User talk:Nick Moyes/Archive 21

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15 ← Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 → Archive 25

Adminship

Nick, have you ever considered running for adminship? In looking over your contributions, it seems to me that you are eminently qualified, and would also find the tools helpful with respect to helping newbies and dispute resolution. I, and several others, I'm sure, would be happy to nominate you. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:34, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Vanamonde93 - thank you very much for contacting me. It's really appreciated. The honest answer is 'yes', it's rarely very far from my thoughts when I'm here. I've been considering/working towards running for the last 18 months or so. I have been approached off-wiki a couple of times by Ritchie333 with an offer of a joint nomination, and did my ORFA back in April 2018. But since then I've been very committed IRL to a building renovation project away from home. So I haven't been able to dedicate as much quality time to Wikipedia as I would have liked, nor indeed can I commit to being available for a week's RFA right now. (My other excuse is that I hate doing a bad job if I'm not fully prepared; I'd rather put it off. So, whilst I feel 'moderately' confident of getting through an RfA, I'm less confident of subsequently being the good admin that I would want to be, and that our community deserves. So, right now I'm still watching and learning and trying to address some of my weak spots whenever I get an opportunity. But there are so many of them!!! Maybe later in the year (which I think I said last year, too.)) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:22, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
PS: Another worthy editor whose contributions you might like to consider looking at is User:Marchjuly. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Real life is always a priority; but with respect to "being the good admin", it is my belief that even a handful of admin actions every month are a definite net positive. I will take your response as a "yes but later", so expect to hear from me again! I confess I don't know much of Marchjuly; I will take a look. Cheers, Vanamonde (Talk) 23:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
+1, no better time than now. Run for it dude. Lourdes 02:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Agreed, and my/our offer still stands! Until then, I'll reset my reminder for October 1. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:15, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail (Sep 2019)

Hello, Nick Moyes. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 13:55, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Richard Nevell (WMUK): I got the email telling me I've got mail from you, but I can't find your actual message in my Inbox. So, could you either try again, or DM me via Twitter, please? (I have just discovered my webmail company appears to have deleted virtually every one of my past messages - and yours is probably amongst them.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:56, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
It might have ended up in spam! I just re-sent the message so hopefully that's got through. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

This coolness

Helpfulness
Thanks for being helpful! Mac Henni (talk) 20:38, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-36

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

Recent changes

  • You can use the new termbox interface if you edit Wikidata on a mobile device. This is to edit labels, descriptions and aliases easier on the mobile pages. [1]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki has been deployed during the last week.
  • The previously announced change of positions of the "Wikidata item" link on all wikis has been rollbacked due to unexpected cache issues. [2]
  • The limit for rollbacks has been increased from 10 to 100 rollbacks per minute. [3]
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (Recent Changes, Watchlist, and Related Changes) now include two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces. However the "All discussions" filter does not include pseudo talk pages, like discussions that are in the Project: or Wikipedia: namespaces. But it will include changes happening on Project talk: or the Wikipedia talk:. [4]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 3 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 4 September. It will be on all wikis from 5 September (calendar).
  • When you log in, the software checks your password to see if it follows the Password policy. From this week, it will also complain if your password is one of the most common passwords in the world. If your password is not strong enough, please consider to change your password for a stronger password. [5]

Meetings

Future changes

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

09:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

added Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
readded Floquenbeam • Lectonar
removed DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

removed Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

removed Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Nick Moyes,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
  • Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.
Not English
  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks and essay

Hi Nick. Thanks for your support at RfA. It's truly appreciated. You might also be interested reading in the essay I alluded to in reply to you. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:21, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you very much for providing me with many options to check out, I am working through them already. I will provide some feedback as soon as I can. 
Tvincent88 (talk) 02:52, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you very much for this, Tvincent88. If you let me know the best (and maybe the worst ones) I promise to view them and to offer the best to others at the Teahouse. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Nick, Thanks for welcoming me!, you know what, I got a nomination posted! lol, it's the death of Tonga's Prime Minister, nothiing happy, but well, lol. Thanks again! --CoryGlee (talk) 10:21, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey that's fantastic news (for you, that is!). A great achievement for a new editor to get a post on the main page. You'll go far! Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:28, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard - September 2019

Hello, Nick Moyes! Here is the September 2019 issue of TheWikiWizard.

