User talk:Jason Quinn/Archive 5
 | 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. |
Wolfshiem
Sorry about that -- I corrected it, as I'm sure the editor must have, and as, perhaps, Fitzgerald may have wanted, prior to reading the note.
After reading the note, I fell into a downward spiral of philosophical arguments around Wikipedia policy and spelling that sapped my will to live, let alone return to change it back. I am glad you have it the way you want it! -Kieran (talk) 20:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- "Wolfshiem" was the spelling present in the first edition of the book. "Wolfsheim" was a second edition and later change. The change by the editor was deliberately to obfuscate the Jewish name to avoid potential allegations of anti-Semitism. I do not recall at the moment anything about how Fitzgerald felt about the change (or even if he was aware of it) but viewing "Wolfsheim" as just a "corrected" spelling of "Wolfshiem" is false. In fact it was the reverse as the original spelling is a proper Jewish name while the latter is just invented to avoid being associated with a real name. Using the later edition spelling alone would gloss over an important and interesting aspect of the book's history.
- When you edited this page, there should have been a red page notice here saying it's best not to split the discussion into two places. If whatever editor you used did not display this, please let me know because there's a bug. If it did display and you just skipped it, it's kind of the same problem that occurred with your Gatsby edit. Jason Quinn (talk) 07:49, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- I'd literally never seen that before, and pretty much glossed over it -- the interface is pretty busy. It does, indeed show up, so no need to worry about bugs in your non-standard code.
- And seriously, this kind of sarcasm and shirtiness is exactly why Wikipedia gets accusations of elitism and exclusivity, and new editors often feel deeply unwelcome. Please reflect on your attitude, as I feel that it is being actively harmful to the project as a whole. -Kieran (talk) 19:52, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- When you edited this page, there should have been a red page notice here saying it's best not to split the discussion into two places. If whatever editor you used did not display this, please let me know because there's a bug. If it did display and you just skipped it, it's kind of the same problem that occurred with your Gatsby edit. Jason Quinn (talk) 07:49, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- What I wrote is generously informative in explaining lingering doubts you seemed to have about the correctness of the Wolfsheim edit. It appears you are upset because I suggested you may have an issue with hastiness. My comments were not sarcasm nor were they ill-tempered. So I reject your claim. I do, however, expect editors to actually read stuff before they edit. You seem to think that WP:CIVIL requires us to never critique other editors habits. It does not. But now you accuse me of being unwelcoming to newcomers and harmful to the project and you have made me "shirty". I have welcomed many many users on Wikipedia and very often go above and beyond to offer them help and assistance... far above what most Wikipedians do, very likely including you. Since you accuse me of being bad for the project regarding new editors, find me ONE instance of me biting a newbie or stop making unfounded accusations. Regardless, I point out that you are not a new user, and even though I avoid it too, I have no ethical issue being blunt with long-term users if need be. Perhaps in the future be thankful when offered constructive criticism rather acting with thin-skinned indignation. I see no further benefit to this discussion. Jason Quinn (talk) 20:48, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Invitation to Admin confidence survey
Hello,
Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.
The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.
To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.
We really appreciate your input!
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.
For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Jason Quinn. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Five years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
- And counting! Although I haven't been as active recently. Thanks! Jason Quinn (talk) 12:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
- count to seven ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- This is a reminder I'm also getting old! Jason Quinn (talk) 10:12, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The User Page Barnstar |
Your user page is so good, it has just been plagiarized.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
|
Hello, from the Portals WikiProject...
You are invited to join the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system...
The Portals WikiProject was rebooted on April 17th, and is going strong. Fifty-nine editors have joined so far, with more joining daily.
We're having a blast, and excitement is high...
Our goal is to update, upgrade, and maintain portals.
In addition to working directly on portals, we are developing tools to make portals more dynamic (self-updating), and to make building and maintaining portals easier. We've finished two tools so far, with more to come. They are Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.
Discussions are underway about how to further upgrade portals, and what the portals of the future will be.
There are plenty of tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too).
With more to come.
We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.
See ya at the WikiProject!
Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 23:44, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much
The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.
By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.
Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.
If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.
Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 18:03, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT
Disambiguation link notification for June 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Predator (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Val Verde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
RfC: Social democracy
You might be interested in providing your insight at: Talk:Bernie Sanders#RfC: Social democracy. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
pickles
Regarding your edit, I'm not sure we even have a {{incandescent vegetables}} :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 20:41, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Jason Quinn. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:25, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 special circular
 |
Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:19, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tony Galento, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Max Baer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Template:Cite book
I noticed on Akiko Akana tht you removed the "orig" from a citation as "no such parameter", which was blank anyway. Looks like something I added, probably from Template:Cite book. Just giving you heads up, in case you want to delete it from that template. — Maile (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. As far as I recall at the moment
|orig=has never been used but|origyear=(which is now|orig-year=) is. Anyway, I check the documentation and didn't notice any (current) issues. Blank parameters should usually be removed. The cite templates have undergone a lot of revision over the years so probably just some quirk of history. Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 23:15, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,
Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.
I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!
From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.
If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
Have a very Quinn happy adminship anniversary on your special day!
Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:30, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Infobox photo discussion
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on which of two photos is preferable in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society
Dear Jason Quinn/Archive 5,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Talkback (Beşiktaş and Emenike)
Message added 29 March 2020. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Administrators' newsletter – April 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.
Technical news
- There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Miscellaneous
- The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Administrators' newsletter – May 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
- Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
- A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
- A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.
Technical news
- The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
- Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.
Miscellaneous
- A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.
The Great Gatsby
Hi Jason. I noticed Talk:The Great Gatsby/GA2 is still open. I added some comments there. As the person who opened the reassessment you should be the one to close it. Regards AIRcorn (talk) 21:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, Aircorn. I delisted the article and closed the discussion. I rarely participate in GA work but I noticed the instructions given at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment in the "How to use this process" section are either confusing, misleading, or broken. I followed them to list the GAR (but it seems like something was missed because it attracted almost no attention) and following them to close was totally confusing. For example, even though I followed the steps to list, no {{GAR/current}} was found to close. I just "winged" everything to close manually so hopefully it was done correctly. Seems to me that an experienced GA editor, who has the ability to think like a newbie, needs to quadruple-check all the instructions to make the process. Cheers, thanks for your comments. Jason Quinn (talk) 00:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- There are two processes. An individual one, which was what you opened, and a community one, which judging from the above were the instructions you followed. Individual ones are for simple relatively non-controversial reassessment, usually conducted by experienced editors. The community one is for the more complex or controversial ones, when disagreements occur over a close or those by editors who maybe lack a bit of experience. No drama either way, thanks for closing. AIRcorn (talk) 00:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of supernovae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cepheus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
 | |
| Ten years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:01, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
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
Entombed (Atari 2600) maze generation.
I was fascinated by the suggestion of 'solvable maze mystery' and so went off to read the arXiv article. On page 4:9 (section 3) it specifically states that unsolvable mazes will be generated and gives a screen capture of such an unsolvable maze generated by the game. I believe the Wikipedia article is in error or gives the wrong impression about the capability of the game's algorithm. Jimbaloid (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Mario Gomez
Hi Jason Quinn, I trust this finds you well. We exchanged couple of message earlier this year regarding Emmanuel Emenike's article. I need to bring an issue. This [1] "special contributor" wiped out a large amount of information from the article of Mario Gomez, without a solid ground and solely based on her/his personal opinion, with the edit on 29 June 2020. She/he deleted information only from the section covering Besiktas spell of Gomez, wiping out 10kb's of data and references. Is it possible to revert the article to it's version before that edit, please? Thank you very much. Isik (talk) 12:02, 30 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
Nomination for merging of Template:Not in refs
Template:Not in refs has been nominated for merging with Template:Failed verification. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 06:13, 1 August 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.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
- A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors
must
orshould
use the articles for creation process. - A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
- An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).
Administrator changes
- Ajpolino • LuK3
Jackmcbarn- Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely
1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created
.
