles
.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
WikiCup 2020 July newsletter
The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.
.svg){kind=small}
Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, 
MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Dorian's Met
Could Meteorological history of Hurricane Dorian be added to the urgents list? I asked Ian and posted on the nomination about a week ago without response. It has two supports, but likely needs another review as well as a SR. NoahTalk 01:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Sybil (wife of Pain fitzJohn)
The article Sybil (wife of Pain fitzJohn) you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Sybil (wife of Pain fitzJohn) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 08:02, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Archiving Cymmer Colliery explosion FAC
- Gog talk, article talk, and Nikkimaria talk.
I suggest your archiving of this FAC discussion was unnecessarily hasty. I had addressed all the points raised by Gog the Mild. The discussion was ongoing and they have now been denied the opportunity to respond and reconsider their initial recommendation. Please read the full discussion carefully and note their comment from 5 July: "If you could get them satisfactorily sorted within, say, a week, then we can move on." Other editors were also yet to respond after my revisions of the article, where was the consensus? ~ RLO1729💬 19:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- I didn't see any consensus to promote, I didn't see any chance of it getting close to promoting. My suggestion is to work on it outside of the hothouse atmosphere of FAC and get it closer to ready. @MikeChristie: may also be able to help you with some helpful suggestions. Also, Sandy, do you want to help out here? --Ealdgyth (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
RLO, I will pitch in and have a look when I am home, traveling now on iphone, and will offer suggestions. Archival is often the fastest route to promotion, as it affords you two weeks to come back in top shape, with a shorter and easier FAC, that is more likely to engage more reviewers. Gog the Mild is a good reviewer, and suggesting withdrawal really works as the fastest route to the bronze star, so please do not be discouraged. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:05, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- I'd like to help but may not have time; I've watchlisted the article and will see. Ealdgyth, the ping failed since there's a space in my username, just FYI. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
I've encouraged RLO1729 to join in here for a discussion of their frustration. I still have much more to say (surprise, surprise :), but will hold off for now to give RLO some breathing room. I still think we could have this article ready for a fresh FAC within the two weeks from its archival, hopefully having developed a better understanding among all along the way. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Signpost Interview
Hello! I'm Puddleglum2.0, a writer for the Wikipedia newsletter The Signpost. I was planning on putting together an interview with coordinators and delegates involved in the Featured Content projects for the August edition, but before putting together the questions, I wanted to gauge coords interest to see if it will be worth doing. Thanks for your work and thoughts! Cheers -- puddleglum2.0 19:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not sure this is the best time - one of our coords is somewhat inactive because of the pandemic, so it's not going to get much from him. --Ealdgyth (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply - that's fine if this wouldn't be the best time; we can do it some other time if you all are busy, although one coord missing probably wouldn't make that big a difference. Thank you! Cheers -- puddleglum2.0 01:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
help me to make a Wikipedia page for notable people
Hello Ealdgyth, Can you help me to make one wikipedia page?? NRS3394 (talk) 11:03, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
About my FAC nomination
Goodday fellow editor. I understand that the FAC nomination was closed for a reason for Chesham branch, but I would like to know in detail and some guidance of what went terribly wrong to cause a major contributor to the article to oppose what I have contributed to not have met the criteria. Yes, I may be inexperienced in FA ship as this may be my first to try and brush up on what I am doing but I was cited as incompetent. I believe the nomination may have been archived way too early and there has been no criticism received to improve on this. I do not appreciate how this has been handled. If it is about the criteria, feel free to guide me, if it is nothing I can do about it, I'll stay out. Thank you for taking the time and I appreciate communication. To give a little more context, the major contributor opposed the FAC which I find it rather poppycock, when he did not even communicate at all when I was working on it. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 15:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- Right at the FAC nomination page it says in the instructions "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it." per the page tools you aren't a significant contributor. Nor was there consultation on the talk page. So .. yes, it got archived. Do you even have access to the sources for the article so that you could address any concerns with the sources that were brought up? The nominator needs to be familiar with all the sources used so that they can address those things. --Ealdgyth (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. Mmmm thank you for pointing out that I overlooked that. I suppose the "consultation" on the talk page was not explicit enough, albeit me only taking the points from the previous FAC to work on which were mainly on copyedits but now that I ponder, I shall rest this case since I do not have the source. I do hope one day it'll be FA, as deserved, but not from me. Thank you for the insight. <3 VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 15:57, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).
Administrator changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
- Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
- Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
- There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Space, the final frontier
It seems to me there's been plenty of time to say anything re Worden that needed saying, but your call. In the meantime, I'd like to get Apollo 14 going at FAC, since we're less than six months from the 50th anniversary of the Moon landing next February, if it's OK.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, that's fine on 14. I'm not inclined to worry too much about Worden, but figured it's best to try and get the reviewer back to it if possible. --Ealdgyth (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Fyi I've done a couple more reviews as a totally inadequate thank you for all your work on FAs. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Dweller why are there two sections for 2008? Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Sandy, hope you're well. Originally, each year had a section for FARd articles. Try this Could be merged in. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Pretty horrified that (unless there's an error on my page) we passed The Kinks 10 years ago and it's never run on main page. Massively important band. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- And odd that the nominator does not seem to have requested it ... but they are gone now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, that too. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)