Wikipedia

User talk:L235/Archive 18

< User talk:L235
Latest comment: 29 days ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic The Signpost: 29 March 2024
Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19

R.Lemkin

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. By curiosity, what happened to User:R.Lemkin? Why were they indefinetely blocked? I can't find any ANI or arbitration/enforcement discussion. Was this just a unilaterial ArbCom decision? If so, why was it made? Paul Vaurie (talk) 08:36, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the block (like all {{ArbComBlock}}s) is based on information that I am prohibited by policy from discussing on wiki. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 13:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Oh. Am I at least allowed to know if it pertains to an interaction the editor had with me? Just like a yes/no? That's why I'm confused. One day the editor was writing things about me and the next day they weren't. Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Notice for party to arbitration amendment request

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from yourself. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#SmallCat dispute and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to yourself. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, jp×g 23:23, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

(resolved) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposal to change the venue for new community-authorized general sanctions

Latest comment: 7 months ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Currently, Wikipedia:General sanctions § Community sanctions provides that:

The community may also impose general sanctions on all editors working in a particular area, usually after a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard ("AN"). [...] Requests for amendments, clarification, or revocation (if sanctions are no longer required) should also be discussed at the administrators' noticeboard.

AN is ill-suited for discussions that can set significant rules – sometimes extended-confirmed (500/30) editing restrictions – on entire broadly-defined topic areas that can last for years and years. AN threads are archived in a matter of days, and sometimes GS authorization threads need to be unarchived. AN also doesn't have the right visibility for GS authorizations, which can be buried under the many threads that concern individual issues (not policy- or topic- level discussions) that AN sees every day. By contrast, VPR is better suited for discussions involving questions of broad application. I would therefore propose that VPR be the principal venue for GS authorizations, with a notice to AN.

Any thoughts on this, or copyediting suggestions for the following?

{{rfc}} Should the venue for seeking consensus to establish a new general sanctions program, and amending or revoking existing general sanctions programs, be changed to the village pump for proposals (with a courtesy notification at the administators' noticeboard)? ~~~~~

Specifically, should the text at Wikipedia:General sanctions § Community sanctions be amended as follows?

The community may also impose general sanctions on all editors working in a particular area, usually after a discussion by consensus at the administrators' noticeboard ("AN") village pump for proposals (VPR), following a notice at the administrators' noticeboard (AN). While community-authorised discretionary sanctions are not bound by Arbitration Committee procedures and guidelines, they usually follow the Arbitration Committee standard discretionary sanctions model. Deviation or additions to these standards typically requires community consensus, unless purely clerical in nature. Requests for amendments, clarification, or revocation (if sanctions are no longer required) should also be discussed at the administrators' noticeboard VPR, following a notice at AN.

Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Seems sensible to me! I agree that AN is archived somewhat too readily for things like this. firefly ( t · c ) 20:35, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Such things usually comes out of an AN/I discussion. If we were to do this, would we just be resuscitating the WP:RFC/U step in WP:DR? - jc37 20:54, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Just to clarify - I'm not necessarily against the idea of a venue change, I just am trying to figure out how this should work. For example, we could also create Wikipedia:Village Pump/Incidents - if the goal was to move things from AN/I. - jc37 21:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
@Jc37: Ah, this is referring to the process of creating new systems of general sanctions (e.g. allowing new community-authorized discretionary sanctions for all articles related to cats) and not about enforcing existing systems of general sanctions. So it strikes me as more similar to policy development and less similar to incident response. Was this a misunderstanding with the proposal or a disagreement with this premise? If it's misunderstanding, that's really valuable to know, and edits to clarify that would be helpful. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I guess my response then (with cartoonish swirly lines over my head and my face with a confused expression) is - Huh?
lol
Humour aside, I was merely asking a question to try to better understand.
From what you are saying though, still has me wondering what the focus is: an RfC/U about the specific actions of one or more specific editors, or is this a proposal for a process for the creation one or more standardized sanctions for a specific type of disruption? Or something else? - jc37 22:10, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I understand now. To answer your question, this isn't like an RFC/U for any particular editors. This affects the process for imposing across-the-board restrictions on all pages in a topic area, often for many years to come. For example, at Special:Permalink/842448517#General_sanctions_proposal, the community imposed 1RR and authorized discretionary sanctions for all pages related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Currently, that happens at AN. But it strikes me as closer to a policy decision that should happen at VPR. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 01:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Ohhhhhhh. And now that I re-read it from that perspective, it makes a lot more sense lol - Thank you : )
And I'll agree that I don't think AN/I is likely the best venue for creating a new community-wide process or standard. I think it's at its best for assessing editor behaviour. - jc37 18:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

  Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Mail

Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. I sent another email two days ago. Did the committee receive it? NMW03 (talk) 17:20, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello? NMW03 (talk) 21:43, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
@NMW03: Apologies for the delay. It's still under discussion. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:22, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Removal

Latest comment: 6 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello there. Can you explain why did you remove Rauwerda's username? Bedivere (talk) 17:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bedivere: I've responded by email. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 18:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. It's all clear now. Have a good day! Bedivere (talk) 18:25, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

  Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

  Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Review the Charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
More languages • Please help translate to other languages.

Hello all,

I am pleased to share the next step in the Universal Code of Conduct work. The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) draft charter is now ready for your review.

The Enforcement Guidelines require a Building Committee form to draft a charter that outlines procedures and details for a global committee to be called the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). Over the past few months, the U4C Building Committee worked together as a group to discuss and draft the U4C charter. The U4C Building Committee welcomes feedback about the draft charter now through 22 September 2023. After that date, the U4C Building Committee will revise the charter as needed and a community vote will open shortly afterward.

Join the conversation during the conversation hours or on Meta-wiki.

Best,

RamzyM (WMF), on behalf of the U4C Building Committee, 15:35, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

SPI clerk form

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello there - I just saw that you removed my form on the SPI clerk page (funnily enough, the day you removed it was, coincidentally, my birthday!). I interpreted your edit summary as meaning that I was OK to reach out to you directly regarding the matter of becoming a clerk, and hope I was correct in this assumption! I plan on returning to regular activity again as of this week and so was wondering if you could give me some pointers on different things I could work on relating to SPI and LTA cases? Thank you very much in advance. Best, Patient Zerotalk 05:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

 

  Administrator changes

  0xDeadbeef
  Tamzin
  Dennis Brown

  Interface administrator changes

  Pppery
 

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  • Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
  • Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
  • Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
  • Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
  • Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
  • Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
  • An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello again