- A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely
Technical news
- The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).
Arbitration
- The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
- Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.
Miscellaneous
- The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
- Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.
ReFill errors
Eck, sorry about that - thanks for spotting and fixing. I looked before hitting "save", but apparently I was readier for bed than I realized at that point in the night. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:58, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
re: McEnany edits
Hi, thanks for your message. Appreciate you pointing out the best practices re: references/punctuation. I added those references by hand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMDG09 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Gender-based designator
Adopt-a-typo: Hi Jason: you have contributed a lot to WP-thanks. Back in 2013 you tried to set up this device and I am wondering about the gender color coding. I am in a course at Portland State Univ called Women Scientists where we are studying the discouragement/bias against/male privilege history of said academics and seekers. I looked around and could not discern how/why you proposed the gender based designator. Please recap it or send me to the talk/page...Gary M Cafe.doppio (talk) 15:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, User:Cafe.doppio. I believe you are referring to the {{Adopt-a-typo}} template that allows people to easily "adopt" a misspelling. I did add the ability to customize the template using "yellow" for neutral, blue for male, and pink for female. It was just simply to extend the adoption of a baby metaphor to the colors usually used for newborn infants. There's nothing more behind it. It was supposed to make the template more fun by allowing the user to chose their color.
- There's one other instance of colorization I've worked on in Wikipedia. I've worked on color-coding some family tree templates by gender. For example, this one {{Kim dynasty (North Korea) family tree}}, which is included in many of the articles for the family members. There's a brief discussion of that at Template talk:Kim dynasty (North_Korea) family tree#Gender. I also asked around somewhere else about color conventions from around the world but I don't remember off the top of my head where that was.
- I suppose in a course about gender a person might object to the use of "blue for male" and "pink for female" as re-enforcing gender stereotypes. I see that point but unless there's a better way to help readers process things like complex families trees without such colors, it remains the best solution we have. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Agree with you about the family tree-you can only try to be fair and inclusive. The non-binary movement is quite evident and sometimes bordering on militant here in Portland. I don't know how a non-binary activist would react to the adopt-typo color coding...I am glad you are still "doing the work"! Cafe.doppio (talk) 21:43, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection
any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet
, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.
- Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection
Technical news
- Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
- Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
- Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.
Arbitration
- The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
- The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.
Miscellaneous
- A reminder that
standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people.
(American Politics 2 Arbitration case).
- A reminder that
hi
I would like discuss with about your edit on the article Jeffrey Ngai Pang Chin. You reverted to a vertion with so many mistakes. For example,「作家部落」 does not mean [Author's blog]. 部落 means a group of people not blog. and the Ip add so many wrong translation and deleted many infomation on the footnote. Some author of the article is wrong.--124.217.188.112 (talk) 07:24, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- some article title is wrong such as 瘋狗，this is not the title.you may check it. --124.217.188.112 (talk) 07:31, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- the author in Ref 7 is also wrong, the essay is use subject “他”which means “he”.--124.217.188.112 (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- The reverting editor (please disclose if you the same person) reverted to a version that ALSO had many mistakes. And he did so without explaining what exactly the "wrong information", despite having already been asked to do so by 61.239.39.90. After my revert, I also asked the reverting editor to explain on the article's talk page what the "wrong information" he keeps claiming is. You know, healthy discussion about the article. So has 61.239.39.90. The editor does not seem to wish to initiate discussion and makes large scale reverts just claiming "wrong information" or something similar. That said, something is seriously bizarre about this article and how IP editors are editing here and the style of editing. The article is barely more than a stub and yet is attracting fanatic ownership-style editing. Jason Quinn (talk) 08:16, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- since I am at office , i don't want colegue know my ID could I use this ip to discuss with you?--124.217.188.112 (talk) 08:49, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- Please start a discussion about the article's content on the article's talk page as is normal practice. Jason Quinn (talk) 09:02, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- ok--124.217.188.112 (talk) 09:04, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Administrators' newsletter – December 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).
Administrator changes
- Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.
