User talk:Clpo13/Archive 26

Archive 20←Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28→Archive 30

Tech News: 2021-40

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • A more efficient way of sending changes from Wikidata to Wikimedia wikis that show them has been enabled for the following 10 wikis: mediawiki.org, the Italian, Catalan, Hebrew and Vietnamese Wikipedias, French Wikisource, and English Wikivoygage, Wikibooks, Wiktionary and Wikinews. If you notice anything strange about how changes from Wikidata appear in recent changes or your watchlist on those wikis you can let the developers know.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 October. It will be on all wikis from 7 October (calendar).
  • Advanced item Some gadgets and bots that use the API to read the AbuseFilter log might break. The hidden property will no longer say an entry is implicit for unsuppressed log entries about suppressed edits. If your bot needs to know this, do a separate revision query. Additionally, the property will have the value false for visible entries; previously, it wasn't included in the response. [1]
  • A more efficient way of sending changes from Wikidata to Wikimedia wikis that show them will be enabled for all production wikis. If you notice anything strange about how changes from Wikidata appear in recent changes or your watchlist you can let the developers know.

Future changes

  • You can soon get cross-wiki notifications in the iOS Wikipedia app. You can also get notifications as push notifications. More notification updates will follow in later versions. [2]
  • Advanced item The JavaScript variables wgExtraSignatureNamespaces, wgLegalTitleChars, and wgIllegalFileChars will soon be removed from mw.config. These are not part of the "stable" variables available for use in wiki JavaScript. [3]
  • Advanced item The JavaScript variables wgCookiePrefix, wgCookieDomain, wgCookiePath, and wgCookieExpiration will soon be removed from mw.config. Scripts should instead use mw.cookie from the "mediawiki.cookie" module. [4]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:28, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back

I hope you had a nice break! I was happy to see your resysop request at BN and wanted to welcome you back. Best of luck, and I look forward to seeing you around. — Wug·a·po·des​ 21:46, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I couldn't stay away for long. Glad to be back in the saddle. clpo13(talk) 22:15, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-41

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 October. It will be on all wikis from 14 October (calendar).

Meetings

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

tp access

Hello and thank you for this block. You might want to have a look at their current Talk page and consider whether the content and their continued access is suitable/appropriate. My feeling is that it is probably not OK but then I'm not a policy expert. Thanks in advance for having a quick look, if you don't mind, please. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

DBaK, thanks for the heads-up. I rolled back their edits. At the very least, the block notice should stay visible. As for talk page access, they haven't done anything in a couple days, but I'll keep an eye on it and revoke if they start being disruptive again. clpo13(talk) 19:38, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Many many thanks for having a look. I really appreciate the speedy response. Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-42

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Toolhub is a catalogue to make it easier to find software tools that can be used for working on the Wikimedia projects. You can read more.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 19 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 20 October. It will be on all wikis from 21 October (calendar).

Future changes

  • The developers of the Wikipedia Android app are working on communication in the app. You can now answer questions in survey to help the development.
  • 3–5% of editors may be blocked in the next few months. This is because of a new service in Safari, which is similar to a proxy or a VPN. It is called iCloud Private Relay. There is a discussion about this on Meta. The goal is to learn what iCloud Private Relay could mean for the communities.
  • Wikimedia Enterprise is a new API for those who use a lot of information from the Wikimedia projects on other sites. It is a way to get big commercial users to pay for the data. There will soon be a copy of the Wikimedia Enterprise dataset. You can read more. You can also ask the team questions on Zoom on 22 October 15:00 UTC.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Incarnater_the_Big,_Just-the_Big

You've just blocked this gentleman User:Incarnater_the_Big,_Just-the_Big. You might want to take a look at his user-page; it's fairly offensive and (in my view) needs deleting. Thanks for the block. Elemimele (talk) 21:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele:  Done Thanks for the notice. clpo13(talk) 21:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Editors Guild of India

Hello Clpo13, you've recently rejected the protection request for Editors Guild of India. I've filed an SPI on one of the user involved at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dhy.rjw. I believe the edit warring in that article is targeted against Venkat TL. Recently one of the users, Rob108 signed as TallMegan after writing a comment, who I suspected of socking.[5]. Although I believe this is enough for a WP:DUCK block, there are more evidences at the SPI. I'm writing this here because the SPI will take days to close and an action against these users will stop their disruptive editing and WP:HOUNDING across many articles.[6][7] Thanks.- SUN EYE 1 07:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Suneye1: I've replied at the SPI. I'm not sure about the connection to Dhy.rjw, but Rob108 and TallMegan have behaved very similarly to each other, so I've blocked both accounts for sockpuppetry. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. clpo13(talk) 16:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Though there were a lot of similarities between Dhy.rjw and the other two accounts, TallMegan and Rob108 were to ones involved in personal attacks and disruption. I'll let the closing admin decide about Dhy.rjw. Thanks. - SUN EYE 1 18:41, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Respectful request

In that I've edited for years and this is the initial time I'm aware of that a complaint's been lodged against me, it would be taken as a great kindness to me if you could grant me a definite period of time for me to to demonstrate my ability to successfully address the deficiencies in my editing.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

In that some over-generalize my editing as lacking in competence, I'd like to say that with regard to this issue, I know I can improve in my editing competence, by way of: my being patient with regard to Wikipedia's rules in specific as well as social rules in general; my being less obsessive about my interests; my learning better to comprehend other editors' points of view; my being less sensitive regarding shared concepts and beliefs interpretable as "correct" or "admirable"; my attaining more reciprocity in conversing; and my being less concerned with having to share my opinions.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
@Hodgdon's secret garden: that's good to hear. However, you should demonstrate this in other topic areas before I'd consider revising the topic ban. The consensus among admins at the AE request was that the potential for disruption in the AP2 topic area is too high, so you should find a different topic area to engage in and show that you can avoid the issues that resulted in the ban, after which the ban can be reassessed on appeal. I know that can be frustrating if this is your primary area of interest, but there are many articles on Wikipedia that could use fixing or updating, and plenty of discussions you could participate in that would demonstrate your ability to work with other editors (you can see a list at WP:RFC/A). clpo13(talk) 18:45, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
(Responding to request for input) This seems like insincere pandering. HSG had plenty of opportunity to listen to other editors asking them to modify their approach over the last several months at their user talk page, and didn't take it. I see no reason to believe they will actually do better once the heat is off them. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 07:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-43

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 October. It will be on all wikis from 28 October (calendar).