We Hope you like this month's issue! If you'd like to discuss this issue, please go to this issue's talk page. Happy Reading! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:44, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Derby Railway Engineering Society (DRES)

Hi Nick

Thank you for contacting me.

I would really appreciate some help on getting the DRES page published. I clearly am not having much luck at the moment! There is additional content I wish to add about the Society including: a summary of the history of the society, what the society does today and a list of past presidents. This will also include external references to books, newspaper articles, websites, the society web site and archive material from the society. How many of these do I need to reference before the article becomes acceptable to Wikipedia?

Kind regards

Mark Zawisza — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markz55 (talk • contribs) 12:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Markz55. Now it's a draft, you can work on it for as long as you wish without anyone bothering you (unless you add copyrighted content). Drafts generally only get deleted if they go untouched (unedited) for 6 months. So feel free to add other encyclopaedic content when you have the time. The really key thing, however, is that you cannot base an article on an organisation's own website - that's purely free promotion. It is essential to be able to show references which evidence that other, reliable souces have written about DRES in detail. These don't have to be online, but they must be published and potentially available. Private Society archives or other unpublished documents just dont cut it. A 1920s D.E.T. notice of a forthcoming meeting, or brief summary of a past one are not sufficient. There will be many other groups (eg Midland Railways Natural History Society - now Derby Nat.Hist.Soc.) which would face similar challenges to meet the organisational notability criteria laid out in WP:NORG. So start by looking for three or more good independent references before spending time on adding minor detail.
BTW:I saw you had another article draftified about a Hotel. This stands more chance of being accepted, especially if you focusand expand on the historic Grade II listed conservation status and link to that definition. I'd be happy to give it a look over once you're happy youve investigated all possible historic sources.
Finally, it helps a lot if you sign every talk page post. Just add four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~) right at the end. Forgive all my minor typos here - am rather busy redecorating, and am on a tiny mobile device, and in a rush. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nick

Many thanks for the prompt reply. Most helpful.

I have updated the draft about DRES now to include more information about the society and I have included external references (books and websites) which mention the society in detail. Would you be kind enough to have a look and see if this "cuts it". I presume you still have access to the draft?

Thank you for mentioning the Grapes Hotel. I will try and find a bit more about it from a conservation point of view. I will update it and come back to you.

Kind regards

Markz55 (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Edmund de Waal copy edit

Hi Nick, Thanks for your help so far with editing advice and for sending me in the right direction for more information on what makes a good Wiki entry. I have spent some time in the last couple of days giving the Edmund de Waal entry a good copy edit to try and make it more neutral in tone, and by adding some further references as per your advice. I was wondering if you had the chance, could you have a look over the entry for me? I'm sure there is probably room for more edits to condense the text, but I was cautious not to remove too much information in case it was deemed necessary. I am more than happy to take on any further edits and advice you may have. :-) Fieldguide (talk) 08:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

My first wiki birthday...

Has happened! I can now say I've been on Wikipedia for slightly over a year. Clovermoss (talk) 01:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Yay - congratulations, Youve cone a long way in that time, haven't you? I've nearly completed my reply to you on our dedicated talk page. You'll see that I said I'll ping you when its complete. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