Latest comment: 5 months ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Sorry to be a bother, just chasing this up again as my previous post was rather quickly archived by the bot! Please refer to this diff - I look forward to your reply. Patient Zerotalk 00:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@Patient Zero: Apologies for the delayed response! I'm delighted you're interested in helping — we always need more clerks. The reason it's a complicated question at SPI is that almost all Wikipedians end up not being terribly helpful at SPI, which isn't their fault — it's somewhat just the nature of the work. (I myself was, at best, a middling clerk back in the day.) If you're nonetheless still interested in helping, I recently offered some advice for an SPI clerk candidate that we didn't end up appointing. In the context of my comment there, "analysis of behavioral evidence" just means finding and pointing out the right diffs that show that socks are socking — it's shocking how few filed SPIs come with good analysis and that's really the main reason some cases languish for weeks or months. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:26, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
And, if you're interested in helping out regularly, feel free to give me a ping when you leave comments — no promise on short response-time from me, but I might be able to chime in sometimes. Other advice pages include Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guide to filing cases, User:Blablubbs/How to file a good SPI, and User:Tamzin/SPI is expensive. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to write out a comprehensive response, Kevin! I really appreciate it. Tamzin's essay in particular has led to me realising, in fact, that there have been instances in the past where I've filed an SPI, but in actuality I could've just left a message on the original blocking admin's talk page requesting a block for block evasion instead. Upon reflection, I firmly believe I understand the distinction now, and going forward I would definitely be keen to help in a way that is much more beneficial to the admins, clerks and CUs involved in the cases. I understand if you do not feel I am ready to be a clerk at this time (that is the impression I get due to you linking to the clerk rejection - please tell me if I have misinterpreted that) - I ought to mention here that I was granted the edit filter helper tool two years ago (if I recall correctly!), and that has helped me particularly with matters such as WP:UAA, as well as identifying long-term abusers and prolific sockpuppets. But going back to the point at hand, I will do my best to help out more at SPI, and look forward to seeing you there. Look forward to hearing from you, --Patient Zerotalk 23:28, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
@Patient Zero: Apologies, I didn't realize you were asking whether I think you're suitable as an SPI clerk now. Those decisions are made by the functionaries collectively, and I wouldn't want to speak or promise on their behalf without consulting, but I'm happy to raise it with them if you'd like. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:38, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
No worries - I appreciate it wasn’t particularly clear from my original post, looking back! That would be great, thank you - even if I am not selected this time around, I think it’ll be good to get some feedback and/or advice. Patient Zerotalk 00:22, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
@Patient Zero: Just checked with the functionaries. They are also excited that you're interested but aren't ready to make an appointment yet. Two themes from the functionary discussion: (1) the functionaries would like more of a record of analyzing and commenting at SPI (especially harder ones) to be able to assess when appointing a clerk. That's not to say that you need to be an expert at SPI before becoming an SPI clerk, but one way to put it is that there are some gut instincts in spotting similarities between accounts, if you will, that we don't actually quite know how to train, that the functionary team is trying to catch glimpses of when selecting clerks. (2) Functionaries would also be interested to know how much capacity/time/activity you're expecting to devote to the clerk team in the future. "I can't say" is a very fair answer, as we're all volunteers, but I think there's some sense that training a clerk is a significant investment of functionary effort (starting at several hours a week of clerk/CU time on mentoring and review, which peters off over a several-month-long traineeship) and of your effort, and we want to make sure that spending your and our time there makes sense. In short, if you spend a month (or maybe two) at SPI working on providing SPI behavioral analyses as suggested above, that will really help. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Block Administrating

Latest comment: 5 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Dear L235, After almost a month, I finally figured out what it was that Wikipedia administrative editors didn't like and thus blocked me. I was so perplexed and it wasn't until you, kind guardian editor, specified why I was blocked in a recent iteration of a block. It was because I had inadvertently left Private Relay on in the iCloud settings of my MacBook Air. I will, of course, make sure that I never inadvertently leave Private Relay on again after leaving a library or hotel public wifi network! I wanted to send you an email, but see no email box. Okay to delete this once read. Many thanks and kind regards, MusaVeneziana(talk) 19:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @MusaVeneziana. I think this emphasizes how important it is to get these block templates to be as informative and useful as possible, as we've seen from @GeneralNotability and @Firefly when they created {{CDNblock}}. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
Yes, as an editor who woke up one morning to see an editing block on Wikipedia set to expire four years later in October 2027 with no specific reason given, I couldn't agree with you more! Thank you again for enlightening me. Maureene MusaVeneziana(talk) 16:38, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Proxy block

Latest comment: 4 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, I apparently got a proxy block that came from you due to an IP while being in a location at work, it still affects me using Safari browser, I had to switch to Microsoft Edge to notify you. Hope you can fix this, because I didn’t do any web hosting or anything like it says, I can only assume there is just an IP identity issue. I just realized I probably shouldn’t share IP, my bad of the before revision! Jhenderson 777 12:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

If it's an issue when using Safari only, it sounds like you're using iCloud Private Relay. Unfortunately, iCloud Private Relay (as an open VPN) is blocked to prevent abuse. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
@Jhenderson777: After taking a bit more of a look, well, it's basically impossible that you're a sock   I've granted your account IP block exemption. Edit away, iCloud or not. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 06:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

ECR

Latest comment: 4 months ago7 comments4 people in discussion

1) "The restriction applies to all edits and formal discussions related to the topic area, broadly construed, provided that:" ?