Future changes

  • Diff pages will have an improved copy and pasting experience. The changes will allow the text in the diff for before and after to be treated as separate columns and will remove any unwanted syntax. [8]
  • The version of the Liberation fonts used in SVG files will be upgraded. Only new thumbnails will be affected. Liberation Sans Narrow will not change. [9]

Meetings

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm welcome!

Thank you for the warm welcome, and the guidance on helping out. I'm off and running, editing the page on Ronot society. Lynnmarieisme (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)lynnmarieisme

pingas

pingas :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.74.218 (talk) 00:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

3O

My honest understanding was that if an article is currently on the Main Page, one shouldn't go about slapping NPOV tags on it without a consensus first being reached on ERRORS or someplace. Is that not "disruptive editing"? Forgive me if I don't find IPs like this one anything close to credible... Kingoflettuce (talk) 02:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I’m not sure of the exact procedure with DYK, but as an uninvolved admin, restoring a stable version seems to me to be the best option right now for something people are coming to from the main page. clpo13(talk) 03:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, that's exactly what I had tried to communicate to the IP but I suppose some frustration and annoyance crept in along the way. That guy is relentless! Kingoflettuce (talk) 03:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act

Hi clpo13, as there is an ongoing discussion on the neutrality of a section of the article Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act, could you please add back the tags to this edit-protected page as in this version? This will serve to alert both editors and readers of that the neutrality is disputed due to undue weight (especially as it is linked at the DYK section on the main page of Wikipedia) - which it is, given that there is only one opinion listed as "Support" and a whole slew of opinions as "Opposition" from individuals who are only known for their opposition (lack of credentials) - and that there are no valid sources that prove that this balance of opinions reflects the reality on the ground (especially public opinion). Readers who navigate to this page from the main page should be aware that the neutrality is currently disputed - I have alerted the WP: WikiProject Singapore team to fix this issue too.

I would also like to highlight that while not necessary, this page was not listed on the WP: WikiProject Singapore page, so a large part of the Singapore Wikipedia community who arguably understand the situation the best as to which sources are considered reliable did not have the ability to review this article before it was nominated for WP:DYK. User:Kingoflettuce has been removing the NPOV tags and refusing to discuss, claiming it is vandalism - when I have been writing my reasons on the talk page and he/she has refused to address them and the relevant policies I highlighted, calling me "Boomer", "lmao", "ranting" and stating "I don't need to answer to you" when I've been polite all this time here and elsewhere, and has contravened the three revert rule, even when an uninvolved editor reverted the edits. He/She is under the impression that IP addresses are necessarily vandals and is more interested in attacking users than discussing the topic, which is why I called for ANI.

My actions thus far have been to raise awareness that the article needs fixing and bring in more editors who understand the situation to collaborate on the neutrality bit (if you look at the article, it was created recently and there are only a few common editors) by adding the NPOV tags and starting a talk discussion, but User:Kingoflettuce seems adamant that this should not be done. While I quote policies to substantiate my belief that the article is biased, that user only quotes "my honest understanding" for the NPOV tag, which is hardly sufficient. Hope you can add the tags back to alert both editors and readers, especially if there is no policy against doing this for DYK articles (it's not a featured article). Thanks! --121.7.1.169 (talk) 06:00, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Attila Dobák - deleted

Could you please give me some details of why have you deleted the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angela Psenak (talk • contribs) 21:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Angela Psenak: it was actually Jimfbleak who deleted it, and it looks like it was due to copyright infringement from https://soundcloud.com/attiladobak. clpo13(talk) 21:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Angela Psenak: it was also promotional in tone, and lacked adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that he meets the notability guidelines. Also, it seems likely that you have conflict of interest, please don't write about yourself, your friends, relatives or colleagues and note that any COI must be declared Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Tin Goyenda

Hello Clpo13,

I was blocked by you a few days ago for reverting my edits on an English article (Tin Goyenda). Your action was to side with, effectively, a person named @আফতাবুজ্জামান. From what I gather, you will only be in a position to judge the veracity of my edits if you knew both English and Bangla, and at the same time have read all the Tin Goyenda and the Three Investigators books. I am quite certain you have none of these qualifications except that you perhaps speak English. Therefore, you are in no position to determine whether I am in fact making an edit which is based on facts or not. Hence, I found it extremely offensive and insulting that it is I who you decided to block, instead of আফতাবুজ্জামান who appears to be some Bangladeshi overenthusiastic college/school/university student. This person আফতাবুজ্জামান has told me that he does not understand English and yet he interferes with my English edits, which clearly indicates personal vendetta. Since you are not able to read Bangla, you are incapable of reading his own comments in which he asserted that he does not understand English. You have made an error of judgment.

I am a research engineer and and accomplished writer (please Google Muhammad Eusha to see a plethora of my published editorials in the national dailies of Bangladesh). I speak both English and Bengali fluently. I have also read both the Tin Goyenda and the Three Investigators books minutely in both languages! Therefore, I know what I am talking about! It is an affront to my qualifications that you would so casually slap a ban on me. I donate to Wikipedia and try to edit articles to the best of my abilities. Thug-like behavior from আফতাবুজ্জামান and his accomplices should not be tolerated if you wish your articles to be of high quality. Good day to you, sir!

Kind regards

Eusha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meusha (talk • contribs) 10:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Meusha: you were blocked for edit warring. Additionally, the source you provided didn't support the plagiarism claim as it was just a link to the English language book. Making the connection from that to plagiarism is original research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Instead of relying on your personal knowledge, your claim should be backed up by a reliable, published source, like a news article, for example, so that readers can verify the claim (see Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth for more). Finally, since claiming a living author is guilty of plagiarism is a violation of Wikipedia's biographies of living people policy, I strongly suggest you refrain from adding it again unless you have a very good source to support it. clpo13(talk) 16:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Clpo13, Perhaps I didn't make myself abundantly clear. That the books are a case of verbatim translation becomes clear to anyone who reads both the English and the Bengali versions. I'm not entirely sure exactly why this itself isn't a reference. Please take a moment to digest what I'm saying. Read the Bengali text and then read the English to which I've posted a link. You'll see what I am trying unsuccessfully to make more visible to you. If it says "I go to school" in the English version and says the same sentence in Bangla, it should NOT REQUIRE a Third reference! It shouldn't have to be mentioned in ANOTHER article. This is unproductive and completely unnecessary a demand.

