Hello! Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave me a message by clicking the "new section" button above. I am an administrator, and I will do my best to help you. I will respond on this page to keep the discussion in one place. I archive when I think this page is getting long, or if all the discussions are old to the point of irrelevance, or after a long absence on my part. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs)
Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
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 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
Many thanks
Many thanks for correcting my categorisation error - it is appreciated! Rollo August (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- No problem! Let me know if you need any more help. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).
|
|
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people
, replacing the 1932 cutoff.
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
- Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!
Help Draft of article for "Beauty and the Bees"
In October I submitted a draft of an article on the Tasmania-based beauty brand Beauty and the Bees. I haven't heard back (edits, rejection, acceptance, etc.). I made sure everything covered in the article came from a reliable source, and, I think, left out any editorializing. I'd love some feedback. Thank you in advance. Andy M. Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andymsmith (talk • contribs) 19:38, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Andymsmith, I have taken a look at the draft and made some changes. The reason no one has reviewed it is that you did not submit it for review. I added a box with a button that says "Submit the draft for review!" When you are ready for someone to review it, click the button.
- I think it reads a little bit like an advertisement for the products or something the company's public relations department would produce. There is a fine line between an encyclopedic article about a company and an advertisement for that company. It would be a good idea for you to read through some of the articles in Category:FA-Class company articles to get a feel for what Wikipedia is looking for in an article about a company.
- I reformatted your references so that they will number automatically and be clickable. Each reference is named by the last name of the author (execpt the Business Wire one, which did not name an author). When you go to reuse references you can type "<ref name=Author'sLastName />" and that should call back the reference. For new references, before you were putting <sup>1</sup>, just replace the "sup" with "ref" and put the text of the reference where you would have put the number.
- I removed some references entirely, where they did not support the content in the article. For example, you cited a Web MD article about Asperger's, when what was needed was a citation supporting the fact that the company's founder has Asperger's. You cited an article that was just generally telling people what squalane oil is, rather than an article saying Beauty and the Bees uses it and why that is important. I've also tagged some places in the article where you do not have sources supporting information, and need them. I also tagged one reference with a failed verification tag - I think you probably meant to cite a different article from the same magazine.
- Frankly, I think you could cut most of the "Products" section of the article without losing anything - we do not need a comprehensive list of ingredients or background information on the farms where they are grown or the endangered status of the ingredients. If you leave that information you need to make its relevance more clear.
- Lastly, it would be helpful if you had more sources that really talk in depth about the company. The bare minimum for notability is three, and you've got that, but most of the sources in the article either provide background information unrelated to the company (e.g. the one about the farm where the ingredients are grown which does not mention the company at all), or mention the company briefly in an article about something else.
- At this point, I don't think the article would pass an AFC review, but it's reasonably close. Hopefully my comments above are helpful to you. Let me know if you need any more help or want me to take a look at it again later. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:00, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- I've also added some templates to the draft's talk page which may bring it to the attention of people specifically interested in working on articles about companies and/or cosmetics. Also, I see that back in August you mentioned on the help desk that you are a paid part-time employee of the company. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure#How_to_disclose to properly disclose your status as a paid editor. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 22:40, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Global watchlist - Update 8
Administrators' newsletter – March 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).
- TJMSmith
- Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley
Interface administrator changes
- A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
- A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the
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 request for comment asks if sysops may
place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions
? - There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.
- When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to 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 a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
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 Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed
.
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
- Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.