2) Although I would let a straightforward editreq through even if not in the proper form, I think the policy should require the proper form so as to deal with editors doing things like this Selfstudier (talk) 17:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Selfstudier: Below I've taken a first crack at rewriting the restriction. Let me know what you think. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 22:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


Draft v1

The Committee may apply the "extended confirmed restriction" to specified topic areas. Thereafter:

  1. Only extended-confirmed editors may make any edits in any namespace related to the topic area, broadly construed.
  2. The sole exception is that non-extended-confirmed editors may make non-disruptive edit requests in the "Talk:" namespace. Non-extended-confirmed editors nonetheless may not participate in discussions or consensus-forming processes. It is best practice to use a prominent editnotice to inform non-extended-confirmed editors about the limited scope of this exception. Should disruption occur on "Talk:" pages, administrators may take enforcement actions described in "C" or "D" below.
  3. If a page (other than a "Talk:" page) mostly or entirely relates to the topic area, broadly construed, this restriction is preferably enforced through extended confirmed protection, though this is not required.
  4. On any page where the restriction is not enforced through extended confirmed protection, this restriction may be enforced by other methods, including page protection, reverts, blocks, the use of pending changes, and appropriate edit filters.
  5. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise enforcement discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
  6. Reverts made solely to enforce this restriction are not considered edit warring.

(The word "enforcement" in E can be removed, as it is covered by "enforce" a few words later.) I think this is an improvement as it removes the implied requirement to use the template. I.e., I disagree with Selfstudier about that. The main problem is that the template instructions say "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y", thereby ruling out perfectly reasonable comments pointing out errors in the article without explicit instructions for fixing them. Clearly we don't want "The second paragraph is biased", but I think we do want "The last sentence of the second paragraph has no verb". Obviously it is hard to draw the boundary precisely, but in my opinion the template currently draws the boundary in the wrong place. Zerotalk 03:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

LGTM, and I agree with Zero about removing the first "enforcement" in E. Zero raises a reasonable concern about the edit request template requiring "X to Y," but I don't think that affects the language of WP:ARBECR itself, so much as the language of the edit request template. Not sure what the solution is: maybe a custom ARBECR edit request template? Or maybe changing the language of the current edit request template. Either way, I think as far as the language of ARBECR goes, this draft is good. Thanks L235. Levivich (talk) 18:55, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
In the absence of any other comments, can we go ahead and implement this? I am not going to insist on the formal version of edit request because may not participate in discussions or consensus-forming processes should keep things within bounds. Selfstudier (talk) 16:11, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
@Selfstudier: Since this will take an ArbCom motion and vote, I'll need to send this around to my colleagues for review and consideration. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Great. Thank you. Selfstudier (talk) 09:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

sorcery

Latest comment: 4 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Kevin, Ive tried to figure out how you linked to a comment on a live page and I just cannot find out how. Any chance you can show me your ways? nableezy - 17:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I use a tool called Convenient Discussions, which provides the links! Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 18:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Oh wow, thats amazing. Doesnt work with my signature though for replies currently ;(. Thanks! nableezy - 00:29, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
it was too cool to let go of, finally made me relent on the signature ;( nableezy - 20:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2023

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

  Guideline and policy news

  Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
  • The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
  • Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Latest comment: 4 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi L235. :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:11, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: Thanks! Will do when I have a moment. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Why haven't you had a moment yet? It's really worth doing. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate the enthiuasm but I really don't mind waiting. If L235 is busy doing other things, that's completely fine :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: No worries, Barkeep49's just messing with me! A bit of an in-joke  . Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit requests only

Latest comment: 4 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi,

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1184641744#Motion:_Edit_requests_only

You enacted this change in policy. I had no idea it was under discussion, of course. The change seems to have been made after discussion among a handful of editors, over a period of less than a week.

The proposal says, at the top: "List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request", but only the proposer is listed.