I'm not That desperate to make edits to the encyclopedia. However, I shall remember the insult. I'm leaving with profound knowledge as to why people don't find Wikipedia reliable. You side with the criminals. You'll find that those thoroughly dishonest individuals NEVER read neither the English nor the Bengali books! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meusha (talk • contribs) 19:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Clpo13, One last thing. I have already explained this in lucid detail for those with eyes and ears. However, I feel it is only my responsibility to add this - the reference to my "claim" was actually provided. @আফতাবুজ্জামান simply looked at the book at the referenced site and could not see any evidence because he did not read the Bengali book against the English counterpart. And you of course are entirely incapable of making any judgment at all because you do not read Bengali. And yet, you are the one responsible for making decisions on article on a book in Bengali! How silly is that, my dear sir? It is not I who initiated the edit war. I simply reverted the article to what I can see to be a more accurate and factual version when I saw I was being harrassed by a group of schoolboys! As for you, I would like to file a formal complaint against your incompetence and ignorance. Could you kindly tell me how that is done? I will soon publish an article on a Bangladeshi English daily lambasting these clowns who think Tin Goyenda was an original Bangladeshi series! It was a word by word copy of the original American books. The truth is there for everyone to see who bothers to compare the Bangla books to the English ones. Referencing the Bangla books to the English ones is sufficient. Thank you and kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meusha (talk • contribs) 06:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Meusha: I'd prefer it if you actually read the policy and guideline links I mentioned, but if you insist on reporting me, you can do so at WP:ANI. clpo13(talk) 16:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Clpo13, I will proceed with filing a formal complaint against you. Not that I am expecting anything good to come out of it! The world is, was and will be characterized by a systematic failure to ensure justice. But if you cannot read Bengali, why did you tell me my reference was not good enough? Why did you side with the criminals? I merely want to point out to the Wikipedia authority, the system of empowering arbitrary individuals without proper abilities is tantamount to giving free reign to vandals. It is I who got charged with vandalism in the end, which is ironic in itself.

Need your help

Can you please take a look at my request in Edit warring Noticeboard that I submitted? MehmoodS (talk) 10:43, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 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

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-44

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • There is a limit on the amount of emails a user can send each day. This limit is now global instead of per-wiki. This change is to prevent abuse. [10]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 2 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 3 November. It will be on all wikis from 4 November (calendar).

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:26, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Igini234

Hi Clpo13. Just an FYI really. Per Special:Diff/1053165031, assuming I'm not wrong, would you be interested in unblocking Igini234? I'll grant that they're not the best edits ever, but the fault seems to lie elsewhere. Ping@10mmsocket: -- zzuuzz (talk) 09:10, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Look at the pattern of editing on that article today. It's highly likely that this user is also one of the IP addresses that were active before the article was semi-protected. 10mmsocket (talk) 09:29, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
I don't disagree in the slightest - these kind of observations don't easily escape a checkuser. My point stands? -- zzuuzz (talk) 09:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
@Zzuuzz: I've unblocked them. I agree that it seems they were attempting to bring the article back in line with the sources. clpo13(talk) 15:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Super, thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:52, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit Clarification

Hello Cody,

Regarding the following edit, could you please provide an example of what would be an acceptable version to you? "Reverted 1 edit by Wmh1978 (talk): Inappropriate without attribution per WP:RSOPINION undothank Tags: Undo Twinkle." My proposed contribution contains no opinions so I'm a bit confused as to how to address your requested revision. Are you saying that I should write something like, "According to X, [insert paraphase from source]..."?

Take care, -WMH1978Wmh1978 (talk) 20:30, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Wmh1978: yes, exactly. The source you added in this edit is an opinion article. While there are times that such sources may be included in an article, we should always take care to attribute any statements from them to their authors instead of stating them as fact in Wikipedia's voice. WP:RSOPINION and WP:INTEXT address when and how to do this. clpo13(talk) 20:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Great, thanks for that helpful information! -Wmh1978Wmh1978 (talk) 20:50, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Blocked

Thought that sharing an article written by my old friend Eva Björklund would contribute to enrich the scarce information about her in Wikipedia. Don't worry, I'll never try to contribute again. Goodbye. 2601:586:4B01:7170:2193:5EEC:9439:374F (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for ur contributions :) Le0n0622 (talk) 02:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Aqua kids AfD

I was the one that PRODded and de-PRODded this article and subsequently re-nominated it. Since I no longer agree with my previous actions I think the AfD should have been considered uncontested delete rather than no consensus. Dronebogus (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

@Dronebogus: thanks for pointing that out. I've closed it as a soft delete. clpo13(talk) 23:32, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Recommendation for closing discussion. Kindly review status of talk page

Hello Cody, please could you review the ongoing discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper%27s_Riddle The issues appear to have been resolved so the message templates should be removed. I dont agree with the nomination for deletion as it meets notability criteria therefore edit warring is no valid grounds for deleting an article. The edits made by @User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith who nominated it for deletion were useful to improve the article and are agreed upon, so the problems are no longer present on the article. It will only be re-added if it gets deleted. Valid articles should be improved upon not deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factsaboutnigeria (talk • contribs) 14:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

@Factsaboutnigeria: Removal of any tags should be agreed upon by consensus of the article's editors at Talk:Jasper's Riddle. As for the deletion discussion, that will run seven days before being assessed by an involved user or administrator. If you object to the article's deletion, you can give your reasons there, keeping in mind Wikipedia's notability guidelines. clpo13(talk) 18:24, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-45