October Events from Women in Red

October 2019, Volume 5, Issue 10, Numbers 107, 108, 137, 138, 139, 140


Check out what's happening in October at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Do articles like this belong in WP?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_people_from_Jammu_and_Kashmir&curid=401745&diff=917445959&oldid=916518353 I can think of thousands of communities and states across the world which could have an article like this, and the list of people with WP articles is staggering. Most seem to be local functionaires. Again if these people meet the criteria for notability then so does so many others, including you Gees maybe even me ;)Oldperson (talk) 21:41, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, Oldperson. (You know, it seems somehow discriminatory calling you by your chosen username!) It's a good question, but the answer is "Yes, it does belong on Wikipedia". When it says "List of people from...insert placename here", it really means "List of notable people who already have an article on Wikipedia about them from...insert placename here".
Here are the first 500 search results for articles of that name. And all these 'List of ' pages can be placed into sub-categories of Category:Lists of people by place. The larger the place, the more sensible it is to subdivide them into smaller, more manageable regions. Of course, if you find an entry there which has neither a wikilink nor a citation to prove notability, then feel free to remove them with the appropriate edit summary. Many people like to add names as redlinks, but these generally shouldn't be accepted without a supporting reference. You can read a little more about what's ok at WP:LISTPEOPLE. I note that the diff you sent me was of someone who had removed a person from such a List. I checked it and agree that there was no evidence in the article that they came from that part of India. Sadly, nobody's written about me, nor added me to any interesting lists. Where I come from we're all so dull that there isn't even a 'List of' article about our area! Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Oldperson is quite appropriate. I am 8o years of age, and I am sure that you have reviewed my user page. I am lucky to still be around. My expiration date was May 2018, so I am good.Thanks for answering my question. I get flabberghasted by the wide variety of articles on WP.

I of course googled you and saw your youtube presentation. I think you deserve an article and volunteer to write it, if you wish. Just don't know where to start. I would say that you are extremely modest and would probably be guffawed (out of jealousy may be?) by other admins and editors, but could blame it on me. So where do I start? I could use a good project, while waiting for a snail mail package from Wright Patterson AFB,Ohio public affairs. Subject: List of Aerospace Primus persons. They weren't even aware that there was such a thing.Oldperson (talk) 22:56, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

It's kind of you to think that about me, but no, Oldperson, I certainly wouldn't meet our notability criteria, unless I start going on another a killing spree, even if perhaps two or three of the things I've helped create over the years do. I have held back on writing about one of them myself as I would have a bit of a WP:COI, so, unless you fancy writing about two hundred years of botanical publication of a part of the UK you've probably never heard of, I really wouldn't both if I were you! Come to think of it, I've been in many local newspapers and local TV over the years quite a bit (and even had an hour's 'Desert Island Discs-type programme about me on local radio, there's absolutely nothing whatsoever about me that's sufficiently notable by Wikipedia's standards. Unless, that is you go looking for the front page photo of me on the cover of the rather salacious The Sunday Sport national newspaper a few decades ago. But, as I was painted blue/green, dressed up as an alien, standing in front of this world famous painting, along with a news story about beings from another planet buying up the earth's artworks, it's unlikely that any citation you might provide would ever be regarded as a WP:RS! I think you'll have far more success extracting information from the Air Force Base - though I'm not sure I understand quite what you're seeking there. I do think it's brilliant how you've picked up editing Wikipedia, and it's certainly a great way to keep the mind sharp and active, especially in the face of the challenges you'd had to put up with in recent times. Keep on keeping on! All the very best, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Shite (using Brit euphemisms), if you "ain't" notable per WP standards then most of the WP:BLP's I've seen, especially on the link that I referenced definitely aren't. That said and done. Aerospace Primus is a select group of persons started by the Air Force R&D Command, which has since morphed into the USAF Systems Command, which has morphed into USAF Air Material Command. It's purpose was to honor the contributions of persons (men) who made contributions to the American aerospace program by being the first thus Aerospace Primus, amongst the honorees were Ed White (astronaut), Chuck Yeager, Joseph Kittinger, it also includes "nobodies" like TSgt James Howell who made the first faster than speed of sound, ejection from an aircraft (he was a live test dummy). Of course the Soviet Union beat America to many of the claims, but I think that the criteria for the inductees was that they were the first American whose feats contributed to the American aerospace program. There are a number of firsts that would also qualify,like those in the Apollo program but I never heard of the program after Ed White, thus my inquiry to Wright Patterson. I suspect that I will be disappointed, so I am not hanging onto the mailbox. I will just have to find something else that will pique my imagination.Oldperson (talk) 01:37, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I've discouraged a new editor and I don't think I've done enough to make up for it or if that's even possible to do