WikiCup 2021 March newsletter
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
- Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
- Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
- ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
- Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
- Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
- The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
- Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
- Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
- Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
- Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Being reasonable
Thank you for giving me a choice. J.Turner99 (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- You're welcome. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
ITN removal error
Hi ONUnicorn, an editor recently removed the Atlanta Spa shooting blurb from the ITN template stating that it was the "oldest item" from the list, but according to this comment [1], the oldest one was actually the 'Pritzker Architecture Prize' blurb. Could the shooting blurb be added back in, please? Thanks! Some1 (talk) 04:03, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Done ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 04:26, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
John Magufuli
You put this page under the Pending Changes protection on March 12, 2021. There is an IP editor who is now complaining that they are unable to save an edit to the page, see Talk:John Magufuli#Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2021. The protection icon on the page indicates that the page is actually semi-protected. My understanding is that Wikipedia:Pending changes protection should allow unregistered editors to edit the article, although their edits would then need to be reviewed. In this case it would appear that the article has been placed under PC protection and semi-protection simultaneously; at least that's my impression. Could you please check the protection settings there? Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 21:09, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Nsk92 I placed it under temporary semi protection for 1 month as people were adding unverified rumors about his illness/hospitalization/death (this was before he died). At the same time I also added indef PC protection. The PC shouldn't do anything while semi is active, but once semi expires it stops the article from being completely unprotected if vandalism resumes. Semi should expire April 12. However, now that he actually has died, perhaps the rumors will stop. Would you like me to unprotect it and leave just PC? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 04:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi User:ONUnicorn (talk) thanks for your contribution to Southgate Shopping Centre (Australia). However Grahame (talk) has made proposed an WP:AFD for that article. Please do a kind gesture and share your thoughts on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southgate Shopping Centre (Australia) whether it should be deleted or kept. - User:BugMenn (talk) 07:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirect
userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
- 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 problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
Question
Do you think I'm good at finding vandalism? Dr Salvus 05:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- It looks like you installed RedWarn yesterday, which is a popular vandalism fighting tool. The edits you've made with it since then all look fine. I cannot find any evidence of vandalism fighting before yesterday though, but perhaps I'm missing something? I did see your request to Cassiopeia from last week where you asked to be trained on vandal fighting, and I think Cassiopeia gave you some good advice there. At this point, I would say to go slow and be careful, but you seem to be off to a decent start. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
What do you usually analyze to decide whether or not to entrust rollbacker rights? Dr Salvus 17:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I look for a long history of counter vandalism work (more than one day). I look at the user's talk page to see if there are complaints about their reverts, and how they respond to those complaints. I look to see if they've received compliments or barnstars for their countervandalism work. I look at their contributions and spot check them to see if I agree that they are reverting obvious vandalism. I look to see if they are distinguishing between vandalism and good faith but problematic edits, as one should not use rollback for the latter. I look to see how they handle being told they have made a mistake - do they take it well or get defensive? Do they spot their own mistakes and correct them? I look to see how (and if) they are communicating with the people whose edits they are reverting. Are they using the warning templates? The warning templates are good for some things, but as they are generic they can be less than informative at times. Are they leaving personalized notes alongside/instead of the warning templates where it is appropriate? There are some cases where it's better not to give excess warnings; do they seem to have a feel for when to warn and when not to warn? Are they checking back to see if their warnings got any response? Have they been posting on AIV and requests for page protection as necessary? How have admins responded to their posts on those boards? Have they requested/expressed a desire for other advanced permissions? Have those been granted? Do they seem excessively eager to get advanced permissions?