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Mobile IP editors are now able to receive warning notices indicating they have a talk page message on the mobile website (similar to the orange banners available on desktop). These notices will be displayed on every page outside of the main namespace and every time the user attempts to edit. The notice on desktop now has a slightly different colour. [11][12]

Changes later this week

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:35, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Mindless editing

Hello, I noticed your comments on the talk User:KENNY DEBT JR. I noticed another user, User:HappyGoLucky7, making those same kinds of edits (I am assuming) to artificially raise their edit count. I left a comment on their page, similar to yours, yet they are continuing to make repeated nonsensical edits. I saw that Kenny was banned, and not sure if that is necessary in this case, but it looks like HappyGoLucky is doing this again after I asked them not to. Not sure how to proceed, but your help is appreciated here. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 21:13, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@PerpetuityGrat: I'm not too sure, either. The Kenny account was very obvious, as the user didn't make any constructive edits, didn't reply to my message, and stopped exactly at 500 edits (see WP:ECP). HappyGoLucky has some useful contributions and has been communicative, which are good signs, but going right back to making those minor user page edits does seem like an indication of WP:PGAME, as does their rationale for wanting a higher edit count for no apparent reason. I'd suggest keeping an eye on their edits to see if they gravitate towards any contentious areas and reporting them to WP:ANI at the first sign of disruption. They haven't really done anything blockable at this point, in my opinion. clpo13(talk) 21:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
@Clpo13: sounds good, will keep an eye out. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 21:30, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit References

I am new to Wikipedia. I went through YouTube and some articles to Learn about editing Wikipedia. It is not for commercial purposes or advertising purposes. I wanted to offer a unique article for readers of this page. It’s a very useful article with over 12000 words But the only thing I don’t know is whether I edited it correctly or not. I am really sorry If I made any mistakes While I am editing your page. Thank you for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AARNissanka (talk • contribs) 19:12, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@AARNissanka: Usually links like that are added by people trying to promote their website, which is why it was previously removed. If you think it's a valid addition, please read the information at WP:EL about adding external links, or WP:REF for information on using it as a reference for details in the article. clpo13(talk) 19:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for replying to my message. I agree with you that people do promote websites through Wikipedia. even I can see with your page, (Eg: References no 19.20 and 26) but I thought that my article will bring more value for readers compared to some of the liked articles. Also, I get value. If you think it's not a valid addition, I am wondering how those articles link to become valid addition to this page. So I think it's not fair. But I don't have any choice if you say so. Anyway, it’s your decision and don’t know much about Wikipedia editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AARNissanka (talk • contribs) 21:00, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

IP abuse

This IP you warned is continuing to attack me and anyone who they deem “nazis”. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Increase&diff=1054904181&oldid=1054902872 I keep being stalked by them. This users keeps using this IP range and is back again and again. OyMosby (talk) 18:11, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

@OyMosby: I've given them a last warning about WP:NPA. I'm not familiar with the history here, but if you have evidence (such as diffs) of on-going disruption by someone via multiple IP addresses, you can bring it to WP:ANI to put some extra eyes on the situation. clpo13(talk) 18:38, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Reversion

Every useful edit I ever make on wikipedia gets reverted by some self-important gatekeeper intent on keeping information out of the public domain. I really don't know if I should bother. Useless edits, on the other hand, are never reverted. Maybe I should stick to useless contributions. Sitting Duck (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-46

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Problems

  • Sometimes, edits made on iOS using the visual editor save groups of numbers as telephone number links, because of a feature in the operating system. This problem is under investigation. [14]
  • There was a problem with search last week. Many search requests did not work for 2 hours because of a configuration error. [15]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 16 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 17 November. It will be on all wikis from 18 November (calendar).

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:05, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Acuff (2nd nomination)

Hi, would you consider relisting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Acuff (2nd nomination) so I can vote in it? I don't think it should have been closed quite yet, given the low participation and, more importantly, the complete and total absence of any RS whatsoever to support this (in my view, G-11-level obviously promotional) BLP article. Levivich 15:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@Levivich:  Done. I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. clpo13(talk) 20:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Delay? I wish everyone else in my life would get back to me the next day! :-) Thanks! Levivich 21:51, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, but see also

Hi there, thanks for protecting General relativity and blocking ip 155.33.135.4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). You might have a look at the other IPs (from the same location) they used for the same edit:

IPs were warned on talk page. Thanks and cheers. - DVdm (talk) 22:34, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@DVdm: thanks for the heads up. I don't see any clear signs of proxy use on the other IPs. Hopefully the article protection will deter whoever it is. clpo13(talk) 22:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely, but hey, who knows . - DVdm (talk) 23:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
@Clpo13:, just as I predicted:
There we go. - DVdm (talk) 17:31, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
See also [20] at AIV. - DVdm (talk) 18:26, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
With all this, the single IP was blocked for a whopping 31 hours by user Alexf (talk · contribs). Immediately after that:
Right. - DVdm (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Sorry I missed all this. Looks like Hut 8.5 has protected the page for another month. It'll probably need to eventually be semi-protected indefinitely, though. I don't suppose we can ban all Harvard IPs just to catch one crank... You could report the IPs at WP:OP to see if there's a definite open proxy or VPN range that could be blocked. clpo13(talk) 19:58, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Accidental revert?

On Byron Brown, you rollbacked my edit (which fixed a broken {{citation needed}} tag). I assume this was in error, and that it's not an issue if I restore it to the proper formatting (I am, however, happy to let the edit stand if you actually did this on purpose).jp×g 03:41, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I see that you have already self-reverted. Never mind, then, and good luck with the rest of your RC queue! jp×g 03:43, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-47

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Stop Please

Hi Cody, I am just fixing the FAKE and biased views on this article. Wikipedia is a site that is for fact, not fiction and these articles and 'talks' are wrong. Many have been 'trolled' by these made up words, "Gubbi Gubbi" is a word that Eve Fesl's group made up, Not an Indigenous Austrlian word. By the looks of things you are not in Austrlia so I advise that you let me edit this article as I live in Kabi Kabi territory. I have all the local history books on my area and Gubbi Gubbi is Fake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SavageCabbages (talk • contribs) 23:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

@SavageCabbages: my recent warning was in regard to this edit where old talk page comments were modified or removed. You can leave new comments there, but please don't change comments by other people per the talk page guidelines. I have no objection to your changes as long as they're in keeping with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, such as WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOR. You can use the books you have as reference with templates like {{cite book}}, if you like (there's more info at WP:CITE). clpo13(talk) 23:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
That said, you should also explain your changes, either via edit summaries or on the talk page, so other editors don't misidentify them as vandalism. clpo13(talk) 23:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your your edits at Mass killings under communist regimes's talk page and AfD nomination as an admin.