Hi, Nick. I've made a mistake. I wrongly assumed that AMarkMcLean might be a paid editor, when they're just a new editor interested in improving the Wikipedia article. I feel terrible about it, but I'm not sure what else to do. I replied on their talk page and made a comment on the COIN noticeboard about my mistake [10], but I'm afraid that it might not sound sincere coming from me. I'm aware that mentioning their username will give a notification; which is part of the reason I'm asking for your advice, as I was hoping that someone like you could be more welcoming than I have been in this situation. Clovermoss (talk) 00:05, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: I think you've done your best to say sorry. I've made equally embarrassing errors, and apologising is all one can do. Or try this. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:59, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I have done my best, but I still regret making that mistake in the first place. I feel like I'm a bit of a failure, you know? I think it bothers me so much because it's the complete oppisote of what I'm trying to do. I want to be welcoming and all that, I'm someone who enjoys helping others. I guess everyone makes mistakes, and I'm kind of relieved that you aren't angry at me for making one, but it's definitely a mistake I want to avoid making in the future. I hope that my apology was read. I guess there's no way to know that unless I get a reply, but I just wish that even if they have no plans to ever edit again, at least my apology had been received. So they knew how sorry I was. Clovermoss (talk) 20:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: Listen, as you go through life you'll be bound to make mistakes. It's what people do. When you're young, those little mistakes can seem huge - but they're not really, and they shouldn't let them eat you up inside. The most important thing that you can do is to recognise your mistakes when you make them, and say sorry whenever you can, both in real life and here. That you have done, so you should not berate yourself. Learn from life's errors, but I can assure you that the only people who never make mistakes are the people who never do anything. You know, it's lovely when someone comes back and says 'I forgive you', but the greatest thing of all is the person who says 'sorry' to start with. I shall only get cross with you if I find your one mistake here puts you off from developing as a great editor. I have huge confidence in you.
Look, we are all quick to judge others, and sometimes to come to the wrong initial view. Want to know what my biggest mistake and biggest regret on Wikipedia is? It was at the Teahouse, in full public view, about 18 months ago, when an editor who I remember thinking at the time was going to be trouble, came to ask a question there. For some reason I was very condescending and scathing of their actions, and, having checked for copyvios in their work, I accused them of breaking our policies. They said they hadn't, but I insisted (because the evidence as I saw it at the time pointed clearly to them having done so. So I accused them of outright lying. They continued to deny it and another experienced editor came to my support and also accused them of copyright violations. Oh, that made me feel clever (and right). Gotcha! Luckily a third editor saw things differently and far more clearly, and pointed out my error. The copyvio content that I thought they had added had actually come from that article originally and had been used elsewhere. It had been in that article long before it was placed on an external site. I was mortified! How could I have been so wrong? I felt terrible, and matters were made worse by me having to leave immediately afterwards to join the family for evening dinner. I made a very hasty holding reply, suggesting that I might indeed have been wrong, then returned a few hours later to investigate, and saw I had been wholly and utterly in the wrong. Not only that, but sarcastic and bombastic, too. Now, I could have said 'my bad' and moved on and not cared about their feelings, but I felt this (probably young) person deserved far better from a Teahouse host, despite my overall distrust of their editing motives - and perhaps it was that which had clouded my initial judgement of their edits. So I wrote them a heartfelt apology, not only publicly at the Teahouse, but also directly on their talk page. Things that have been said can never be unsaid, but they can at least be apologised for, and that's how we should all behave on Wikipedia in my view. And you've done that. The good news is: nobody dies from our small mistakes! You can see more of this sorry mistake of mine, and my apology  at the Teahouse and direct on their user talk page. The fact that about three days later they were indefinitely blocked as a sock puppet didn't make me feel any better for my error, nor vindicated me in any way. I messed up. But these things happen to us all - learn from them and improve for next time - that's all any human can do. To be honest - it's the people who don't care about their mistakes and their impact on others that are the real concern. You're doing just fine! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:38, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Poveglia

