MediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs) →Administrators' newsletter – June 2021: new section Tag: |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs) →The Signpost: 16 May 2024: new section Tag: |
||
(381 intermediate revisions by 71 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{User:The Wordsmith/Articles}} |
|||
{{Archive basics |
{{Archive basics |
||
|archive = User talk:The Wordsmith/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = User talk:The Wordsmith/Archive %(counter)d |
||
|counter = |
|counter = 11 |
||
|headerlevel = 2 |
|headerlevel = 2 |
||
|maxarchivesize = |
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
||
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |
||
}}<!-- 14:52 May 19, 2016 (UTC), The Wordsmith added [[Template:Oca]] --> |
}}<!-- 14:52 May 19, 2016 (UTC), The Wordsmith added [[Template:Oca]] --> |
||
<!--<CENTER>{{User:Harej/Forever|text1=[[WP:BRC|<span style="color:#6e98c2">BATHROBES</span>]]|text2=FOREVER|image=Bathrobecabalicon.png}}</CENTER> |
|||
{{User:The Wordsmith/Articles}} |
|||
[[File:Jimbo Peeking.gif|left]] |
|||
<CENTER>{{User:Harej/Forever|text1=WIKIPEDIA|text2=FOREVER}}</CENTER> |
|||
--> |
|||
{|align="right" |
|||
|- |
|||
|[[File:Jimbo Peeking.gif]] |
|||
{|align="left" |
|||
|- |
|||
<!--|[[File:Massachusetts State House, Boston, Massachusetts - oblique frontal view.JPG|right|250px]]--> |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
|{{archives}} |
|||
|{{archive box|[[/Archive 1| Archive 1]]<br>[[/Archive 2|Archive 2]]<br>[[/Archive 3]]<br>[[/Archive 4|Archive 4]]<br>[[/Archive 5|Archive 5]]<br>[[/Archive 6|Archive 6]]<br>[[/Archive 7|Archive 7]]<br>[[/Archive 8|Archive 8]]<br>[[/Archive 9|Archive 9]]<br>[[/Archive 10|Archive 10]]<br>[[/Archive 11|Archive 11]]<br>[[/Archive 12|Archive 12]]<br>[[/Archive 13|Archive 13]]<br>[[/Archive 14|Archive 14]]}} |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
|{{User Wikipedian For|year=2005|month=3|day=4}} |
|{{User Wikipedian For|year=2005|month=3|day=4}} |
||
|- |
|||
|{{User:The Wordsmith/Status}} |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
{{User:The Wordsmith/Backlog}} |
|||
{{cot|reason=Contentious Topics awareness templates}} |
|||
{{cquote|<big>In light of the following considerations: |
|||
{{Contentious topics/aware|9/11|a-i|aa2|ab|acu|ap|blp|cc|covid|e-e|gc|gg|gmo|ipa|irp|ps|r-i}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
{{Clear}} |
|||
<!-- =====DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE===== --> |
|||
== SPI == |
|||
* That the core principles of the policy on biographies of living people—in particular, neutrality and verifiability—have been set forth by the Wikimedia Foundation as a mandate for all projects; |
|||
You're on a roll. Did you want to single-handedly bring the backlog under 100? 28 more to go and then you can retire. :-) --[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 17:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* That the policy on biographies of living people, and this Committee's ruling in the Badlydrawnjeff case, call for the removal of poorly sourced and controversial content, and places the burden of demonstrating compliance on those who wish to see the content included; |
|||
:Thanks! Every once in a while a good hyperfocus lines up with something that's ''actually productive''. If you'd like to help, could you possibly take care of [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Exposed.factotum|this SPI]]? It's the last Non-CU case from January, and too messy for me to make heads or tails of it (more than most India-related SPIs). <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 17:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* That unsourced biographies of living people may contain seemingly innocuous statements which are actually damaging, but there is no way to determine whether they do without providing sources; |
|||
::No, thanks, I'll let some clerk earn their keep.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 14:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== GENDERID RfC close == |
|||
* That Wikipedia, through the founding principle of "Ignore All Rules", has traditionally given administrators wide discretion to enforce policies and principles using their own best judgment; and |
|||
Hey, (hopefully) quick question while the close is still fresh in your mind. I was wondering, if there was a slight majority favouring the proposal, why did it fail to find consensus? I can't figure out from the close if you're implying that the oppose arguments were stronger policy wise, or if there was some other reason. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 04:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* That administrators have been instructed to aggressively enforce the policy on biographies of living people. |
|||
:Since RfCs are [[WP:NOTAVOTE]], the numbers don't outright determine the outcome though they can be a factor. I prefer to mention the numbers in discussions that attracted a lot of opinions just to have it notated, but it isn't crucial to the consensus-finding process. As far as the strength of the arguments, they were roughly even. Discussions like this are a little non-standard, because proposed alterations to a policy, guideline or MOS aren't always going to be based in existing policy just due to the nature of it. Proposed changes like this need to have a solid, affirmative consensus in order to be successful and overcome the status quo, and I just didn't see it here. I don't like no consensus closes to RfCs, and I can often find at least a partial consensus to pull out of the flames (often opposers will agree on some parts of a proposal), but in this case I didn't see any other option. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 04:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::No I get that they're not a vote, however it's rare that when an RfC has a numerical majority for either a consensus to be found against the majority, or for there to be no consensus found. I've closed plenty of RfCs and discussions myself so I'm familiar with the process. When [[WP:DETCON|determining the consensus]] we do weigh the contributions based on the relative strengths of their policy based arguments, and that's why I asked if the oppose arguments were stronger. Basically I'm trying to understand the ''why'' of the close, rather than the ''what'' of the close. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 04:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::For the record, the percentage of support was roughly 53-55% depending on how the weak !votes and a couple odd ones were weighted. In most discussions of this type, a simple majority isn't enough unless backed up by arguments that were stronger than the opposers. In this case, they weren't. I didn't see the Support !voters adequately demonstrate that the existing wording was a problem that this proposal would resolve, and it wasn't enough to overcome the Oppose argument that the existing policies and guidelines are enough to handle this issue. Where the arguments are equally strong, there isn't consensus and the status quo remains. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 05:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== AE == |
|||
The Committee has determined that: |
|||
Hi The Wordsmith, |
|||
I was wondering if you'd had a chance to take a second look at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Zilch-nada|this]]. |
|||
* The deletions carried out by Rdm2376, Scott MacDonald, and various other administrators are a reasonable exercise of administrative discretion to enforce the policy on biographies of living people. |
|||
Thanks, [[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 18:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* The administrators who carried out these actions are commended for their efforts to enforce policy and uphold the quality of the encyclopedia, but are urged to conduct future activities in a less chaotic manner. |
|||
:Thanks for the reminder, I got distracted by something shiny. I've taken another look and responded there. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 21:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* The administrators who interfered with these actions are reminded that the enforcement of the policy on biographies of living people takes precedence over mere procedural concerns. |
|||
::Shiny things are the worst, especially [[tinsel]] ;). Thanks for taking a second look. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 17:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Sorry for coming back to this, but I wonder if you can give some advice: following your second comment, the thread was archived for inactivity. {{u|Seraphimblade}} kindly rescued it from the archive, but it has now received no comment for an additional 5 days, and will probably be auto-archived soon. Aside from adding a "bump" every couple of days to keep it alive (which seems silly), do you have any suggestions for appropriate ways to attract additional attention? (It is not so much that I am invested in ''how'' it turns out at this point, but rather that I would like it to be disposed of one way or another.) Thanks for your time, and sorry for the bother. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 00:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm surprised it hasn't gotten ''any'' attention from other admins, but if it doesn't then I'll just take action on my own. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 17:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Help.. == |
