User talk:Urhixidur/Archive/2016

Moons of Jupiter

On March 10, 2015, you edited {{Moons of Jupiter}} and moved moons of Jupiter articles and their associated talk pages on the theory that the names Jupiter LI and Jupiter LII are permanent names. I believe this is a mistake. See "Satellite Ephemeris File Release". 2015-03-09., which says, "Jupiter LI (no name yet)" and "Jupiter LII (no name yet)". Also see Scott S. Sheppard. "Jupiter's Known Satellites"., which lists these satellites as "yet to be named". On August 1, 2015,you edited Jupiter LI and Jupiter LII, inserting "It received its permanent name in March of 2015." with the ref "CBET 4075: 20150307 : SATELLITES OF JUPITER, 7 Mach 2015." I believe this reference is in error. If you can establish that the names Jupiter LI and Jupiter LII are really permanent names, please forgive this message. Otherwise, please arrange to have the articles moved back to where they were and rename the moons back to their standard temporary names. Respectfully, —Anomalocaris (talk) 12:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

The nuance is that these satellites received their permanent numbers in 2015. Edited accordingly. Urhixidur (talk) 13:59, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Do you have a citation for this, preferably on the public Internet? Also, even if Jupiter LI and Jupiter LII are considered permanent while the longer S/2010 J 1 and S/2010 J 2 are considered temporary, all other moons of Jupiter that have temporary names are listed in Wikipedia under their temporary names, so why are these two listed this way? —Anomalocaris (talk) 16:28, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

The citation is the CBET, unfortunately. You can look at http://planetarynames.wr.usgs.gov/Page/Planets as confirmation. The naming process in astronomy progresses in four stages. First are individual observations, which bear varying identification tags depending on the source (e.g. "SK03J170" in http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/mpec/K03/K03G19.html). Next comes the realization that this could be an actual object, at which point it gets a provisional designation (e.g. S/2003 J 17). Once a sufficient number of separate observations have firmly established the object's existence and orbital details, it gets a permanent designation (e.g. Jupiter L). Normally, the object gets a true name at the same time or very shortly afterwards, as the discoverers have had plenty of time to decide what that name will be and the IAU rules are pretty straightforward. It just so happens that in the cases of Jupiter LI and LII, the discoverers have (presumably) just not had the inclination or time to submit a name. There are plenty of historical precedents for this, such as S. B. Nicholson's refusal to name his discoveries (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinope_%28moon%29#cite_note-Nicholson1938-6). The key point to retain here is that Jupiter LI and LII are not temporary designations. Urhixidur (talk) 16:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

OK —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Z. Knezevic listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Z. Knezevic. Since you had some involvement with the Z. Knezevic redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 02:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Archive.

Meanings of minor planet names CSD G6

Hi, would you mind processing Meanings of minor planet names: 220,001–230,000 to make way for Meanings of minor planet names: 220,001–230000 to be moved there? You seem like most relevant admin for the job :)   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  12:46, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

All done. How did that mistake ('230000' for '230,000') occur, originally? Urhixidur (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Interesting question... Found it! back in 2009, and it wasn't noticed by whoever uncommented it, nor by anyone else in the meantime. I also found Meanings of minor planet names: 3100,001–310,000. These pages seem to get a lot less attention than their List of minor planets counterparts, which is why I've been so busy with them lately.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:04, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

3100,001–310,000 has been dealt with forthwith. Urhixidur (talk) 15:25, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

And Meanings of minor planet names: 289001–291000—the intended page was 290001–291000, which exists and contains 289001–291000's content.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  20:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Fixed. Urhixidur (talk) 22:41, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:List of minor planets/Helper

Template:List of minor planets/Helper has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  01:45, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Urhixidur. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Urhixidur/Archive.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Urhixidur. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Urhixidur. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:MPES

Template:MPES has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:47, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Urhixidur a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Lepricavark (talk) 16:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)