Apparently only the proposer User:Ashvio is "involved, or directly affected"; and that confirmation gives no clues about who "all parties" means.

To my eye, this is a disruptive change in Wikipedia policy that affects all users; it bans any contribution to a talk page from a new editor unless it is presented as an edit-request. But new editors don't in general know what an edit-request is, let alone how to format one (for example, I've been here for a couple of decades, and I've never had to make an edit request).

So I think the process for this change was inadequate; I seek your advice on how to dispute the change.

I learned of the change when I challenged User:Selfstudier over a rebuke he had issued to another editor on an article talk-page, because their contribution was not an edit-request. Selfstudier referred me to this new rule. Looking at Selfstudier's contributions, it seems to me that editor has been weaponizing the rule change.

How do I get this decision reviewed (or re-opened)?

MrDemeanour (talk) 17:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

@MrDemeanour: Thanks for your note. I think there are a few elements of your question, which I'm happy to address.
First, it's important to note that the extended confirmed restriction doesn't have any effect on Wikipedia in itself—it only applies in topic areas where there has been an ArbCom remedy (or community decision) applying it to the topic. Currently, there are only two such topics: "the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland", and the Palestine-Israel conflict. That means that ECR isn't "policy" in the normal sense—it should be viewed more in terms of an ArbCom case remedy, which ArbCom has a responsibility to revisit when necessary.
In terms of notice, we did provide (in accordance with the normal process) a public notice both at the ArbCom noticeboard (Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 14 § Proposed motion to modify the extended confirmed restriction provisions) and at AN (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive355 § Proposed motion to modify the extended confirmed restriction provisions).
Do you have a specific change in mind that you'd like to see to the ECR procedure? Formally, the place to request that ArbCom revisit a prior decision is WP:ARCA, but I suspect that those requests are unlikely to succeed so close to the previous decision. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 18:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying that the rule-change only applies to articles subject to "extended confirmed restriction"; I wasn't aware that such a category existed, it thought the term was referring to any article that beginners can't edit directly.
Regarding notice, most editors edit; they don't hang out on committee noticeboards, unless they are process nerds. In the light of your clarification, that obsjection is obsolete, I suppose. It would have been that in the event of a rule-change that affects all users, all users should be warned first of the discussion, and then of the decision. You've clarified that this rule-change only affects users that are interested in two specific pages.
I'm glad the change only applies to the two articles you mentioned; that's far from clear in the text of the rule. I haven't yet found out when this new restriction category was introduced, or. how, or why. I'm concerned that the rule-change itself might result in many more articles being joined to this category.
I'm not interested in the "ECR procedure", or Wikipedia bureaucracy in general. I'm just a long-term general editor. I read and contribute to talk pages, and that's about as far as I want to dive into bureaucracy. But I find it troublesome when I see a talk-page post that is constructive, rebuked simply by reference to this rule. MrDemeanour (talk) 19:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Understood and much appreciated. And yes, there's always more we should do to make this more clear. I just want to clarify that it's not just two pages — it's all of the pages and edits related to those two topic areas, which is certainly broader, but still fairly exceptional. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

IP Block

Latest comment: 4 months ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Please, I'd like to continue Mr Li editing the sandboxes in the user area Nesshunter. I'm unable to on the device I have with the block imposed User:L235. Otherwise, please correct a typo zinnober9 naval>navel Nesshunter (talk) 20:57, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

@Nesshunter: I'm guessing you're having trouble editing due to an IP block of a proxy or VPN service. Please try turning off any proxy or VPN service you have on, such as "iCloud Private Relay". That will enable you to edit. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Policy relates to Apple IRC but that's incorrect as far as is seen; the exception requested again and necessary to continue the account with invested time in it and it's not specified in advance that a chat room will take precedent over the user Nesshunter (talk) 21:32, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
This isn't about IRC or a chat room. Please see WP:IPBE for the requirements for an IP block exemption, which unfortunately your account does not meet. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:34, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Understood, however exceptions are handled when requested and wp: are apprised Nesshunter (talk) 21:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
I've assessed your request and decline it. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