- In your case I would not grant rollback without at least one month of solid countervandalism work, and then I would be hesitant. Your recent activity comes across as though you are primarily motivated by awards. Given time and hard work, you can shed that reputation, and counter vandalism work is a good way to broaden yourself as a Wikipedia editor. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Is it allowed to make mistakes? I have made excellent interventions but every now and then I have been wrong Dr Salvus 22:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Of course it's allowed to make mistakes! You are human, I am human, we are all humans here (except for the bots, and they are programmed by humans), and Errare humanum est. If you want to see some of my mistakes, search my Contributions for the edit summary "oops" or something similar. The question isn't, "do you make mistakes?" It's, "How do you react after you make mistakes?"~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 23:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- When I'm wrong, I admit the mistake and try to improve my interventions Dr Salvus 12:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC
- Good. That's the best approach. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 12:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- When I'm wrong, I admit the mistake and try to improve my interventions Dr Salvus 12:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC
- Of course it's allowed to make mistakes! You are human, I am human, we are all humans here (except for the bots, and they are programmed by humans), and Errare humanum est. If you want to see some of my mistakes, search my Contributions for the edit summary "oops" or something similar. The question isn't, "do you make mistakes?" It's, "How do you react after you make mistakes?"~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 23:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Is it allowed to make mistakes? I have made excellent interventions but every now and then I have been wrong Dr Salvus 22:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I admit that once I asked for rights just to brag, but I changed my approach. How can I make the whole community understand that I am no longer an Hat Collector? Dr Salvus 11:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Time. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 17:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I hope I'll be able to prove in a month or two that I'm not a hat collector. Let's change the subject, since I'm not a native speaker, do you mind if I ask you to do some copy-edits in the future? Dr Salvus 20:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would enjoy helping you with copy edits. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm glad you accepted.
However, remember that in order to avoid excessively stressing a user I am asking for help from more people by reducing the workload for a single person Dr Salvus 16:43, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Could you copy-edit Mario Noce page? Dr Salvus 20:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Done. I tried to give a lot of explanation in my edit summaries of what I changed and why. I'm a little confused by the "Early career" section. I left a clarify template there explaining what is confusing about it. It's possible someone more familiar with football generally and Italian football in particular may not find that as confusing. I think the article as a whole could use more detail, but it's a good start. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your copy-edit. Dr Salvus 21:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
"Polispostiva Catania 1980" is a name of a football team for children and not a youth league. Thanks anyway for inserting the "clarification needed" template. Dr Salvus 13:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would like the article List of Coppa Italia finals to be a readable article even for non-football fans. What do you think of this article? I also wished it was a FL but I made some mistakes that opened a discussion in the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1062#Problemswith GA & FLs|WP:ANI. Dr Salvus 16:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think for the most part List of Coppa Italia finals is fine for what it is. I'm not sure there's really much more you can do with that list article to improve it. The main article on the Coppa Italia seems like it has some significant information gaps, but the list seems fine. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
I would like to know if you have given this rating taking into account the failed FL nominations in which there are many indications that I have not understood since English is my third language Dr Salvus 20:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- There is saying "this list is acceptable" and then there is saying, "this is one of the the best lists on the English Wikipedia". FL is the latter. Some lists, no matter how hard you work on them and how good they are, will never represent the best Wikipedia has to offer, and that's ok. I think List of Coppa Italia finals is fine, it's acceptable. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Now I understand why you gave me this answer. Dr Salvus 21:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
What do you usually take into consideration to assign the right to pending changes reviewer? Dr Salvus 20:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Like with rollback, I look for the ability to distinguish between vandalism and good faith edits, but pending changes reviewer goes beyond mere vandalism. I look for the ability to spot not just obvious vandalism, but subtle vandalism (like small changes in, say, a wrestler's statistics or a film's box office earnings) things that at first appear to be plausible changes but are actually vandalism. Many articles under PC protection are protected for reasons other than vandalism. I look for the ability to identify good faith edits that nevertheless are inappropriate. I look for knowledge about sources, an abililty to evaluate and work with sources, to know what sources are RS or not RS. I hesitate to assign PC reviewer to someone who works mostly or exclusively with the visual editor, as the ability to evaluate the wikicode in the diff is essential. I look for the ability to read the article history and logs - to quickly see why the article has PC protection so they know what to look for. I look for someone who is active and likely has a large watchlist. I look for people who are active on the type of article that is most likely to be PC protected (wrestling articles, film articles, political articles, celebrities - those make up the bulk of the PC queue). I look for people who are able to evaluate changes and sources and articles in subject areas they are unfamiliar with. I look for people who enjoy working their way through a list of tasks that need to be done. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I think I meet these criteria. I can also recognize vandalism in non-soccer topics. But I must to shake off the Hat Collector reputation because I am no longer obsessed with user rights. Dr Salvus 20:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Now I don't ask any more questions, because you have been clear and clear and because I'm not desperate if I'm not a rollbacker (I can use Twinkle). Dr Salvus 12:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Rollback rights
Hello! Yesterday, you have commented on my talk page after you gave me rollback rights. However, it seems like that I still don't have them, (User rights log doesn't show it, nor in the preferences) is this some kind of an error, maybe? Thanks, Vacant0 (talk) 11:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Whoops! Sorry about that. I could have sworn I did it. At any rate, I've done it now. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 01:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Request
Hi. Could you undelete Draft:List of Copa del Rey finals? Dr Salvus 20:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Done. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 03:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Global watchlist - Update 9
Thank you
Thank you for directing me toward the "be bold" page! I have mostly been adding sources and interlinks in my edits, but this makes me feel a lot more comfortable when it comes to potentially making larger changes to pages. I really appreciate the help!
