Archive 125 | ← | Archive 130 | Archive 131 | Archive 132 | Archive 133 | Archive 134 | Archive 135 |
Wikidata weekly summary #397
Tech News: 2020-02
21:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: December 2019
|
Wikidata weekly summary #398
Tech News: 2020-03
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Article rescue
The Article Rescue Barnstar | ||
Thanks for saving the article Mac-Talla (band). Much appreciated! buidhe 15:33, 16 January 2020 (UTC) |
The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Removal of Template:Leave message from user pages
Hi Andy. I have some concern about your removal of Template:Leave message from several user pages on the supposed basis of inactivity. Template:Leave message is not documented as being only for use by active users, and Wikipedia:User pages#Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages generally proscribes substantial editing of others' user pages. Would you reconsider those edits? --Bsherr (talk) 03:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- OK, I've reconsidered them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, and the result of your reconsideration? Will you revert them? --Bsherr (talk) 13:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- No. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:59, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Andy, you understand I am trying to have a discussion with you about this, to determine whether you may be right, or whether a discussion with more participants is advisable, right? Responding as if you are a defendant in a lawsuit doesn't make that easy. Could you explain why you think the edits are consistent with Wikipedia:User pages#Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages? --Bsherr (talk) 14:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- I understand that you have accused me of being "disingenuous", and responded to one of my edits with "seriously?" My edits, which removed templates that were both outdated and inappropriate, improved the project. You have yet to show otherwise. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:25, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I didn't accuse you of being disingenuous, just the act of orphaning a template out of process and then claiming that it has a low transclusion count afterwards; I'm saying that was not candid, not you're not candid. My "Seriously?" was not concerning the merits of any edit you made, just your choice to revert my reversion, instead of following the guidance at WP:BRD to discuss; which I thought was surprising, and I would think you would too if you were in my shoes. Instead I've been chased to the brink of WP:3RR for the first time in...probably, years. I am willing to leave those matters there, unless you want to discuss them further. But these issues have nothing to do with the topic of this discussion, do they? I didn't mass-revert your user page changes, but instead initiated this discussion, right? So again, are you interested in discussing with me why you think those edits are consistent with Wikipedia:User pages#Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages? --Bsherr (talk) 14:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Diff. You have yet to respond to my request that you furnish evidence supporting your allegation that I acted "out of process". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:49, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- I guess that's my answer, then. All right. --Bsherr (talk) 15:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Your answer was in my post timestamped 14:25. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:05, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- I guess that's my answer, then. All right. --Bsherr (talk) 15:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Diff. You have yet to respond to my request that you furnish evidence supporting your allegation that I acted "out of process". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:49, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I didn't accuse you of being disingenuous, just the act of orphaning a template out of process and then claiming that it has a low transclusion count afterwards; I'm saying that was not candid, not you're not candid. My "Seriously?" was not concerning the merits of any edit you made, just your choice to revert my reversion, instead of following the guidance at WP:BRD to discuss; which I thought was surprising, and I would think you would too if you were in my shoes. Instead I've been chased to the brink of WP:3RR for the first time in...probably, years. I am willing to leave those matters there, unless you want to discuss them further. But these issues have nothing to do with the topic of this discussion, do they? I didn't mass-revert your user page changes, but instead initiated this discussion, right? So again, are you interested in discussing with me why you think those edits are consistent with Wikipedia:User pages#Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages? --Bsherr (talk) 14:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- I understand that you have accused me of being "disingenuous", and responded to one of my edits with "seriously?" My edits, which removed templates that were both outdated and inappropriate, improved the project. You have yet to show otherwise. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:25, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Andy, you understand I am trying to have a discussion with you about this, to determine whether you may be right, or whether a discussion with more participants is advisable, right? Responding as if you are a defendant in a lawsuit doesn't make that easy. Could you explain why you think the edits are consistent with Wikipedia:User pages#Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages? --Bsherr (talk) 14:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- No. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:59, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, and the result of your reconsideration? Will you revert them? --Bsherr (talk) 13:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #399
Tech News: 2020-04
19:41, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you ...
... with thanks from QAI |
... for improving articles in January! Today - 20 in 2020 - is a birthday, she is pictured on the lower choir pic, enjoy listening. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
"Stenter" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Stenter. Since you had some involvement with the Stenter redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 12:57, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Henry Gough
Great Barr seems to be the nearest place of any size to Perry Barr. Or maybe Handsworth Wood? Rathfelder (talk) 22:40, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- You're not from round here, I take it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:43, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
No I'm a Manc. Do you know where the ancient boundary between Staffordshire and Warwickshire was? This must have been pretty much on it. I'd like to get him out of the People from Staffordshire category into something more local. Rathfelder (talk) 22:45, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- There is no more local category suitable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:07, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Jordan Sinnott
On 26 January 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jordan Sinnott, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 15:29, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 January 2020
- From the editor: Reaching six million articles is great, but we need a moratorium
- News and notes: Six million articles on the English language Wikipedia
- Special report: The limits of volunteerism and the gatekeepers of Team Encarta
- Arbitration report: Three cases at ArbCom
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2019
- News from the WMF: Capacity Building: Top 5 Themes from Community Conversations
- Community view: Our most important new article since November 1, 2015
- From the archives: A decade of The Signpost, 2005-2015
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Japan: a wikiProject Report
Wikidata weekly summary #400
Tech News: 2020-05
18:53, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
February with Women in Red
February 2020, Volume 6, Issue 2, Numbers 150, 151, 152, 154, 155
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Books & Bytes – Issue 37
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).
|
Interface administrator changes
|
- Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
- The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with
wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input
. No proposed process received consensus.
- Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
- When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [13]
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
- Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!