|||
</big>}} |
|||
Hello, currently on the visa policy pages for countries around the world.. an editor is editing using multiple accounts. |
|||
He is [User:DENOSIO] and his puppets, who have already been blocked several times. |
|||
When looked at their history, he wrote a lot of inaccurate information, which caused friction with other editors. |
|||
First of all, I ask you to block the accounts that appear to be his puppets. |
|||
1. Stars678 |
|||
2. JapanNipponTokyo19 |
|||
3. 2401:7400:c806:5aa7:6062:6ccd:6241:a643 |
|||
4. 2401:7400:c806:5aa7:287a:c99e:499d:e34e |
|||
5. 203.168.xx |
|||
6. 203.81.xx |
|||
<!-- =====DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE===== --> |
|||
Their speaking style and editing style are similar to the puppets that have already been blocked several times. |
|||
If the above measures are difficult, please set the 'VISA POLICY' pages of all countries in the world (198 countries) to allow only long-term certified users to post. |
|||
At least I think there will be less writing done by DENOSIO's puppets. |
|||
Since I also violated WIKIPEDIA while 'defending' DENOSIO, I am 'prepared' to be punished for it and am posting a message to the administrator. |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – January 2021 == |
|||
Thank you. [[User:Lades2222|Lades2222]] ([[User talk:Lades2222|talk]]) 12:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (December 2020). |
|||
{{Col-begin}} |
|||
{{Col-2}} |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/991684447#Desysop request (Andres)|Andres]] • [[Special:PermaLink/991635255#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2020#December 2020|Brion VIBBER]] • [[Special:PermaLink/991635255#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2020#December 2020|Rkitko]] • [[Special:PermaLink/991635255#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2020#December 2020|Thatcher]] |
|||
:I'm familiar with this sockmaster, please file a case at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations]] and it will be looked into as soon as someone is available. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 17:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{Col-2}} |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Checkuser Logo.svg|20px|alt=]] '''CheckUser changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|Barkeep49]] • [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|BDD]] • [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|CaptainEek]] • [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|Primefac]] |
|||
==Unblock== |
|||
[[File:Oversight logo.png|20px|alt=]] '''Oversight changes''' |
|||
Hi, I am [[User:Barr Theo|Barr Theo]]. I am currently unlogged because I do not want to break my "insane streak of creations for March", which is also the reason why I did not answer [[User:Chaotic Enby|Chaotic Enby]]. (The last time I used an IP address was in 2022 by the way, and this occasion is an exception that I do not want to repeat). |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|Barkeep49]] • [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|BDD]] • [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|CaptainEek]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/995653715#2021 Arbitration Committee|Joe Roe]] |
|||
{{Col-end}} |
|||
Regarding these wild accusations of bot usage, I must say that I am very disappointed with your conclusions... No, I do not use "unauthorized bots", I simply create the articles that I have scheduled for the day and then wait for :59 to click on publish, usually at 23:59. Why do I do it? Because I am obsessed with details (grouping individuals by name, such as Luises and Manuels) and with symmetry (I always edit in pairs, and very often two or four pages per day), and also because I am a perhaps slightly stupid and crazy. But one thing that I am not is a criminal and I have never used "unauthorized bots"; in fact, I do not even know how to do that and I am not even sure if there is any kind of bot that can do what I have been doing. |
|||
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
|||
:*[[WP:CSD|Speedy deletion criterion]] [[WP:T3|T3]] (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a [[Special:Permalink/995058813#RFC: should WP:T3 be deprecated?|request for comment]]. |
|||
Perhaps my insane levels of consistency and tiredness lead some of you to believe that I am being aided by machines, or that I am machine myself, but I ain't. I am just a human being, a very relentless and determined one. Sorry, Chaotic Enby, but there are no shortcuts for greatness. |
|||
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
|||
:* You can now put pages on your watchlist [[mw:Help:Watchlist expiry|for a limited period of time]]. |
|||
Now that this miserdustanding has been clarified and now that I have explained by "bot-like activity", I need to be unblocked as soon as possible because my schedule tells me that I have SIX new pages to create today (two of which are already done since 21 March, but that I will only publish at :59 of today). |
|||
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
|||
:*By [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Horn of Africa#New alternate motion (3-month DS trial)|motion]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures#Discretionary sanctions|standard discretionary sanctions]] have been temporarily [[Special:Permalink/993316360#Arbitration motion regarding Horn of Africa|authorized]] {{tq|for all pages relating to the [[Horn of Africa]] (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)}}. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). |
|||
:* Following the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020#Results|2020 Arbitration Committee elections]], the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: {{Noping|Barkeep49}}, {{Noping|BDD}}, {{Noping|Bradv}}, {{Noping|CaptainEek}}, {{Noping|L235}}, {{Noping|Maxim}}, {{Noping|Primefac}}. |
|||
Kind regards (waiting for 14:59 to upload this).[[Special:Contributions/2001:8A0:7E53:DF00:454:DF3B:EAA5:BA5D|2001:8A0:7E53:DF00:454:DF3B:EAA5:BA5D]] ([[User talk:2001:8A0:7E53:DF00:454:DF3B:EAA5:BA5D|talk]]) 14:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
{{Center|{{Flatlist| |
|||
* [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|Discuss this newsletter]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]] |
|||
}}}}<!-- |
|||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)</small>}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mz7@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=996253833 --> |
|||
:Responded on user talkpage, /64 blocked 1 week for block evasion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 16:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – February 2021 == |
|||
::Hi, it's Barr Theo again. I have answered your final question. I did it at 18:59 and you made edits at 19:20s, so I am assuming that you probably just missed the notification. |
|||
::Sorry for block evading again, but you yourself said that you didn't care because I am not actually being evasive. |
|||
::Anyways, I have answered your final question. I cannot stress enough the urgency of this situation. I need to be unblocked today. Do not wait for other admins, just do it yourself. |
|||
::Kind regards. [[Special:Contributions/89.214.148.253|89.214.148.253]] ([[User talk:89.214.148.253|talk]]) 20:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==SPI== |
|||
Hi The Wordsmith! Since you are active on SPIs these days, can you take action on [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpicyBiryani|this case]]? SPI is so much backlogged that these cases are getting no attention. Thanks. [[User:Orientls|Orientls]] ([[User talk:Orientls|talk]]) 01:19, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (January 2021). |
|||
{{Col-begin}} |
|||
{{Col-2}} |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hog Farm|Hog Farm]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/997537243#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#January 2021|Mattflaschen]] • [[Special:Permalink/997537243#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#January 2021|Nandesuka]] • [[Special:Permalink/997537243#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#January 2021|Savidan]] • [[Special:Permalink/997537243#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#January 2021|Wangi]] |
|||
==Asphonixm== |
|||
{{Col-2}} |
|||
Thank you for addressing another [[user:Hi Bree!|sock account]] of Asphonixm. Moving forward, could you kindly review the account [[User talk:Nida Suryani|Nida Suryani]]? I suspect it might be another sock puppet of Asphonixm. This account created the article "[[Haji Zakaria bin Muhammad Amin]]," and its name is derived from one of Haji Zakaria bin Muhammad Amin's daughters, which aligns with the behavioral patterns of this sockmaster, such as [[user:Rita Puspa]]. Once again, thank you. [[User:Ckfasdf|Ckfasdf]] ([[User talk:Ckfasdf|talk]]) 21:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Checkuser Logo.svg|20px|alt=]] '''CheckUser changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:PermaLink/999114581#changes_to_functionary_team|Berean Hunter]] • [[meta:Special:PermaLink/20997879#Xeno@enwiki|Xeno]] |