Technical news
- Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Technical news
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
Arbitration
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). - Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
Hello
Can you fix the grammar please WNBA injury here. Thanks!
The article Crotaphion has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:V for any WP:MEDRS compliant sources. A search of PubMed for this term turns up no results, and a Google Books search pulled up primary results of robot-generated Chinese-English dictionaries, then antiquated medical dictionaries which don't show preview so don't give definitions. At best, this is deprecated.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
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, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!
Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:43, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).
|
|
|
Arbitration
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people
, replacing the 1932 cutoff.
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!
Precious anniversary
| | |
| Eight years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
- A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect. - A request for comment asks if sysops may
place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions
? - There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.
Technical news
- When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
- When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
- There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).
Arbitration
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people.
Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions. - The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed
.
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.
Happy First Edit Day!
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
Administrator changes
- Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
Technical news
- When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
Arbitration
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
Administrators' newsletter – May 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
- The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.
Technical news
- The user group
oversightwill be renamed tosuppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
- The user group
Arbitration
- The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.
Administrators' newsletter – June 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).
Administrator changes
- Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
- Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
- Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.
Technical news
- Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.
Arbitration
- After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
- An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
Technical news
- IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
Arbitration
- The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
Requesting evaluations of the The Great Gatsby FAC nomination
Hello, Jason Quinn. As you're one of the more active editors of The Great Gatsby article, I was hoping you might weigh in on its current nomination as a Featured Article Candidate. As any Wikipedia editor can participate in a review of a FAC nomination, it would be appreciated if you would contribute an evaluation of the article, whether pro or con. → Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Great_Gatsby/archive2 — Flask (talk) 18:08, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.
Technical news
- Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)
Arbitration
- Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.
Miscellaneous
- You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
Technical news
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
Administrators' newsletter – October 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
- Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
Technical news
- DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.
Arbitration
- A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
- Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
- The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
Miscellaneous
- Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
- The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
RfA 2021 review update
Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.
The following had consensus support of participating editors:
- Corrosive RfA atmosphere
- The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.
- Level of scrutiny
- Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.
- Standards needed to pass keep rising
- It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.
- Too few candidates
- There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.
- "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins
The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:
- Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere. - Admin permissions and unbundling
There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas. - RfA should not be the only road to adminship
Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.
Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.
There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun
Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.
There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Technical news
- Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.
Arbitration
- GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
- Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Administrators' newsletter – December 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
Administrator changes
Technical news
- Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
- The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
- The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.
Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
RFA 2021 Completed
The 2021 re-examination of RFA has been completed. 23 (plus 2 variants) ideas were proposed. Over 200 editors participated in this final phase. Three changes gained consensus and two proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration. Thanks to all who helped to close the discussion, and in particular Primefac, Lee Vilenski, and Ymblanter for closing the most difficult conversations and for TonyBallioni for closing the review of one of the closes.
The following proposals gained consensus and have all been implemented:
- Revision of standard question 1 to
Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?
Special thanks to xaosflux for help with implementation. - A new process, Administrative Action Review (XRV) designed to review if an editor's specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools, is consistent with policy in a process similar to that of deletion review and move review. Thanks to all the editors who contributed (and are continuing to contribute) to the discussion of how to implement this proposal.
- Removal of autopatrol from the administrator's toolkit. Special thanks to Wugapodes and Seddon for their help with implementation.
The following proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration:
- An option for people to run for temporary adminship (proposal, discussion, & close)
- An optional election process (proposal & discussion and close review & re-close)
Editors who wish to discuss these ideas or other ideas on how to try to address any of the six issues identified during phase 1 for which no proposal gained are encouraged to do so at RFA's talk page or an appropriate village pump.
A final and huge thanks all those who participated in this effort to improve our RFA process over the last 4 months.
This is the final update with no further talk page messages planned.
01:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Merchandise giveaway nomination
|
A token of thanks
Hi Jason Quinn! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
|
 |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.
- Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.
Arbitration
- Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.
Miscellaneous
- The functionaries email list (functionaries-en
lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
How we will see unregistered users
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. /Johan (WMF)
18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Misidentified species
Hi Jason,
I just saw your question for Modussiccandi at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, and was intrigued. It's a good question.