Do you think that this is structured well enough to be read by the closure? It is just less than 4,000 words in full but the "Must read" section is way less than that and should be easily to read, and I just want to make sure that the closure will be able to read it in reasonable enough time. My !comment at AfD is this, plus link to 'essay' (as suggest here by DRN moderator). It this a valid way to structure and summarize my AfD !comment? Thank you. Davide King (talk) 17:59, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@Davide King: it's been suggested at WP:AN#Mass killings under communist regimes content resolution that a panel close might be necessary due to the contentious nature of the discussion. However it happens, I'm sure the closer(s) will take the time to evaluate the arguments thoroughly to keep this from dragging out longer than it needs to. I don't want to comment on the content at this point, but I do think your rationale is well-structured, especially in pointing out the most important parts for the closer to read and having a summary for a quick evaluation. It might be long, but it seems appropriately detailed regarding the policies and guidelines relevant to this article. For a topic like this, a long but well-reasoned comment is much better than the usual drive-by ILIKEIT/IDONTLIKEIT sort. It might even persuade other AFD !voters, who will have more time to look it over than the closer. clpo13(talk) 18:23, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! My only hope is that it is at least read by the closure (I agree about a panel close), though I do not think it might persuade other AFD !voters, as they completely miss our points, as if we are denying that killings happened under Communist regimes and/or many people indeed died (none of us is disputing any of this) — what we are disputing is the connection between all those events with each other and/or communism, how the article is selectively about sources, cherry pick those that support such connection, and treat it as majority/scholarly consensus/discourse (in reality, they are at best a minority in academic, and popular press sources are not really good for this).
Some of us do not even dispute that it may be notable (I have supported this topic as a full rewrite), though other do (mainly the connection and link between events and their, in fact, lack thereof) — I am supporting deletion because only that and/or total rewrite (it would be better to delete and then gain consensus for the rewrite before recreation) can support the numerous issues and controversies, which have been acknowledged by moderator at WP:DRNMKUCR (completely ignored in rebuttal of our arguments), and a NPOV article without such issues simply cannot be written (we cannot even agree about the main topic's scope and structure), and is ironically proved by the comments and behavior of the 'Keep' side. All of this must be clear and weighted ...
— as long as that is done, whatever the result will be, I can accept it and live with it. Davide King (talk) 18:37, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-48

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 30 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 1 December. It will be on all wikis from 2 December (calendar).

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

User talk:50.88.81.101

Was just about to ask if you'd consider extending this editor's warning to a block, when I saw your post about them at AIV. Have gone ahead and blocked the IP for a while, more for the BLP violation than the ranting. They clearly have strong views and an enthusiasm for sharing, and there seemed a reasonable chance more BLP violations would follow. Hope that's ok. -- Euryalus (talk) 03:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@Euryalus: No worries. Upon reflection, they likely weren't going to stop any time soon, and the BLP stuff was pretty egregious, so a block makes sense. Thanks for taking care of it. clpo13(talk) 19:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Jill Valentine

Thanks for revdeleting. I should have done that myself. I didn't really know what to do about protection and I guess I sort of forgot full move protection--it's not a thing that I do frequently cause I rarely run into this problem. That is one particularly tasteless LTA. Drmies (talk) 15:12, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: No problem. Page move vandalism is a pain. clpo13(talk) 16:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

User talk page protection

It looks like we protect-conflicted on User talk:Firefangledfeathers, I reinstated your previous protection length. Just wanted to give you a heads up. -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:23, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@LuK3: I just saw that, thanks. I have no strong feelings on length if Firefangledfeathers wants to reduce it. clpo13(talk) 17:27, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
I don't have a preference. Grateful for you both. If you care to look into it anymore, Penn Jillette could possibly use some BLP-related revdel. Firefangledfeathers 17:33, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Silencing criticism isn't "human rights"

I have a right to point out on a talk page that there should be a criticism section of "human rights" article on Wikipeda. I provided examples of abuse of "human rights' lingo as well. Your, unethical, attempt to muzzle my criticism is just further evidence for the need for a criticism section in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.248.119 (talk) 04:32, 3 December 2021 (UTC) It would take you only a few minutes of googling to find many examples of alleged "human rights" organizations in contradiction of their own alleged values.. For instance I gave you the example of the UN "human rights' Council. Check the current member states to see if they all actually follow the follow the migration rules the alleged UN "human rights' council proscribes to others. (hint. they don't) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.248.119 (talk) 05:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Heterodox Academy on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

You need to read the Bible if you are going to edit this page and delete others conteibutions.

I suspect the person running this page and deleting new edits is 1, sorely lacking in biblical knowledge and 2, is not a Christian.

My edit was simple...

  • EDIT- The Holy Trinity is not coequal, the Bible clearly states that the Father is more powerful than the Son. Jesus does not know the time of his own return, only the Father is privey to this information. That makes the Father slightly more knowledgeable than the Son and therefore the two are not equal in power.

I was told that my edit is not widely accepted by the Christian community as a fact and that there is no physical or literary evidence to back my claim. Say what? Is this some kind of sick, evil joke? WHAT I WROTE IS LITERALLY WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE. THE BIBLE STATES THAT ONLY THE FATHER KNOWS THE TIME OF JESUS'S RETURN. JESUS HIMSELF DOES NOT KNOW THE TIME OF HIS OWN RETURN, HE SAYS SO HIMSELF IN...THE BIBLE. ADDITIONALLY, JESUS ALSO SAYSVTHAT NO ONE IS GREATER THAN THE FATHER.

I bet you are one of those people who go around making up your own theories and conspiracies about the Bible. You certainly have never read it from beginning to end or you would know all this.