|||
:All the Asphonixm SPIs are now completed. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 20:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Oversight logo.png|20px|alt=]] '''Oversight changes''' |
|||
::Sorry to annoy you again.. but he is back. [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Asphonixm]]. Thank you. [[User:Ckfasdf|Ckfasdf]] ([[User talk:Ckfasdf|talk]]) 00:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:PermaLink/999114581#changes_to_functionary_team|Someguy1221]] • [[meta:Special:PermaLink/20997879#Xeno@enwiki|Xeno]] |
|||
{{Col-end}} |
|||
== ''The Signpost'': 29 March 2024 == |
|||
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
|||
:*The [[WP:AC/DS|standard discretionary sanctions]] authorized for [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2|American Politics]] were [[Special:PermaLink/1001485112#Motion:_American_politics_2_(1992_cutoff)|amended by motion]] to cover {{tq|post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people}}, replacing the 1932 cutoff. |
|||
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-03-29}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 5--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2024-03-29|Single-page]] * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] * [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 22:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script ([[User:JPxG/SPS]]) --></div></div> |
|||
[[File:Info Simple bw.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Miscellaneous''' |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1216007342 --> |
|||
:*Voting in the [[:meta:Stewards/Elections 2021|2021 Steward elections]] will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The [[:meta:Stewards/Confirm/2021|confirmation process]] of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically [https://tools.wmflabs.org/meta/accounteligibility/55 check your eligibility] to vote. |
|||
:*Wikipedia has now been around for [[Wikipedia:20th anniversary|20 years]], and recently saw its billionth edit! |
|||
== [[WP:Articles for deletion/Richard Allan (actor)]] == |
|||
---- |
|||
{{Center|{{Flatlist| |
|||
* [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|Discuss this newsletter]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]] |
|||
}}}}<!-- |
|||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)</small>}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Amorymeltzer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1004110745 --> |
|||
Hello, |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – March 2021 == |
|||
You G5-CSDd that page. I seem to remember I had edited the page and added sources, but maybe I am wrong. Anyway would you please oblige me by sending me the text in my userspace/or create a Draft so that I can rework it and try to make it acceptable?. Thanks a lot. -[[User talk:Mushy Yank|<span style="font-family:American Typewriter;color:#00123F">My, oh my! </span>]][[User:Mushy Yank|<span style="color:#F0CCAA;font-family:American Typewriter;font-size:13px;">(Mushy Yank)</span>]] 22:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I've restored the article to [[User:Mushy Yank/Richard Allan (actor)]]. Since you're willing to accept responsibility for it, please make sure all the content is compliant with our policies before moving back to mainspace. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 13:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (February 2021). |
|||
::Thanks a lot. -[[User talk:Mushy Yank|<span style="font-family:American Typewriter;color:#00123F">My, oh my! </span>]][[User:Mushy Yank|<span style="color:#F0CCAA;font-family:American Typewriter;font-size:13px;">(Mushy Yank)</span>]] 20:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TJMSmith|TJMSmith]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/1008841493#Desysop_again_please|Boing! said Zebedee]] • [[Special:PermaLink/1004081430#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#February 2021|Hiberniantears]] • [[Special:Permalink/1005108063#Desysop request for Lear's Fool|Lear's Fool]] • [[Special:PermaLink/1004462796#Request desysop (only)|Only]] • [[Special:Permalink/1007890148#Voluntary Admin Removal \ WGFinley|WGFinley]] |
|||
:::...and now its back in mainspace, neatly side stepping the AFD which you kindly closed with a G5 speedy nomination on 4 April. <span style="background-color:lightblue">''''' [[User:Velella|Velella]] '''''</span><span style="background-color:lightblue"> <sup>''[[User talk:Velella|Velella]] Talk ''</sup> </span> 22:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Interface administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Interface administrator changes''' |
|||
::::That AFD seemed to be heading for a relist or no consensus. A few sources have been added since the AFD was opened, but if you still believe it qualifies for deletion there's no prejudice against re-nominating it. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 22:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Special:Diff/1009276671#Interface Admin for AmandaNP & DeltaQuadBot|AmandaNP]] |
|||
:::::... but if it was a G5 then, isn't it still a G5 candidate? Same history, same originator, same sock-puppet? I am not going to argue this at any length - I will bow to your longevity on Wikipedia! Regards <span style="background-color:lightblue">''''' [[User:Velella|Velella]] '''''</span><span style="background-color:lightblue"> <sup>''[[User talk:Velella|Velella]] Talk ''</sup> </span> 22:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Sort of, but there's an exception for allowing edits that are useful to be restored on a case-by-case basis. Aside from the question of whether the new content from {{u|Mushy Yank}} is "substantial" (which would invalidate a G5 rationale), the longstanding practice is that if a contribution by a banned user is useful and an editor in good standing is willing to accept responsibility for it, it can be reinstated at an admin's discretion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 23:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Recent SPI close == |
|||
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
|||
:*A [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Desysop Policy (2021)|request for comment]] is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 community sentiment on binding desysop procedure|2019 RfC]] in favor of creating one such a policy. |
|||
:*A [[Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: Deprecate criterion a. from F7|request for comment]] is in progress to remove [[WP:CSD#F7|F7]] (invalid fair-use claim) [[WP:CSD#F7a|subcriterion a]], which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags. |
|||
:*A [[Wikipedia talk:Page mover/delete-redirect#RFC on granting delete-redirect to page movers|request for comment]] seeks to grant [[Wikipedia:Page mover|page movers]] the {{code|delete-redirect}} userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at [[Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect]]. |
|||
:*A [[Wikipedia talk:General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019#RfC on use of COVID-19 editnotice|request for comment]] asks if sysops may {{tq|place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions}}? |
|||
:*There is a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) #Pending-changes protection of Today's featured article|discussion in progress]] concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with [[WP:PC|Pending Changes]] [[WP:PCPP|protection]]. |
|||
Hi, |
|||
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
|||
:*When blocking an IPv6 address with [[WP:TW|Twinkle]], there is now a checkbox with the option to [[WP:/64|just block the /64]] range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage. |
|||
:*When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at [[WP:RfPP]], and even link to the specific revision. |
|||
:*There have been [[Special:Permalink/1009602172#Pending Changes again|a number]] of [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_187#Unable_to_set_Pending_Changes|reported issues]] with [[WP:PC|Pending Changes]]. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved ([[phab:T273317]]) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist ([[phab:T275322]]). |
|||
Thanks for your recent work on the NicolePunch SPI. I wonder if you could help me with a point that has a bearing on one element of that case. |
|||
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
|||
:*By [[Special:PermaLink/1008369085#Motion:_Remedy_transfer_to_Gender_and_sexuality_shell_case|motion]], the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures#Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] originally authorized under the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate|GamerGate case]] are [[Special:Permalink/1008383822#Gender and sexuality standard discretionary sanctions authorized|now authorized]] under a new [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender and sexuality|Gender and sexuality case]], with sanctions {{tq|authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people.}} Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions. |