I saw that you replied to my conversation with Poveglia. It seems like he was trying to help me, but the user was blocked for sock puppetry, making me feel a little betrayed. Should I have trusted this user? Interstellarity (talk) 14:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: That's a moot point. Many very good editors get blocked and a few break our rules by trying to return to continue editing under another name. Some get away with it for quite a while. They are reasonable, constructive, yet are evading that block. Were they to be trusted? well, in so far as they behaved competently, then, yes. But can they be trusted not to do it again, who knows? I've had a number of young editors, some of whom I've spent many frustrating hours trying to sort out to get back on the straight and narrow, only for them to turn out to be blocked for sockpuppetry (eg JJBullet) or others for offensive outburts to others. I've never felt betrayed and I don't think you should either - just disappointed. Often, at the back of one's mind one asks 'why does this new user seem so competent?'. And it's surprising how frequently the answer is that they turn out to have been active here before. But you know that we always ask everyone to Assume Good Faith, so no, don't feel betrayed. Should you have trusted them? Well, if there was no evidence to the contrary - yes, you should have, and I assume you did. There's no shame in that. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:32, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Nick Moyes, Hopefully, I can move on from this after this user got blocked. Interstellarity (talk) 16:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
I see absolutely no reason for you not to. Don't take it to heart! I do remember seeing the name 'Quixotic Potato' some time back, now I've come to look into them. regards,Nick Moyes (talk)

We need YOU!

Hello Nick Moyes,

Unregistered editors cannot create articles on Wikipedia, but they can use the articles for creation process to submit drafts that registered editors can either accept and publish or decline. WikiProject Articles for creation is looking for experienced editors who want to partake in this peer review process. If you have what it takes to get involved, then please take a look at the reviewing instructions. To discuss specific AfC reviews, do so freely on the designated talk page.

There is currently a backlog of over 4000 drafts (1,195 very old).

If you know an editor who may be willing to help out, please use the template you are currently reading {{subst:WPAFCInvite}} to draw attention to this WikiProject. Many hands make light work!

Andrew Base (talk) 17:12, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Andrew Base (talk) 17:12, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

template test

Teahouse logo
Hello, Nick Moyes! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Wiki Adventure

Reading your response to Greg Dahlen on the Teachouse I thought you might be able to answer my question. I have created 5 Articles to date and edited more than 1000, been an editor since at least Apr 2018. Then last week a Wiki Adventure Template showed up. Do you know why Is everyone getting a template, or only certain chosen ones? I felt insulted so I deleted the template. Do you know why I received it? ThanksOldperson (talk) 16:36, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Oldperson. Users are welcome to delete most things from their userpage, and you did right with that template. Actually, it was the work of a now indefinitely blocked editor who seemed to take delight using WP:Twinkle to leave those messages on random users' talk pages, like this on yours. So it wasn't some weird automated process, rather the work of some weird person who has now been blocked, both for a lack of competence and for disruptive editing. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:06, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Nick MoyesI do believe that I know who the editor was. he was Jack90s15 that template showed up right after I made an edit,and the next edit was his. When I was reviewing ANI or some admin page I saw that he was blocked.Oldperson (talk) 21:21, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Update on Libya Wikiproject

Hello, I have completely formatted the Libya Wikiproject. There is only one if not two active members, so hopefully this brings more active members to the page. Here is the formatted page. I got rid of some of the clutter but I still have to change a couple things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Libya Max Pigeon (talk)