Redf1veXW (talk) 15:22, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Glad I could help. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
WikiCup 2021 May newsletter
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
- The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
- Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
- Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
- Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
- Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
- Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
- Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
- Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Interface administrator changes
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
- The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. 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.
- The user group
oversight
will be renamed tosuppress
. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
- The user group
- The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee 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.
Precious anniversary
Four years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).
- Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
- Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)
- Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
- Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.
- Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the 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 migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.
- After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.
unprotection request
Reggaetón Lento (Bailemos) has had low amounts of vandalism since the PCR, I think recent changes can handle from hereon out and thus I am requesting unprotection. Thanks in advance! (please ping on reply) Sennecaster (What now?) 22:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sennecaster I have unprotected it. Thanks for letting me know you think it no longer needs it. I am concerned though; as one of the reasons I added PC protection was that it has very few page watchers, so vandalism or well-intentioned but poor quality edits can linger in a situation like that. It might be a good idea to keep an eye on it and add it to your watchlist if it isn't already there. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Sunshine
Sunshine! | ||
Hello ONUnicorn! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 20:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC) |
Happy first day of summer, ONUnicorn!! Interstellarity (talk) 20:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Same to you! ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Bettina Walter
Hello ONUnicorn, I'd like to ask whether you could unprotect Bettina Walter which you protected from creation a couple of years ago. I've reviewed a draft for this person at AfC (Draft:Bettina Walter) and I believe she is now notable under WP:ANYBIO. Thank you and best, Modussiccandi (talk) 10:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- Modussiccandi Done. The draft looks like a vast improvement over the repeatedly deleted and recreated version. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
WikiCup 2021 July newsletter
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
- The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
- Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
- Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
- Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
- Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
- BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
- An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
- IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
- The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).
|
|
- An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.
- Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)
- Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.
- You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.
WikiCup 2021 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
- Jake Wartenberg
- Emperor • Viridian Bovary
- Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
- A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
Your help desk response
I am slow getting through the archives, but I thought you might want to correct your response. For some reason you are referring to a question two sections above, when it is actually the next section above.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Which help desk response are you referring to? I'm confused. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Oops. I copied it and then forgot. This response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, that one. There was a section between those two, but it got removed after my post. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 00:52, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Just in case anyone reads that question, it would be nice to correct it so it refers to the right section.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- How's this? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- That's more complicated than what I generally do, but it gets the job done. I usually mark out the inaccurate information and replace it with what is correct. But that's changing other people's work, and I should ask them to do it themselves.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:57, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- How's this? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Just in case anyone reads that question, it would be nice to correct it so it refers to the right section.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ONUnicorn,
Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.
Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.
At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.
There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.
Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Administrators' newsletter – October 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
- Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
- Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
- DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.
- A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
- Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
- The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
- Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
- The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.