|||
:*The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan|Kurds and Kurdistan]] case was [[Special:Permalink/1008479504#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan closed|closed]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan#Standard discretionary sanctions|authorizing]] [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures#Discretionary sanctions|standard discretionary sanctions]] for {{tq|the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed}}. |
|||
As mentioned by {{u|Justlettersandnumbers}}, the accounts listed on that SPI seem to be linked in some way to a PR company. |
|||
[[File:Info Simple bw.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Miscellaneous''' |
|||
:*Following the [[meta:Stewards/Elections 2021|2021 Steward Elections]], the following editors have been appointed as stewards: [[meta:Stewards/Elections 2021/Statements/AmandaNP|AmandaNP]], [[meta:Stewards/Elections 2021/Statements/Operator873|Operator873]], [[meta:Stewards/Elections 2021/Statements/Stanglavine|Stanglavine]], [[meta:Stewards/Elections 2021/Statements/Teles|Teles]], and [[meta:Stewards/Elections 2021/Statements/Wiki13|Wiki13]]. |
|||
The Lubham13 account appeared relatively soon after user NicolePunch received the last of their COI warnings for promo edits (NicolePunch was presumably very close to being blocked at that point). Undisclosed promo edits resembling those of NicolePunch continued under the Lubham13 account before that user declared a COI. Then, after Lubham13 failed to install promo material on the Legal & General article through a 24/2/24 edit request (I can’t provide a diff as the edit was revdeled for copyvio), the same material appeared [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ant%C3%B3nio_Sim%C3%B5es_(executive)&diff=prev&oldid=1214347382] on the article of Legal & General's CEO via an edit by an IP address. That IP address appears to be associated with the activity of user NicoleReuthePunch, which is (I am quite sure) a sock of NicolePunch. So, I must say that I’m not convinced that those accounts are really stale (or at least the end user behind those accounts is apparently still active). This IP activity is the most recent edit made by these accounts on the relevant articles, and surely is not stale? |
|||
This chain of events also suggests that the declared COI under the Lubham13 account is not a sign of this user "trying to do things by-the-book" (as you suggested at the SPI). It looks to me more like a failed attempt at doing so before a return to UPE business as usual to get the material into mainspace. |
|||
---- |
|||
{{center|{{flatlist| |
|||
* [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|Discuss this newsletter]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]] |
|||
}}}} |
|||
<!-- |
|||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)</small>}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Amorymeltzer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1009640350 --> |
|||
There has been a long history on the affected articles of edits from a succession of COI accounts, with new accounts being set up after warnings are received, so the recent activity is in accordance with how things have been running here for some time. |
|||
== Precious anniversary == |
|||
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Four}} --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 07:58, 11 March 2021 (UTC) |
|||
On a related point, the Lubham13 account seems to be a shared account, on the basis of (a) the following quote: ‘Main edits that ''we'' are proposing are […]’ (unfortunately I can’t provide a diff as the edit was revdeled), and (b) the fact that the PR company apparently involved here is based in a town called Lubbenham. |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – April 2021 == |
|||
The shared account issue is a separate issue, but I’d be grateful if you could get back to me on the SPI issue. I accept that not all COI problems are covered by an SPI and that the continuing issue of promo edits on these articles will ultimately have to resolved through other means. However, I'd be grateful for your input on your thoughts regarding the above. |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (March 2021). |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/1009515877#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#March 2021|Alexandria]] • [[Special:Permalink/1009515877#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2021#March 2021|Happyme22]] • [[Special:Permalink/1014421250#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS closed|RexxS]] |
|||
(Also copying in {{u|dormskirk}} as they have also been active on these articles.) [[User:Axad12|Axad12]] ([[User talk:Axad12|talk]]) 05:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
|||
:*Following a [[Special:Permalink/1012827050#RfC:_Deprecate_criterion_a._from_F7|request for comment]], [[WP:CSD#F7|F7]] (invalid fair-use claim) [[WP:CSD#F7a|subcriterion a]] has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags. |
|||
:*Following a [[Wikipedia talk:Page mover/delete-redirect#RFC on granting delete-redirect to page movers|request for comment]], [[Wikipedia:Page mover|page movers]] were granted the {{code|delete-redirect}} userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. |
|||
:A few things here. Yes, sockpuppetry and/or UPE is the most likely scenario here. There's almost enough to block the others, but the disclosure put a wrench in that. Since the Lubham13 account was warned and added the paid editing disclosure properly, I'd need to see more UPE by that account after the disclosure to justify a block on that basis. Regarding the IPs, when I refer to them as "stale" I mean that the person using them has probably already gotten a new IP, so blocking the old one would have little effect. I've gone ahead and blocked 81.144.179.'''114''', which wasn't listed in the SPI. I see 81.144.179.'''144''' was listed, so that might have been a typo. It might be stale (it's borderline), but the contributions from it go back long enough that it could be a static IP so I've blocked it 6 months. I've also added a 6 month semi-protection on the three articles that are being targeted, which is usually more effective than playing IP [[Whac-A-Mole]]. If we start to see new accounts gaming autoconfirmed and then popping up with promotional content on that set of articles, that would make a much clearer case for blocking the whole lot including the stale accounts. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 16:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
|||
::Many thanks for your help here. Yes, I agree 100% with everything that you've said (and the 114 vs 144 was a typo on my part, for which my apologies). Thanks again. [[User:Axad12|Axad12]] ([[User talk:Axad12|talk]]) 17:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:*When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a [[Job queue|job queue]] problem. ({{phab|T278350}}) |
|||
:*Code to support some very old [[Web browser|web browsers]] is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. ({{phab|T277803}}) |
|||
== Jellypeeler == |
|||
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
|||
:*A [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/2021 review/Consultation|community consultation]] on the Arbitration Committee [[WP:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions procedure]] is open until April 25. |
|||
[[User talk:Jellypeeler]] has requested the removal of a block you imposed. Since it came at the end of an SPI, I think you're the only one allowed to respond, aside from a community discussion, so I declined it on procedural grounds. Could you review it? [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 10:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
{{center|{{flatlist| |
|||
* [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|Discuss this newsletter]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]] |
|||
}}}} |
|||
<!-- |
|||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)</small>}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Dreamy Jazz@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1014590924 --> |
|||
:I don't think they should be unblocked. In addition to the behviour I noted at the [[WP:Sockpuppet investigations/TwinTurbo/Archive| SPI]], after Yamla identified their other account, Mr. Riba, I took a look at that account's activity which is mostly on Commons (nothing here) and saw they uploaded a couple images of [[Mahek Bukhari]], an article [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=&user=&page=Mahek+Bukhari&wpdate=&tagfilter=&wpfilters%5B%5D=newusers&wpFormIdentifier=logeventslist Jellypeeler created here] (and other Wikis). One was a [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File:MahekBukhari_Mugshot.png mugshot], which has since been deleted via [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:MahekBukhari_Mugshot.png this deletion request] so you can't see it now but as I noted in the request, the image had been manipulated to make her look better. The other is [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maybvlogs-4-PLT-shoot.jpg this one] which was uploaded via Flicker on March 3rd and attributed to Cheyanne Reynolds. The [https://flickr.com/photos/200191765@N04/53563439850 Flicker account] was created on March 2nd, a day before the upload, and only has four photos, all of Mahek Bukhari so seems coordinated. It's all very fishy. [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 14:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – May 2021 == |