File:Teahouse Barnstar Hires.png CC BY-SA 3.0 Heather Walls Teahouse Barnstar
Thank you for your help and advice with Wikiproject Libya. I really appreciated it! Max Pigeon i
Thank you. I'd like to suggest you add a Table of Contents (see WP:TOC) - but at present there are too many sub-headings, and not enough main headings. So, for some reason this gas stretched out the TOC - perhaps because of the column layout. You could collapse some of the long lists of articles, and be aware of physical overlapping columns. I'm guessing you've used actual pixel numbers rather than proportions. So, on my tiny phone screen, the participant list is partly obscured by another column. Good luck with all this. Nick Moyes (talk)|
I'll look into it. I am on a computer so for me it looks fine. I'll be sure to look at it on my phone sometime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Max Pigeon (talk • contribs) 13:19, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-41

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

Recent changes

Problems

  • There is a problem in the visual editor when you copy or delete text with footnotes. It will be fixed soon. [12]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 8 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 9 October. It will be on all wikis from 10 October (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 9 October at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • The Community Wishlist Survey has a new format. It will focus on wikis that typically get less support. It will probably go back to the normal format next year. It is not decided exactly how it will work this year. You can leave feedback.
  • The URL of the Wikimedia wiki main pages could be changed. This is because the current URLs cause several problems. For example https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Main_Page would be https://www.wikidata.org/ instead. You can tell the developers if this would cause problems for your wiki.
  • There is a new technical community newsletter. You can read more about the work of Wikimedia's technical community. Subscribe to get the information in the future.
  • Advanced item Outreachy is an internship program for groups who are underrepresented in free and open-source software. There are seven Wikimedia projects about coding, documentation and quality assurance in the next round. Persons who fit the criteria can apply. The last day to apply is 5 November.

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

15:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2018/19 Atlantic Sun Conference men's basketball season

Hello, Nick Moyes. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "19 Atlantic Sun Conference men's basketball season".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Editing News #2 – Mobile editing and talk pages – October 2019

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Inside this newsletter, the Editing team talks about their work on the mobile visual editor, on the new talk pages project, and at Wikimania 2019.

Help

What talk page interactions do you remember? Is it a story about how someone helped you to learn something new? Is it a story about how someone helped you get involved in a group? Something else? Whatever your story is, we want to hear it!

Please tell us a story about how you used a talk page. Please share a link to a memorable discussion, or describe it on the talk page for this project. The team would value your examples. These examples will help everyone develop a shared understanding of what this project should support and encourage.

Talk Pages

The Talk Pages Consultation was a global consultation to define better tools for wiki communication. From February through June 2019, more than 500 volunteers on 20 wikis, across 15 languages and multiple projects, came together with members of the Foundation to create a product direction for a set of discussion tools. The Phase 2 Report of the Talk Page Consultation was published in August. It summarizes the product direction the team has started to work on, which you can read more about here: Talk Page Project project page.

The team needs and wants your help at this early stage. They are starting to develop the first idea. Please add your name to the "Getting involved" section of the project page, if you would like to hear about opportunities to participate.

Mobile visual editor

The Editing team is trying to make it simpler to edit on mobile devices. The team is changing the visual editor on mobile. If you have something to say about editing on a mobile device, please leave a message at Talk:VisualEditor on mobile.

Edit Cards

What happens when you click on a link. The new Edit Card is bigger and has more options for editing links.

Toolbar

The editing toolbar is changing in the mobile visual editor. The old system had two different toolbars. Now, all the buttons are together. Tell the team what you think about the new toolbar.
  • In September, the Editing team updated the mobile visual editor's editing toolbar. Anyone could see these changes in the mobile visual editor.
    • One toolbar: All of the editing tools are located in one toolbar. Previously, the toolbar changed when you clicked on different things.
    • New navigation: The buttons for moving forward and backward in the edit flow have changed.
    • Seamless switching: an improved workflow for switching between the visual and wikitext modes.
  • Feedback: You can try the refreshed toolbar by opening the mobile VisualEditor on a smartphone. Please post your feedback on the Toolbar feedback talk page.

