Hello. I see that you have reverted the page-move vandalism at Kamōš-ʿaśa, but not yet the one at Chemosh-nadab. Could you please resolve this? Thanks in advance. Antiquistik (talk) 13:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Antiquistik apologies for missing this out. On it. – robertsky (talk) 13:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Much thanks! Antiquistik (talk) 13:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Hybrid event productionEdit

Hi, Robert.

I'm André Rodrigues, a Wikimedian from the LGBT+ User Group. In 2023, we are planning our annual event, Queering Wikipedia, as a hybrid conference. Looking through Wikimania 2023 page, I saw that you're in charge of Audio Visual Technical needs for hybrid & remote conferences, so I was wondering if you could help me with some tips for the event production. We are especially looking for open source meeting options, but we are also open to private platforms if they work better (considering accessibility and privacy issues).

It would be extremely helpful if you could give me some input on this topic. You can also email me at andrerodriguex@gmail.com if you want to. Thank you! Andrerodriguex (talk) 23:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Andrerodriguex @Robertsky lets catch up on Telegram and plan a meeting next week or soon after. --Zblace (talk) 13:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 54Edit

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022

  • New collections:
    • British Newspaper Archive
    • Findmypast
    • University of Michigan Press
    • ACLS
    • Duke University Press
  • 1Lib1Ref 2023
  • Spotlight: EDS Refine Results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Tech News: 2023-04Edit

MediaWiki message delivery 23:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Premature closer of the East Timor/Timor Leste discussionEdit

With all due respect, I understand that the argument has lacked civility and seems to be an endless back and forth, but I feel as if closing it yet another time is just going to delay the East Timor rename argument for a few years, and return back to where it is now with little change. There has been eight whole discussions on the page rename, and if we want a "a more depth look/analysis on modern usage of either term," then I suppose it should be made now or very soon.

I suggest that the discussion is reopened and an outline and analysis of all the arguments for either side created, and then a definitive vote can be made that can only result in a rename or the name staying East Timor, in both cases with move protection (unless if something major changes to the country that can spur another discussion). Having it be no consensus once again seems to me as it will appease no one- I fully understand why you figured a closure was warranted, but I believe it's just a band-aid to an unresolved issue that seems like it won't ever be resolved at this rate. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 19:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@HadesTTW, thanks for reaching out.
I am cognizant of the multiple attempts to move the article to Timor Leste. However, for this discussion, it is my view that there's no point reopening it if no one has the in-depth data to back either stance. This is also not a premature close given that the discussion had gone on for 25 days, way more the minimum 7-day period, and an extended 14-day period (if there's minimum participation or unclear consensus) for RM discussions. The discussion is also already one of the more well-attended ones with ~27 editors participating, in comparison of other typical RM discussions where there would be 3 or 4 participants. Extending the discussion further is just muddying the waters further.
I had attempted to reconcile both sides of the discussion after a couple of days of lull in each burst of editors inputting their comments, trying to close it at least 3 times in either direction. Each time, no matter how differently I draft my closing statement each time, the conclusion that I arrived is the same. Also, do note that discussions here are arrived by consensus and not by a vote. Having it be no consensus once again seems to me as it will appease no one: conversely having a definitive outcome with a justification based on the arguments that both sides had thrown out will please no one as well since the arguments are similar to each other, revolving around common name, modern name guidelines/policies.
The next move discussion may not be far off, as long as someone can spend the time to extract the data from news sources, scholarship papers, etc and weigh the usage of both terms, rather than just relying on Google hits or corpus extraction. – robertsky (talk) 20:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I see- I understand that it is an incorrect to call it a "premature closure," though there really should be something done to help advance this discussion which is so intensely argued. Perhaps an editor could start doing a serious scholarly analysis of the reasons for and against a rename- of course, more than the completely arbitrary method of finding out which term is used more in academia or the news.
I would volunteer but I feel as I am not qualified enough- I do not personally know anyone from East Timor, and I'm sure much of the analysis has been conducted in Portuguese which I do not speak. Here's hoping that the next discussion will be far more informed and sourced than the previous have been.
Thanks for the thorough explanation.
HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 20:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Tech News: 2023-05Edit

MediaWiki message delivery 00:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)