|||
:The restriction only applies to blocks marked as Checkuser blocks. I'm just a regular patrolling admin at SPI, so my blocks are subject to review in the usual manner. I think the evidence is strong, but I have no objections to an uninvolved admin handling the unblock request using their own judgement. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 04:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Courtesy ping to {{yo|Yamla}} <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>''[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]''</small></span></sup> 04:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Let me know if you need anything from me. I have no objection if people want to lift the block here. Of course, it's not my block. I can also look for any further evidence of sockpuppetry, though I expect everything's stale. Also, Nyttend, welcome back! Glad to see you active once again. --[[User:Yamla|Yamla]] ([[User talk:Yamla|talk]]) 11:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== ''The Signpost'': 25 April 2024 == |
|||
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-04-25}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 6--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2024-04-25|Single-page]] * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] * [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script ([[User:JPxG/SPS]]) --></div></div> |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1220541483 --> |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – May 2024 == |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (April 2024). |
|||
<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap"> |
|||
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em"> |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (April 2021). |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
||
:[[File:Gnome-colors- |
:[[File:Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg|20px|alt=readded|Readded]] [[Special:Permalink/1220304714#Resysop request (Nyttend)|Nyttend]] |
||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] {{Hlist|class=inline |
|||
|[[Special:Permalink/1216602202#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2024#April 2024|JohnOwens]] |
|||
|[[Special:Permalink/1216602202#Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2024#April 2024|Killiondude]] |
|||
|[[Special:Permalink/1218467362#Handing in my mop|MelanieN]] |
|||
|[[Special:Permalink/1218761294#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management closed|Nihonjoe]] |
|||
}} |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia |
[[File:Wikipedia bureaucrat.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Bureaucrat changes''' |
||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special: |
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/1218761294#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management closed|Nihonjoe]] |
||
</div> |
|||
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em"> |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Checkuser Logo.svg|20px|alt=]] '''CheckUser changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg|20px|alt=readded|Readded]] [[Special:PermanentLink/1219467786#Changes to the functionaries team, April 2024|Joe Roe]] |
|||
[[File:Oversight logo.png|20px|alt=]] '''Oversight changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:PermanentLink/1219467786#Changes to the functionaries team, April 2024|GeneralNotability]] |
|||
</div> |
|||
</div> |
|||
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
||
* Phase I of the [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review|2024 requests for adminship review]] has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 3b: Make the first two days discussion-only (trial)|creating a discussion-only period]] (3b) and [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 13: Admin elections|administrator elections]] (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 2: Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA|creating a reminder of civility norms]] (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I|full report]]. |
|||
:*Following [[Special:Permalink/1020106563#RfC:_Can_editors_request_community_review_of_the_blocks_of_others?|an RfC]], consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged. |
|||
:*[[WP:DESYSOP2021|The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC]] was closed with no consensus. [[WP:DESYSOP2019|Consensus was found in a previous RfC]] for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus. |
|||
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
||
* Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. [[phab:T280531|T280531]] |
|||
:*The user group <code>oversight</code> will be renamed to <code>suppress</code>. This is for [[phab:T109327|technical reasons]]. You can comment at {{phab|T112147}} if you have objections. |
|||
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
||
* The arbitration case ''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management|Conflict of interest management]]'' has been closed. |
|||
:*The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/2021 review|community consultation]] on the Arbitration Committee [[WP:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions procedure]] was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review. |
|||
[[File:Info Simple bw.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Miscellaneous''' |
|||
* This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA. |
|||
* A [[Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2024|'''New Pages Patrol backlog drive''']] is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the [[Special:NewPagesFeed|new pages feed]]. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. [[Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2024/Participants|'''Sign up here to participate!''']] |
|||
* Voting for the [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024|Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C)]] election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024#Voting|voting page on Meta-Wiki]] and '''[[m:Special:SecurePoll/vote/396|cast your vote here!]]''' |
|||
---- |
---- |
||
Line 234: | Line 222: | ||
}}}} |
}}}} |
||
<!-- |
<!-- |
||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) |
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 17:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)</small>}} |
||
<!-- Message sent by User: |
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1220239146 --> |
||
== Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C == |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – June 2021 == |
|||
<section begin="announcement-content" /> |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (May 2021). |
|||
:''[[m:Special:MyLanguage/Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024/Announcement – vote reminder|You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.]] [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate&group=page-{{urlencode:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024/Announcement – vote reminder}}&language=&action=page&filter= {{int:please-translate}}]'' |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ashleyyoursmile|Ashleyyoursmile]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Less Unless|Less Unless]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|Husond]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|MattWade]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|MJCdetroit]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|Carioca]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|Vague Rant]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|Kingboyk]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|Thunderboltz]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|Gwen Gale]] • [[Special:Permalink/1020780399#Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators/2021#May_2021|AniMate]] • [[Wikipedia:Deceased_Wikipedians/2021#SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] (deceased) |
|||
Dear Wikimedian, |
|||
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
|||
:*[[Special:Permalink/1026056600#Proposal: deprecate WP:EA/WP:EAR and close down all active templates or help pages linking to it|Consensus was reached]] to deprecate [[Wikipedia:Editor assistance]]. |
|||
:*Following a [[Special:Permalink/1024830206#Formally deprecate the book namespace|Request for Comment]] the Book namespace was deprecated. |
|||
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process. |
|||
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
|||