Wikimania

The Editing Team attended Wikimania 2019 in Sweden. They led a session on the mobile visual editor and a session on the new talk pages project. They tested two new features in the mobile visual editor with contributors. You can read more about what the team did and learned in the team's report on Wikimania 2019.

Looking ahead

  • Talk Pages Project: The team is thinking about the first set of proposed changes. The team will be working with a few communities to pilot those changes. The best way to stay informed is by adding your username to the list on the project page: Getting involved.
  • Testing the mobile visual editor as the default: The Editing team plans to post results before the end of the calendar year. The best way to stay informed is by adding the project page to your watchlist: VisualEditor as mobile default project page.
  • Measuring the impact of Edit Cards: The Editing team hopes to share results in November. This study asks whether the project helped editors add links and citations. The best way to stay informed is by adding the project page to your watchlist: Edit Cards project page.

– PPelberg (WMF) (talk) & Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Your Teahouse response

Where did you hear that World War II started in 1941, which you said here? If you were American I would interpret that to mean that is the date we were attacked and joined the war.

But your country was already involved before that. The official date is September 1, 1939.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:03, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick, my friend. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:53, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
What do you mean?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Oh, wait, I looked at the current version of the draftarticle. It was corrected.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:00, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
No, wait, I don't see the problem. It never stated (in the earlier draftversion I saw) that World War II started in 1941. It only said he served in the war.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:06, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Forgive me for not replying, nor do I plan to beyond this post. Please just be aware you have been reacting to broad feedback given c.3-4 months ago in good faith, and intended for another editor to consider as they saw fit. I really didn't want to nitpick over or have to justify such feedback. How the editor eventually edited is up to them. Rest assured, I do know when WWII started. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry. I was just confused when I didn't see anything that was wrong. While I no longer answer questions on The Teahouse since my computer might not be able to handle the large amount of information and it's easier to keep up with what I haven't seen if I only read archives, I do inform people who don't seem to know their question was answered, and sometimes I get asked for advice or know what additional advice they need. It's helpful to know what advice is being given, but it's tricky when you can't see why the advice was given.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:12, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Personal thanks and clarification

Hi Nick!, I wanted to thank you regarding your response to the OCD issue. I can assure you assure you you won't have problems with me, at most, I'd repeat a sentence in the Current Events section where I do most of my work in here, but I quickly remove it, or it's removed by others. Some may not understand it but it's actually out my control. Though I promise I promise to behave at best as I can. Thank you for your kind understanding. :) - Iván - --CoryGlee (talk) 20:15, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: Oh, I really do hope you didn't think I was suggesting for one moment that everyone with such issues/abilities is a problem editor - and certainly not you. In fact, I read Wikipedia is ideally suited to take great advantage of many of their unique abilities. As I think I said, what I don't feel WMF is good at is helping people like me (white, male, middle class, middle-aged) understand the needs and abilities of our broad spectrum of editor skills. None of us can help having our own inbuilt perspectives on life; we each need to help one another become the best we can be. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:25, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I thanked you by Wikiedit, but wanted to make it clear that no, I didn't take it as you referring to me as a problem editor my friend :). I just wanted, wanted to make it clear, on the internet I just repeat words but try not to. To. LOL. Thank you again, and great article about the autism spectrum, Wikipedia is really inclusive! :) --CoryGlee (talk) 00:09, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

User:HeeheeYogen8

Good morning. In a rather mild sanction you have blocked this user for one week, thank you.

It appears to me that he is now attempting to steer clear of that measure by using an IP. Since 15 May this IP has done some 250 edits, all dealing with the above users usual subjects airports, airlines and destinations. The style and wording of these edits are practically identical to those used by HeeheeYogen8.

I don't know the precise regulations of en:WP concerning people avoiding blockings by using an IP. In my home WP (de:WP) actions like that usually lead to very drastic measures, up to unlimited bans.