A solstice greeting

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

❄️ Happy holidays! ❄️

Hi Kevin! I'd like to wish you a splendid solstice season as we wrap up the year. Here is an artwork, made individually for you, to celebrate. It's been so great getting to know you this year, and hope we'll have more opportunities to interact (on- and off-wiki) in the coming one! Take care, and thanks for all you do to make Wikipedia better!
Cheers,
{{u|Sdkb}} talk
 
Solstice Celebration for L235, 2023, DALL·E 3.
Note: The vibes are winter solsticey. If you're in the southern hemisphere, oops, apologies.

{{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

 


Spicy (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Joyous Season

Latest comment: 4 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion
 
 
 

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday!   Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Jerium (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages. 

Jerium (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Season's greetings

Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

 
~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~
Hello L235: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas1}} to send this message.
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion
  Happy New Year!
Hello L235:


Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Email

Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there, sorry to bother you. I sent you an email yesterday regarding an IP block I was facing, set by you. As the problem has already been solved by the CheckUser team, whom I thank, you can simply ignore the mail :)
Thank you for your time and sorry again for the unnecessary bother.
Sincerely, --PercyMM 17:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks and apologies for the inconvenience! @PercyMM KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

 

  CheckUser changes

  Wugapodes

  Interface administrator changes

 

  Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

  Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

  Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

LA Meetup: February 17, 2024

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Edit-a-thon and Wikipedia Day Celebration
 

Please join Wikimedians of Los Angeles on Saturday, February 17 from 12:00 to 4:00 pm for a Los Angeles and West Hollywood-themed edit-a-thon at the West Hollywood Library. (For the details and to sign up, see Wikipedia:Meetup/Los Angeles/February 2024.)

We'll also be celebrating Wikipedia's 23rd birthday/Wikipedia Day. (There will be cake!)

We hope to see you there! JSFarman via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Join our Facebook group here.
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

IP Address ban

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I was blocked from making an account on my phone so i made one on my computer. the reason for my IP supposedly being a web host provider or colocation provider i never used wikipedia on my phone so there is no reason to block/ban my phone from making a wikipedia account and i have no people to provide a web host or colocation to. TowelPaint57 (talk) 21:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2024: We are back!

 

Please help translate to other languages.

Hello, dear Wikipedians!

Wikimedia Ukraine, in cooperation with the MFA of Ukraine and Ukrainian Institute, has launched the forth edition of writing challenge "Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month", which lasts from 1st until 31st March 2024. The campaign is dedicated to famous Ukrainian artists of cinema, music, literature, architecture, design and cultural phenomena of Ukraine that are now part of world heritage. We accept contribution in every language! The most active contesters will receive prizes.

We invite you to take part and help us improve the coverage of Ukrainian culture on Wikipedia in your language! Also, we plan to set up a banner to notify users of the possibility to participate in such a challenge! ValentynNefedov (WMUA) (talk)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Report of the U4C Charter ratification and U4C Call for Candidates now available

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Hello all,

I am writing to you today with two important pieces of information. First, the report of the comments from the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) Charter ratification is now available. Secondly, the call for candidates for the U4C is open now through April 1, 2024.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members are invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Per the charter, there are 16 seats on the U4C: eight community-at-large seats and eight regional seats to ensure the U4C represents the diversity of the movement.

Read more and submit your application on Meta-wiki.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 16:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

AN

Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I posed a question relevant to you in JSS' open letter on AN. You may wish to respond. Spartaz Humbug! 19:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging. I've responded there. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2024 Selection

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languages • Please help translate to other languages.

Dear all,

This year, the term of 4 (four) Community- and Affiliate-selected Trustees on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will come to an end [1]. The Board invites the whole movement to participate in this year’s selection process and vote to fill those seats.