If the Father knows something the Son does not, then the Son is not coequal.

By the way, the Bible (specifically JESUS) directly states that no one is greater than the Father.

You shouldn't be running this page. Your beliefs do not conform to those of the average Christian. Additionally, I suspect you do not consider the Bible as the divine word of God, I suspect you are an atheist. Why else could you delete my edit? You claimed my views do not conform to those of the Christian community and that I have no documents to support my claim. You falsely stated the exact opposite of the truth.

Here, I'll do your job for you.

Jesus said no one knows the time of his return, not even himself, only the Father.

Jesus said there is no one greater than the Father.

No go look it up...IN THE BIBLE. Roll your sleeves up, read a scripture or two, get involved for God's sake...

You need to re-examine your beliefs. If you are not a Christian you should not be running this page. You clearly have no idea what the majority of Christians believe. The majority of Christians believe the Bible is the divine word of God. You are claiming the Bible is wrong and that you know better than the VERY WORDS OF JESUS CHRIST.

Shame on you. Literally. Shame. BobBobertBooby (talk) 08:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@BobBobertBooby: The Trinity is an absurd concept, I'll grant you that (and that is no secret for theologians). But Wikipedia is based upon reliable sources and not upon how WP:RANDY reads the Bible. tgeorgescu (talk) 09:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Mehmet Oz

My edit to the entry on Mehmet Oz was neutral, setting straight a distinctly NOT neutral line; it was put in there because the article as it stood assumed that the accusation that Dr. Oz sponsors "pseudoscience" is correct. My edit did not say that the accusation was false. So there's an allegation. That's where you should be leaving it rather than implying that the accusation is true. Also, when the accusations are coming from publications with a clear ideological slant, you ought to be noting that slant.

Kenneth Howes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C44:217F:FD07:3D67:1DC5:6693:3EB7 (talk) 18:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Lakhimpur Kheri violence on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021 GOCE Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2021 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the December GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since September 2021.

                 Current and upcoming events

Election time: Our end-of-year election of coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before "Auld Lang Syne". Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.

December Blitz: We have scheduled a week-long copy-editing blitz for 12 to 18 December. Sign up now!

Drive and Blitz reports

September Drive: Almost 400,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 27 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.

October Blitz: From 17 to 23 October, we copy edited articles tagged in May and June 2021 and requests. 8 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

November Drive: Over 350,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 21 people who signed up, 14 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.

Other news

It is with great sadness that we report the death on 19 November of Twofingered Typist, who was active with the Guild almost daily for the past several years. His contributions long exceeded the thresholds for the Guild's highest awards, and he had a hand in innumerable good and featured article promotions as a willing collaborator. Twofingered Typist also served as a Guild coordinator from July 2019 to June 2021. He is sorely missed by the Wikipedia community.

Progress report: As of 30 November, GOCE copyeditors have completed 619 requests in 2021 and there were 51 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog stood at 946 articles tagged for copy-editing (see monthly progress graph above).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Distributed via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-49

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

  • MediaWiki 1.38-wmf.11 was scheduled to be deployed on some wikis last week. The deployment was delayed because of unexpected problems.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 December. It will be on all wikis from 9 December (calendar).
  • At all Wikipedias, a Mentor Dashboard is now available at Special:MentorDashboard. It allows registered mentors, who take care of newcomers' first steps, to monitor their assigned newcomers' activity. It is part of the Growth features. You can learn more about activating the mentor list on your wiki and about the mentor dashboard project.
  • Advanced item The predecessor to the current MediaWiki Action API (which was created in 2008), action=ajax, will be removed this week. Any scripts or bots using it will need to switch to the corresponding API module. [21]
  • Advanced item An old ResourceLoader module, jquery.jStorage, which was deprecated in 2016, will be removed this week. Any scripts or bots using it will need to switch to mediawiki.storage instead. [22]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

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


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

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. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

Bots Newsletter, December 2021
BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the eighth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Maintainers disappeared to parts unknown... bots awakening from the slumber of æons... hundreds of thousands of short descriptions... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

Our last issue was in August 2019, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. Due to the vast quantity of things that have happened, the next few issues will only cover a few months at a time. This month, we'll go from September 2019 through the end of the year. I won't bore you with further introductions — instead, I'll bore you with a newsletter about bots.

Overall

  • Between September and December 2019, there were 33 BRFAs. Of these, Green checkmarkY 25 were approved, and 8 were unsuccessful (Dark red X symbolN2 3 denied, Blue question mark? 3 withdrawn, and Expired 2 expired).

September 2019

Look! It's moving. It's alive. It's alive... It's alive, it's moving, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, IT'S ALIVE!
  • Green checkmarkY Monkbot 16, DannyS712 bot 60, Ahechtbot 6, PearBOT 3, Qbugbot 3 · Dark red X symbolN2 DannyS712 bot 5, PkbwcgsBot 24 · Blue question mark? DannyS712 bot 61, TheSandBot 4
  • TParis goes away, UTRSBot goes kaput: Beeblebrox noted that the bot for maintaining on-wiki records of UTRS appeals stopped working a while ago. TParis, the semi-retired user who had previously run it, said they were "unlikely to return to actively editing Wikipedia", and the bot had been vanquished by trolls submitting bogus UTRS requests on behalf of real blocked users. While OAuth was a potential fix, neither maintainer had time to implement it. TParis offered to access to the UTRS WMFLabs account to any admin identified with the WMF: "I miss you guys a whole lot [...] but I've also moved on with my life. Good luck, let me know how I can help". Ultimately, SQL ended up in charge. Some progress was made, and the bot continued to work another couple months — but as of press time, UTRSBot has not edited since November 2019.
  • Article-measuring contest resumed: The list of Wikipedians by article count, which had lain dead for several years, was triumphantly resurrected by GreenC following a bot request.

October 2019

November 2019

Now you're thinking with portals.

December 2019

In the next issue of Bots Newsletter:
What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?

  • What happens when two bots want to clerk the same page?
  • What happens when an adminbot goes hog wild?
  • Will reFill ever get fixed?
  • What's up with ListeriaBot, anyway?
  • Python 3.4 deprecation? In my PyWikiBot? (It's more likely than you think!)