:*Wikimedia previously used the [[m:IRC|IRC]] network [[Freenode]]. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the [[m:IRC/Group_Contacts|Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts]] decided to move to the new [[Libera Chat]] network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a [[:m:IRC/Migrating_to_Libera_Chat|migration guide]] and Wikimedia [[m:Wikimedia Forum#Freenode (IRC)|discussions about this]]. |
|||
This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the [[m:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024|voting page on Meta-wiki]] to learn more about voting and voter eligibility. |
|||
[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Arbitration''' |
|||
:*After a [[WP:ARCA|Clarification request]], the Arbitration Committee modified [[WP:APLRS|Remedy 5]] of the ''Antisemitism in Poland'' case. This means sourcing expectations are a [[WP:DS|discretionary sanction]] instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the [[WP:RSN|Reliable Sources Noticeboard]] to discuss disputed sources. |
|||
The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please [[m:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Charter|review the U4C Charter]]. |
|||
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well. |
|||
---- |
|||
{{center|{{flatlist| |
|||
On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" /> |
|||
* [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|Discuss this newsletter]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] |
|||
[[m:User:RamzyM (WMF)|RamzyM (WMF)]] 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]] |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:RamzyM (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Election/2024/Previous_voters_list_2&oldid=26721207 --> |
|||
}}}} |
|||
<!-- |
|||
== RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins == |
|||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)</small>}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Dreamy Jazz@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1027670381 --> |
|||
Hi there! Phase I of the [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review]] has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus: |
|||
* '''Proposals 2 and 9b''' ('''[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Reminder of civility norms at RfA|phase II discussion]]'''): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 2: Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA|Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA]] and [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 9b: Require links for claims of specific policy violations|Require links for claims of specific policy violations]] |
|||
* '''Proposal 3b''' (in trial): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 3b: Make the first two days discussion-only (trial)|Make the first two days discussion-only]] |
|||
* '''Proposal 13''' (in trial): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 13: Admin elections|Admin elections]] |
|||
* '''Proposal 14''' (implemented): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 14: Suffrage requirements|Suffrage requirements]] |
|||
* '''Proposals 16 and 16c''' ('''[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Administrator recall|phase II discussion]]'''): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 16: Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs|Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs]] and [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/2024_review/Phase_I#Proposal_16c%3A_Community_recall_process_based_on_dewiki|Community recall process based on dewiki]] |
|||
* '''Proposal 17''' ('''[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors|phase II discussion]]'''): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 17: Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions|Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions]] |
|||
* '''Proposal 24''' ('''[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Mentoring process|phase II discussion]]'''): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 24: Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process|Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process]] |
|||
* '''Proposal 25''' (implemented): [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I#Proposal 25: Require nominees to be extended confirmed|Require nominees to be extended confirmed]] |
|||
See the [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review|project page]] for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. [[user:theleekycauldron|theleekycauldron]] ([[user talk:theleekycauldron|talk]]), via [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Theleekycauldron@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/2024_review/Mailing_list&oldid=1218650058 --> |
|||
== ''The Signpost'': 16 May 2024 == |
|||
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-05-16}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 7--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2024-05-16|Single-page]] * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] * [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 10:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script ([[User:JPxG/SPS]]) --></div></div> |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1223040870 --> |
Revision as of 10:59, 16 May 2024
| |||||||||||||
|
Contentious Topics awareness templates
|
---|
SPI
You're on a roll. Did you want to single-handedly bring the backlog under 100? 28 more to go and then you can retire. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 17:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Every once in a while a good hyperfocus lines up with something that's actually productive. If you'd like to help, could you possibly take care of this SPI? It's the last Non-CU case from January, and too messy for me to make heads or tails of it (more than most India-related SPIs). The WordsmithTalk to me 17:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
GENDERID RfC close
Hey, (hopefully) quick question while the close is still fresh in your mind. I was wondering, if there was a slight majority favouring the proposal, why did it fail to find consensus? I can't figure out from the close if you're implying that the oppose arguments were stronger policy wise, or if there was some other reason. Sideswipe9th (talk) 04:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Since RfCs are WP:NOTAVOTE, the numbers don't outright determine the outcome though they can be a factor. I prefer to mention the numbers in discussions that attracted a lot of opinions just to have it notated, but it isn't crucial to the consensus-finding process. As far as the strength of the arguments, they were roughly even. Discussions like this are a little non-standard, because proposed alterations to a policy, guideline or MOS aren't always going to be based in existing policy just due to the nature of it. Proposed changes like this need to have a solid, affirmative consensus in order to be successful and overcome the status quo, and I just didn't see it here. I don't like no consensus closes to RfCs, and I can often find at least a partial consensus to pull out of the flames (often opposers will agree on some parts of a proposal), but in this case I didn't see any other option. The WordsmithTalk to me 04:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- No I get that they're not a vote, however it's rare that when an RfC has a numerical majority for either a consensus to be found against the majority, or for there to be no consensus found. I've closed plenty of RfCs and discussions myself so I'm familiar with the process. When determining the consensus we do weigh the contributions based on the relative strengths of their policy based arguments, and that's why I asked if the oppose arguments were stronger. Basically I'm trying to understand the why of the close, rather than the what of the close. Sideswipe9th (talk) 04:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- For the record, the percentage of support was roughly 53-55% depending on how the weak !votes and a couple odd ones were weighted. In most discussions of this type, a simple majority isn't enough unless backed up by arguments that were stronger than the opposers. In this case, they weren't. I didn't see the Support !voters adequately demonstrate that the existing wording was a problem that this proposal would resolve, and it wasn't enough to overcome the Oppose argument that the existing policies and guidelines are enough to handle this issue. Where the arguments are equally strong, there isn't consensus and the status quo remains. The WordsmithTalk to me 05:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- No I get that they're not a vote, however it's rare that when an RfC has a numerical majority for either a consensus to be found against the majority, or for there to be no consensus found. I've closed plenty of RfCs and discussions myself so I'm familiar with the process. When determining the consensus we do weigh the contributions based on the relative strengths of their policy based arguments, and that's why I asked if the oppose arguments were stronger. Basically I'm trying to understand the why of the close, rather than the what of the close. Sideswipe9th (talk) 04:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
AE
Hi The Wordsmith,
I was wondering if you'd had a chance to take a second look at this.