I disagree with the answer he gave (though I certainly don't intend this as a criticism of him). Once in a while, someone notices that a picture is not of what is claimed in the article, and removes it or discusses it with the editor who put it there, giving sources. This is a routine part of the editing process – people make mistakes, they get corrected. I don't see it as original research. It's more lack of (adequate) research by the editor who put the wrong picture there. When it turns out that a picture of a footballer is in fact a picture of a different footballer, it gets fixed, and I don't think anyone would call it original research.
I've never see a species picture with a citation. At Taraxacum platycarpum for instance, there are two pictures, with no references supporting the claim that they are really T. platycarpum. That seems out of line with WP policies. Maproom (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, Maproom. I thought the set of questions for this RfA were too routine and too easy. I wanted to add something more original and that had some depth. Glad you find it interesting as well. Jason Quinn (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
Precious anniversary
| | |
| Nine years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:59, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.
Technical news
- The user group
oversightwill be renamedsuppressin around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections. - The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.
- The user group
Arbitration
- Community input is requested on several motions aimed at addressing discretionary sanctions that are no longer needed or overly broad.
- The Arbitration Committee has published a generalised comment regarding successful appeals of sanctions that it can review (such as checkuser blocks).
- A motion related to the Antisemitism in Poland case was passed following a declined case request.
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2022 Steward elections will begin on 07 February 2022, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2022, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Voting in the 2022 Community Wishlist Survey is open until 11 February 2022.
Nomination for deletion of Template:Typo Team News
Template:Typo Team News has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 19:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A RfC is open to change the wording of revision deletion criterion 1 to remove the sentence relating to non-infringing contributions.
- A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.
Technical news
- The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (T296645)
- Special:Nuke will now allow the selection of standard deletion reasons to be used when mass-deleting pages. This was a Community Wishlist Survey request from 2022. (T25020)
- The ability to undelete the talk page when undeleting a page using Special:Undelete or the API will be added soon. This change was requested in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. (T295389)
Arbitration
- Several unused discretionary sanctions and article probation remedies have been rescinded. This follows the community feedback from the 2021 Discretionary Sanctions review.
Miscellaneous
- The 2022 appointees for the Ombuds commission are Érico, Faendalimas, Galahad, Infinite0694, Mykola7, Olugold, Udehb and Zabe as regular members and Ameisenigel and JJMC89 as advisory members.
- Following the 2022 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AntiCompositeNumber, BRPever, Hasley, TheresNoTime, and Vermont.
- The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey results have been published alongside the ranking of prioritized proposals.
Happy First Edit Day!
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:30, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Category redirect
Hello. I was going reply with this at the section you started at Template talk:Redirect category shell#Intend to delete the arrow image from template, but I thought it might be too far off-topic. Reading your post makes me wonder if I may have been tripped up by the similar Template:Category redirect recently. Which is correct? this edit or my revert? --DB1729 (talk) 00:47, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, DB1729. That's a good question! To be honest I'm not sure off the top of my head. At the moment I'm cleaning up the house for company coming over. Let me get back to you on this. Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 01:57, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, @DB1729:. The two relevant things I found about it were WP:R#CATEGORY and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Redirecting categories. It seems you use soft redirects for categories as you did so your revert was correct. I now remember this again issue. Been a while since it came up! Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 10:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- PS Had soft redirect not been used, it would have had the same issue at with the other discussion. Jason Quinn (talk) 10:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Ahh yes, that clears it up for me. I had scanned the toc at Wikipedia:Categorization and missed the section that contains both those links. Thank you very much! --DB1729 (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- And I may have understood this back when I created Category:University of Leeds alumni. Or maybe I just copied the syntax of a similar redirect. Simply don't remember. DB1729 (talk) 13:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.
Technical news
- Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the
deletelogentryanddeletedhistoryrights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928) - When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)
Arbitration
- Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
- A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
- A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.
Miscellaneous
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.
New administrator activity requirement
The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
- Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
- Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
| | 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. |