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the January 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 04:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Eric Adams

No, I didn't change anything StreamGamer (talk) 00:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I only changed the years active years. StreamGamer (talk) 00:16, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-50

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • There are now default short aliases for the "Project:" namespace on most wikis. E.g. On Wikibooks wikis, [[WB:]] will go to the local language default for the [[Project:]] namespace. This change is intended to help the smaller communities have easy access to this feature. Additional local aliases can still be requested via the usual process. [23]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 14 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 15 December. It will be on all wikis from 16 December (calendar).

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Question

Why does MrOllie keep undoing my question I keep asking him? 216.145.84.248 (talk) 20:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I have no clue, but he obviously isn't interested, so please stop re-adding it. Continuing to do so could be considered harassment. clpo13(talk) 20:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Oxford High School shooting on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-51

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Tech News

  • Because of the holidays the next issue of Tech News will be sent out on 10 January 2022.

Recent changes

  • Queries made by the DynamicPageList extension (<DynamicPageList>) are now only allowed to run for 10 seconds and error if they take longer. This is in response to multiple outages where long-running queries caused an outage on all wikis. [24]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week or next week.

Future changes

  • The developers of the Wikipedia iOS app are looking for testers who edit in multiple languages. You can read more and let them know if you are interested.
  • Advanced item The Wikimedia Cloud VPS hosts technical projects for the Wikimedia movement. Developers need to claim projects they use. This is because old and unused projects are removed once a year. Unclaimed projects can be shut down from February. [25]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:04, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 22

Hello everyone, and welcome to the 22nd issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter. This issue will be covering new and updated user scripts from the past seven months (June through December 2021).

Scripts Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!

New scripts New scripts

  • Ahecht:
  • Awesome Aasim:
    • Infiniscroll adds infinite scrolling to user contributions, page histories, and log pages.
    • Quick create allows for the fast creation of red-linked pages with two clicks.
  • Caburum:
    • UTCclock adds a clock displaying the current UTC time.
  • Chlod:
  • DaxServer:
    • BooksToSfn adds a portlet link in Visual Editor's source mode editing, in main namespace articles or in the user's Sandbox. When clicked, it converts one {{cite book}} inside a <ref>...</ref> tag block into an {{Sfn}}.
  • FlightTime:
  • Jon Harald Søby:
    • diffedit enables editing directly from viewing a diff "when, for instance, you notice a tiny mistake deep into an article, and don't want to edit the entire article and re-find that one line to fix that tiny mistake".
    • warnOnLargeFile warns you if you're about to open a very large file (width/height >10,000px or file size >100 MB) from a file page.
  • JPxG:
    • PressPass adds a collection of tools for Newspapers.com including configurable automatic citation generation in five different formats.
    • CurrentSwitcher gives you links on the contribs page to hide duplicate entries, current revisions, rollbacks, huggles, twinkles, and redwarns.
    • TrackSum lets you automatically sum the lengths of tracks in templates like {{track listing}} and get total runtimes.
  • Nardog:
    • CopySectLink adds a button to copy the unencoded page title or section path next to each heading.
    • IPAInput allows you to type in IPA symbols by directly looking at an IPA key like Help:IPA/English and clicking on the symbols.
    • TemplatePreviewGuard warns when you try to use "Preview page with this template" with a page that doesn't transclude the template.
  • NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh:
    • ContribsTabVector adds "Contributions" and "Statistics" tabs to user and user talk pages on the Vector skin.
    • CopyvioChecker adds a "CopyvioCheck" tab to all pages, except Special (Vector skin only).
    • LiveDiffLink is a version of Equazcion's LiveDiffLink which shows a wikilink instead of a URL.
    • QuickDiff (by OneTwoThreeFall at Fandom) lets you quickly view any diff link on a wiki, whether on Recent Changes, contribs pages, history pages, the diff view itself, or elsewhere. For more information, view its page on Fandom.
  • Novem Linguae:
    • DetectSNG scans a list of 1,600 SNG keywords and displays them at the top of the article.
    • NotSoFast highlights recently created articles in the new pages feed, to discourage patrolling them too quickly.
    • UserRightsDiff concisely displays what perm was added or removed when viewing Special:UserRights.
    • VoteCounter displays a rough count of keeps and deletes at XFDs, RFCs, etc.
    • WatchlistAFD automatically watchlists the AFDs of any pages you AFC accept or NPP patrol, to help you calibrate your reviewing.
  • P.T.Đ:
  • Qwerfjkl:
    • editRedirect adds a → link after redirects to edit them.
    • RegExTypoFix, a script for fixing typos, is a wrapper for User:Joeytje50/RETF.js.
    • talkback creates links after user talk page links like this: |C|TB (with the first linking to the user's contributions, and the latter giving the option of sending a {{talkback}} notice). It also adds a [copy] link next to section headers.
  • Rublov:
    • diff-link shows "copy" links on history and contributions pages that copy an internal link to the diff (e.g., Special:Diff/1026402230) to your clipboard when clicked.
  • Rummskartoffel:
    • auto-watchlist-expiry automatically watchlists every page you edit for a user-definable duration (you can still pick a different time using the dropdown, though).
    • generate pings generates the wikitext needed to ping all members of a category, up to 50 editors (the limit defined by MediaWiki).
    • share ExpandTemplates url allows for easy sharing of your inputs to Special:ExpandTemplates. It adds a button that, when clicked, copies a shareable URL to your exact invocation of the page, like this. Other editors do not need to have this script installed in order to access the URL generated.
    • show tag names shows the real names of tags next to their display names in places such as page revision histories or the watchlist.
  • Tol:
  • Venkat TL:
    • ColourContrib color-codes the user contributions page so that pages you've edited last are sharply distinguished from pages where another editor was the last to edit the page.
  • Vukky:

All in all, some very neat scripts were written in these last few months. Hoping to see many more in the next issue -- drop us a line on the talk page if you've been writing (or seeing) anything cool and good. Filling in for DannyS712, this has been jp×g. Take care, and merry Christmas! jp×g 07:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:06, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi Clpo13! 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 ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:33, 2 January 2022 (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.