Thanks, JBL (talk) 18:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder, I got distracted by something shiny. I've taken another look and responded there. The WordsmithTalk to me 21:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Shiny things are the worst, especially tinsel ;). Thanks for taking a second look. --JBL (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for coming back to this, but I wonder if you can give some advice: following your second comment, the thread was archived for inactivity. Seraphimblade kindly rescued it from the archive, but it has now received no comment for an additional 5 days, and will probably be auto-archived soon. Aside from adding a "bump" every couple of days to keep it alive (which seems silly), do you have any suggestions for appropriate ways to attract additional attention? (It is not so much that I am invested in how it turns out at this point, but rather that I would like it to be disposed of one way or another.) Thanks for your time, and sorry for the bother. --JBL (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm surprised it hasn't gotten any attention from other admins, but if it doesn't then I'll just take action on my own. The WordsmithTalk to me 17:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for coming back to this, but I wonder if you can give some advice: following your second comment, the thread was archived for inactivity. Seraphimblade kindly rescued it from the archive, but it has now received no comment for an additional 5 days, and will probably be auto-archived soon. Aside from adding a "bump" every couple of days to keep it alive (which seems silly), do you have any suggestions for appropriate ways to attract additional attention? (It is not so much that I am invested in how it turns out at this point, but rather that I would like it to be disposed of one way or another.) Thanks for your time, and sorry for the bother. --JBL (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Shiny things are the worst, especially tinsel ;). Thanks for taking a second look. --JBL (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Help..
Hello, currently on the visa policy pages for countries around the world.. an editor is editing using multiple accounts.
He is [User:DENOSIO] and his puppets, who have already been blocked several times.
When looked at their history, he wrote a lot of inaccurate information, which caused friction with other editors.
First of all, I ask you to block the accounts that appear to be his puppets.
1. Stars678
2. JapanNipponTokyo19
3. 2401:7400:c806:5aa7:6062:6ccd:6241:a643
4. 2401:7400:c806:5aa7:287a:c99e:499d:e34e
5. 203.168.xx
6. 203.81.xx
Their speaking style and editing style are similar to the puppets that have already been blocked several times.
If the above measures are difficult, please set the 'VISA POLICY' pages of all countries in the world (198 countries) to allow only long-term certified users to post.
At least I think there will be less writing done by DENOSIO's puppets.
Since I also violated WIKIPEDIA while 'defending' DENOSIO, I am 'prepared' to be punished for it and am posting a message to the administrator.
Thank you. Lades2222 (talk) 12:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm familiar with this sockmaster, please file a case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and it will be looked into as soon as someone is available. The WordsmithTalk to me 17:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Unblock
Hi, I am Barr Theo. I am currently unlogged because I do not want to break my "insane streak of creations for March", which is also the reason why I did not answer Chaotic Enby. (The last time I used an IP address was in 2022 by the way, and this occasion is an exception that I do not want to repeat).
Regarding these wild accusations of bot usage, I must say that I am very disappointed with your conclusions... No, I do not use "unauthorized bots", I simply create the articles that I have scheduled for the day and then wait for :59 to click on publish, usually at 23:59. Why do I do it? Because I am obsessed with details (grouping individuals by name, such as Luises and Manuels) and with symmetry (I always edit in pairs, and very often two or four pages per day), and also because I am a perhaps slightly stupid and crazy. But one thing that I am not is a criminal and I have never used "unauthorized bots"; in fact, I do not even know how to do that and I am not even sure if there is any kind of bot that can do what I have been doing.
Perhaps my insane levels of consistency and tiredness lead some of you to believe that I am being aided by machines, or that I am machine myself, but I ain't. I am just a human being, a very relentless and determined one. Sorry, Chaotic Enby, but there are no shortcuts for greatness.
Now that this miserdustanding has been clarified and now that I have explained by "bot-like activity", I need to be unblocked as soon as possible because my schedule tells me that I have SIX new pages to create today (two of which are already done since 21 March, but that I will only publish at :59 of today).
Kind regards (waiting for 14:59 to upload this).2001:8A0:7E53:DF00:454:DF3B:EAA5:BA5D (talk) 14:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- Responded on user talkpage, /64 blocked 1 week for block evasion. The WordsmithTalk to me 16:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, it's Barr Theo again. I have answered your final question. I did it at 18:59 and you made edits at 19:20s, so I am assuming that you probably just missed the notification.
- Sorry for block evading again, but you yourself said that you didn't care because I am not actually being evasive.
- Anyways, I have answered your final question. I cannot stress enough the urgency of this situation. I need to be unblocked today. Do not wait for other admins, just do it yourself.
- Kind regards. 89.214.148.253 (talk) 20:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
SPI
Hi The Wordsmith! Since you are active on SPIs these days, can you take action on this case? SPI is so much backlogged that these cases are getting no attention. Thanks. Orientls (talk) 01:19, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Asphonixm
Thank you for addressing another sock account of Asphonixm. Moving forward, could you kindly review the account Nida Suryani? I suspect it might be another sock puppet of Asphonixm. This account created the article "Haji Zakaria bin Muhammad Amin," and its name is derived from one of Haji Zakaria bin Muhammad Amin's daughters, which aligns with the behavioral patterns of this sockmaster, such as user:Rita Puspa. Once again, thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 21:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- All the Asphonixm SPIs are now completed. The WordsmithTalk to me 20:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry to annoy you again.. but he is back. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Asphonixm. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 00:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 March 2024
- Technology report: Millions of readers still seeing broken pages as "temporary" disabling of graph extension nears its second year
- Recent research: "Newcomer Homepage" feature mostly fails to boost new editors
- Traffic report: He rules over everything, on the land called planet Dune
- Humour: Letters from the editors
- Comix: Layout issue
Hello, You G5-CSDd that page. I seem to remember I had edited the page and added sources, but maybe I am wrong. Anyway would you please oblige me by sending me the text in my userspace/or create a Draft so that I can rework it and try to make it acceptable?. Thanks a lot. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I've restored the article to User:Mushy Yank/Richard Allan (actor). Since you're willing to accept responsibility for it, please make sure all the content is compliant with our policies before moving back to mainspace. The WordsmithTalk to me 13:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- ...and now its back in mainspace, neatly side stepping the AFD which you kindly closed with a G5 speedy nomination on 4 April. Velella Velella Talk 22:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- That AFD seemed to be heading for a relist or no consensus. A few sources have been added since the AFD was opened, but if you still believe it qualifies for deletion there's no prejudice against re-nominating it. The WordsmithTalk to me 22:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- ... but if it was a G5 then, isn't it still a G5 candidate? Same history, same originator, same sock-puppet? I am not going to argue this at any length - I will bow to your longevity on Wikipedia! Regards Velella Velella Talk 22:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sort of, but there's an exception for allowing edits that are useful to be restored on a case-by-case basis. Aside from the question of whether the new content from Mushy Yank is "substantial" (which would invalidate a G5 rationale), the longstanding practice is that if a contribution by a banned user is useful and an editor in good standing is willing to accept responsibility for it, it can be reinstated at an admin's discretion. The WordsmithTalk to me 23:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- ... but if it was a G5 then, isn't it still a G5 candidate? Same history, same originator, same sock-puppet? I am not going to argue this at any length - I will bow to your longevity on Wikipedia! Regards Velella Velella Talk 22:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- That AFD seemed to be heading for a relist or no consensus. A few sources have been added since the AFD was opened, but if you still believe it qualifies for deletion there's no prejudice against re-nominating it. The WordsmithTalk to me 22:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- ...and now its back in mainspace, neatly side stepping the AFD which you kindly closed with a G5 speedy nomination on 4 April. Velella Velella Talk 22:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Recent SPI close
Hi,
Thanks for your recent work on the NicolePunch SPI. I wonder if you could help me with a point that has a bearing on one element of that case.