The Elections Committee will oversee this process with support from Foundation staff [2]. The Board Governance Committee created a Board Selection Working Group from Trustees who cannot be candidates in the 2024 community- and affiliate-selected trustee selection process composed of Dariusz Jemielniak, Nataliia Tymkiv, Esra'a Al Shafei, Kathy Collins, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov [3]. The group is tasked with providing Board oversight for the 2024 trustee selection process, and for keeping the Board informed. More details on the roles of the Elections Committee, Board, and staff are here [4].

Here are the key planned dates:

  • May 2024: Call for candidates and call for questions
  • June 2024: Affiliates vote to shortlist 12 candidates (no shortlisting if 15 or less candidates apply) [5]
  • June-August 2024: Campaign period
  • End of August / beginning of September 2024: Two-week community voting period
  • October–November 2024: Background check of selected candidates
  • Board's Meeting in December 2024: New trustees seated

Learn more about the 2024 selection process - including the detailed timeline, the candidacy process, the campaign rules, and the voter eligibility criteria - on this Meta-wiki page, and make your plan.

Election Volunteers

Another way to be involved with the 2024 selection process is to be an Election Volunteer. Election Volunteers are a bridge between the Elections Committee and their respective community. They help ensure their community is represented and mobilize them to vote. Learn more about the program and how to join on this Meta-wiki page.

Best regards,

Dariusz Jemielniak (Governance Committee Chair, Board Selection Working Group)

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Results#Elected

[2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Committee:Elections_Committee_Charter

[3] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Minutes:2023-08-15#Governance_Committee

[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee/Roles

[5] Even though the ideal number is 12 candidates for 4 open seats, the shortlisting process will be triggered if there are more than 15 candidates because the 1-3 candidates that are removed might feel ostracized and it would be a lot of work for affiliates to carry out the shortlisting process to only eliminate 1-3 candidates from the candidate list.

MPossoupe_(WMF)19:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2024 Selection

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2024 Selection because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languages • Please help translate to other languages.

Dear all,

This year, the term of 4 (four) Community- and Affiliate-selected Trustees on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will come to an end [1]. The Board invites the whole movement to participate in this year’s selection process and vote to fill those seats.

The Elections Committee will oversee this process with support from Foundation staff [2]. The Board Governance Committee created a Board Selection Working Group from Trustees who cannot be candidates in the 2024 community- and affiliate-selected trustee selection process composed of Dariusz Jemielniak, Nataliia Tymkiv, Esra'a Al Shafei, Kathy Collins, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov [3]. The group is tasked with providing Board oversight for the 2024 trustee selection process, and for keeping the Board informed. More details on the roles of the Elections Committee, Board, and staff are here [4].

Here are the key planned dates:

  • May 2024: Call for candidates and call for questions
  • June 2024: Affiliates vote to shortlist 12 candidates (no shortlisting if 15 or less candidates apply) [5]
  • June-August 2024: Campaign period
  • End of August / beginning of September 2024: Two-week community voting period
  • October–November 2024: Background check of selected candidates
  • Board's Meeting in December 2024: New trustees seated

Learn more about the 2024 selection process - including the detailed timeline, the candidacy process, the campaign rules, and the voter eligibility criteria - on this Meta-wiki page, and make your plan.

Election Volunteers

Another way to be involved with the 2024 selection process is to be an Election Volunteer. Election Volunteers are a bridge between the Elections Committee and their respective community. They help ensure their community is represented and mobilize them to vote. Learn more about the program and how to join on this Meta-wiki page.

Best regards,

Dariusz Jemielniak (Governance Committee Chair, Board Selection Working Group)

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Results#Elected

[2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Committee:Elections_Committee_Charter

[3] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Minutes:2023-08-15#Governance_Committee

[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee/Roles

[5] Even though the ideal number is 12 candidates for 4 open seats, the shortlisting process will be triggered if there are more than 15 candidates because the 1-3 candidates that are removed might feel ostracized and it would be a lot of work for affiliates to carry out the shortlisting process to only eliminate 1-3 candidates from the candidate list.

MPossoupe_(WMF)19:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

Latest comment: 29 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:L235/Archive_18&oldid=1218869845"