Arbitration

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.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

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)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you

For your assistance in the return to editing at Thomas Bartlett Whitaker, Use of the all caps in the notes, in the in-text syntax was the issue, I see. Thank you. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:7012:C16C:DDF:500B (talk) 23:26, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Contributions

Hello, @Clpo13

Can you please delete the two edits? I wasn't the person doing them, and I want them deleted out of my contribution list. It's about the Taylor Swift on the talk page, and the one the Lip Synch Battle. I hope you can find a way to do that. I do not mean any harm. Xx 2A00:6020:B49F:3D00:2C5D:F402:B92A:4C4B (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion?

That was quick and obvious. - MrOllie (talk) 20:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@MrOllie: thanks for the heads up. It's either that or WP:MEAT; there's overlap at Oneida Baptist Institute, as well. Whatever the case, they're continuing the dispute in exactly the same way, so I've blocked them for the same amount of time as the IP. clpo13(talk) 20:52, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Title of the 'Shooting of Ashli Babbitt'

Clpo13,

Happy New Year. I was prevented from moving the 'Shooting of Ashli Babbitt' page to change the name to 'Ashli Babbitt', apparently because on 12/21/21 you either changed the name of the page name to "Shooting of Ashli Babbitt' or changed the protection settings so the page could not be moved to a different name. I wanted to reach out to respectfully ask your reasoning for keeping the title as the 'Shooting of Ashli Babbitt', rather than having it named 'Ashli Babbitt'.

The current title the 'Shooting of Ashli Babbitt' appears to run afoul of Wikipedia's rules for Precision of Article Names (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_titles#Precision_and_disambiguation) ("Usually, titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that. For instance, Saint Teresa of Calcutta is too precise, as Mother Teresa is precise enough to indicate exactly the same topic. On the other hand, Horowitz would not be precise enough to identify unambiguously the famous classical pianist Vladimir Horowitz.")

Thank you for your attention to this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chunterkap (talk • contribs) 22:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Chunterkap, Clpo13 does not appear to be actively editing right now, and I hope they won't mind my responding in the mean time. I would highly recommend using the requested move process for renaming that article, as doing so is likely to be contentious (I would likely oppose it, for example). You might like to read WP:BLP1E, which explains why we rarely create biographical articles about people who are exclusively notable because of one event. Firefangledfeathers 22:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Firefangledfeathers,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my concern, and for doing so respectfully even though you would likely oppose the proposed name change. I reviewed WP:BLP1E and believe the page would be more appropriate named for Babbitt as an individual rather than for the event that brought her name into the public sphere. Out of respect for you, and the Wikipedia community, I seek further clarification to avoid initiating inappropriate controversy.

WP:BLP1E States:

“We generally should avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:

1. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. 2. If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article. 3. If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented.”

The use of the work ‘each’ in the introduction requires that all 3 conditions be met for the Article name to reflect the individual rather than the event. None of the three conditions appear to be met.

Condition 1 appears to not be satisfied, as Babbitt has been subsequently covered for events other than the shooting itself. For instance, a 1/3/22 article in the Associated Press (certainly a ‘reliable source’), covered a 2016 motor vehicle incident and subsequent legal repercussions that Babbitt was involved in that clearly predate her Jan 6 2022 death (https://apnews.com/article/ashli-babbitt-capitol-siege-a15c7e52a04d932972b7a284c7a8f7df). Yes, attention was first drawn to Babbitt due to the Jan 6 shooting, but her presence in the public spear has moved beyond the single event.

Condition 2 appears to not be satisfied, in that Babbitt has not remained a ‘low-profile individual’. As documented in the current Wiki page, Babbitt has become a cause cé·lè·bre, garnering widespread and continuing public attention.

Condition 3 similarly appears to not be satisfied, as the event is clearly not ‘not significant’, and nor was ‘the individual's role…either not substantial or not well documented’. As is the case with the John Hinckley Jr. page, the example used to illustrate Condition 3, Babbitt should have a separate article because the single event she was first associated with, her death on Jan 6, was unquestionably a significant public event, and her role was both ‘substantial’ and ‘well documented’.

Again, I thank you for your guidance and hope for further engagement on this issue.

Chunterkap Chunterkap (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Chunterkap, please see Wikipedia:BIO1E, the guideline that discusses whether an article should be about the event or the person. Schazjmd (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Correction to last comment: Paragraph 3 should read:

The use of the work ‘each’ in the introduction requires that all 3 conditions be met for the Article name to reflect the event rather than the individual. None of the three conditions appear to be met. Chunterkap (talk) 18:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Schazjmd,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my concern. I reviewed WP:BLP1E and still believe the page would be more appropriate named for Babbitt as an individual rather than for the event that brought her name into the public sphere. I stated my reasoning in subsequent comments above. Out of respect for you, and the Wikipedia community, I seek further clarification to avoid initiating inappropriate controversy.

I thank you for your help and hope for further engagement on this issue.

Chunterkap Chunterkap (talk) 18:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Chunterkap, you just need to follow the steps at WP:RSPM. Schazjmd (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Schazjmd,

Thank you for your response. The proposed name change appears as if it could be controversial. So I would like to move this discussed to the page itself and attempt to build consensus prior to attempting to change the name. I hope you will participate in the new discussion.

A happy and a healthy 2022 to you.

ChunterKap Chunterkap (talk) 19:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-02

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 11 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 12 January. It will be on all wikis from 13 January (calendar).

Events

  • Community Wishlist Survey 2022 begins. All contributors to the Wikimedia projects can propose for tools and platform improvements. The proposal phase takes place from 10 January 18:00 UTC to 23 January 18:00 UTC. Learn more.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

01:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cow Tools on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-03

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 18 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 19 January. It will be on all wikis from 20 January (calendar).

Events

  • Community Wishlist Survey 2022 continues. All contributors to the Wikimedia projects can propose for tools and platform improvements. The proposal phase takes place from 10 January 18:00 UTC to 23 January 18:00 UTC. Learn more.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:PiramideUPACIFICO.png

Thank you for uploading File:PiramideUPACIFICO.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)