As mentioned by Justlettersandnumbers, the accounts listed on that SPI seem to be linked in some way to a PR company.
The Lubham13 account appeared relatively soon after user NicolePunch received the last of their COI warnings for promo edits (NicolePunch was presumably very close to being blocked at that point). Undisclosed promo edits resembling those of NicolePunch continued under the Lubham13 account before that user declared a COI. Then, after Lubham13 failed to install promo material on the Legal & General article through a 24/2/24 edit request (I can’t provide a diff as the edit was revdeled for copyvio), the same material appeared [1] on the article of Legal & General's CEO via an edit by an IP address. That IP address appears to be associated with the activity of user NicoleReuthePunch, which is (I am quite sure) a sock of NicolePunch. So, I must say that I’m not convinced that those accounts are really stale (or at least the end user behind those accounts is apparently still active). This IP activity is the most recent edit made by these accounts on the relevant articles, and surely is not stale?
This chain of events also suggests that the declared COI under the Lubham13 account is not a sign of this user "trying to do things by-the-book" (as you suggested at the SPI). It looks to me more like a failed attempt at doing so before a return to UPE business as usual to get the material into mainspace.
There has been a long history on the affected articles of edits from a succession of COI accounts, with new accounts being set up after warnings are received, so the recent activity is in accordance with how things have been running here for some time.
On a related point, the Lubham13 account seems to be a shared account, on the basis of (a) the following quote: ‘Main edits that we are proposing are […]’ (unfortunately I can’t provide a diff as the edit was revdeled), and (b) the fact that the PR company apparently involved here is based in a town called Lubbenham.
The shared account issue is a separate issue, but I’d be grateful if you could get back to me on the SPI issue. I accept that not all COI problems are covered by an SPI and that the continuing issue of promo edits on these articles will ultimately have to resolved through other means. However, I'd be grateful for your input on your thoughts regarding the above.
(Also copying in dormskirk as they have also been active on these articles.) Axad12 (talk) 05:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- A few things here. Yes, sockpuppetry and/or UPE is the most likely scenario here. There's almost enough to block the others, but the disclosure put a wrench in that. Since the Lubham13 account was warned and added the paid editing disclosure properly, I'd need to see more UPE by that account after the disclosure to justify a block on that basis. Regarding the IPs, when I refer to them as "stale" I mean that the person using them has probably already gotten a new IP, so blocking the old one would have little effect. I've gone ahead and blocked 81.144.179.114, which wasn't listed in the SPI. I see 81.144.179.144 was listed, so that might have been a typo. It might be stale (it's borderline), but the contributions from it go back long enough that it could be a static IP so I've blocked it 6 months. I've also added a 6 month semi-protection on the three articles that are being targeted, which is usually more effective than playing IP Whac-A-Mole. If we start to see new accounts gaming autoconfirmed and then popping up with promotional content on that set of articles, that would make a much clearer case for blocking the whole lot including the stale accounts. The WordsmithTalk to me 16:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Jellypeeler
User talk:Jellypeeler has requested the removal of a block you imposed. Since it came at the end of an SPI, I think you're the only one allowed to respond, aside from a community discussion, so I declined it on procedural grounds. Could you review it? Nyttend (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think they should be unblocked. In addition to the behviour I noted at the SPI, after Yamla identified their other account, Mr. Riba, I took a look at that account's activity which is mostly on Commons (nothing here) and saw they uploaded a couple images of Mahek Bukhari, an article Jellypeeler created here (and other Wikis). One was a mugshot, which has since been deleted via this deletion request so you can't see it now but as I noted in the request, the image had been manipulated to make her look better. The other is this one which was uploaded via Flicker on March 3rd and attributed to Cheyanne Reynolds. The Flicker account was created on March 2nd, a day before the upload, and only has four photos, all of Mahek Bukhari so seems coordinated. It's all very fishy. S0091 (talk) 14:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- The restriction only applies to blocks marked as Checkuser blocks. I'm just a regular patrolling admin at SPI, so my blocks are subject to review in the usual manner. I think the evidence is strong, but I have no objections to an uninvolved admin handling the unblock request using their own judgement. The WordsmithTalk to me 04:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Courtesy ping to @Yamla: The WordsmithTalk to me 04:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Let me know if you need anything from me. I have no objection if people want to lift the block here. Of course, it's not my block. I can also look for any further evidence of sockpuppetry, though I expect everything's stale. Also, Nyttend, welcome back! Glad to see you active once again. --Yamla (talk) 11:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Courtesy ping to @Yamla: The WordsmithTalk to me 04:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 April 2024
- In the media: Censorship and wikiwashing looming over RuWiki, edit wars over San Francisco politics and another wikirace on live TV
- News and notes: A sigh of relief for open access as Italy makes a slight U-turn on their cultural heritage reproduction law
- WikiConference report: WikiConference North America 2023 in Toronto recap
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Newspapers (Not WP:NOTNEWS)
- Recent research: New survey of over 100,000 Wikipedia users
- Traffic report: O.J., cricket and a three body problem
Administrators' newsletter – May 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).
- Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.
- Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531
- The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.
- This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C
- You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
On behalf of the UCoC project team,
RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:
- Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
- Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
- Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
- Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
- Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
- Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
- Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
- Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed
See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 May 2024
- News and notes: Democracy in action: multiple elections
- Special report: Will the new RfA reform come to the rescue of administrators?
- Arbitration report: Ruined temples for posterity to ponder over – arbitration from '22 to '24
- Comix: Generations
- Traffic report: Crawl out through the fallout, baby