Maybe you could check the problem - he is still continuing every minute right now. Thank you. --Uli Elch (talk) 09:30, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

@Uli Elch: Thanks. They do indeed look extremely similar. The only difference is that one has used mobile view (hence the tagging of Heehee's edits), whilst the other has chosen desktop view. I can reproduce the same minor difference simply by switching from desktop view on my mobile phone to mobile view on my mobile phone.
I have lodged a report at WP:SPI for a check user to investigate. If proven, it would be very sad to see an editor being indefinitely blocked for avoiding a 1 week block which I intended would have the effect of getting them to engage and to change their editing behaviour. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HeeheeYogen8. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
@Uli Elch: Following advice at WP:SPI, I have blocked the IP for 2 weeks, and extended Heehee's block to 6 months. I'm not happy to have to do this, but it's necessary if they're not going to communicate and simply continue to try to edit. Please let me know if you see other IPs suddenly editing in the same way. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your rapid reaction and your adequate actions. Personally, I do not feel exceptionally sorry, because from my experience it is a rather rare case that someone is ignoring the rules stubbornly to such an extent. Regards --Uli Elch (talk) 12:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi again, Uli Elch. I've just blocked a second IP address (User:70.54.66.250 as a suspected sockpuppet of HeeheeYogen8. Perhaps you'd keep an eye out on relevant articles and let me know of any similar suspicious editing patterns that you might spot from IP addresses or other new accounts? Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Good afternoon. The contributions of this IP fits the usual pattern almost perfectly. Thank you for your action. I will "keep an eye" on things like that and inform you in case I should spot something comparable. --Uli Elch (talk) 14:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

How do you do?

Hello Nick,
This is Interstellarity. How are you doing? I haven't talked to you in so long. I have been moderately active on Wikipedia, although I have been heavily focused on my life outside Wikipedia. How are you doing during the pandemic now that the world is getting vaccinated? Do you still have to wear masks in your area? I would like to know what you have been up to in 2021. Interstellarity (talk) 14:46, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Nick. I noticed that you haven't responded to my message since I posted it 11 days ago. I'm assuming you have been busy in real life for the past few months as stated on your user page. I hope you're doing well and that everything in your life is going smoothly. Please let me know if you need anything from me. Interstellarity (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Interstellarity Nice to hear from you but, yes, very busy in real life. Have just finished renovating another house for the last 5 months, and now have a new tenant installed. Have also been abseiling off my local cathedral recently to get our peregrine falcon chicks banded. And am happily double-vaccinated and have managed to avoid the plague, thus far, though have lost one or two acquaintances along the way. Yes, we wear masks in shops etc, which I still find somewhat unnerving until I see everyone else doing the same! Foreign travel very difficult - as is finding somewhere to stay in the UK now, too. One kid about to finish university, and another about to start later in the year so it's all change. I seem to evolved from singing the childrens' song "Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes", and now use it more as an Aide-mémoire for things to mention when I next hobble along to see my doctor! Such is life. Trusting you're well? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm doing excellent in life :-). The mask mandate in my area has been lifted although I keep a mask handy if needed. I'm also fully vaccinated. I managed to avoid the virus and no one from my life has passed. I'm going to be busy with school in the summer and fall while managing to put some fun in my life. I'm hoping that foreign travel will get better now that people are getting vaccinated. It is difficult, but it will get better sooner or later. I'm happy with my life and hope you and your kids (2 kids, I'm assuming?) are doing well and I'm sure better times are ahead. Thanks so much for your message above. Interstellarity (talk) 21:13, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to express my gratitude to you for your having jumped into that issue I was having with that other editor. Was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt at first, but then it seemed that they were attempting to pique me needlessly. Very glad for your considered response. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 08:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@CurryTime7-24: You're welcome. I could see that you were checking on a number of somewhat dubious edits, and I felt the need to do exactly the same thing. I don't regard that as hounding, but hopefully they will return with a better attitude. Do let me know should problems continue. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

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

Administrator changes

added Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
removed Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • 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.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

How can I add a source of a book?

Please give me an example of a source. Thanks Feldmarschall Rommel (talk) 22:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Feldmarschall Rommel Here are some notes and an example to guide you on adding a book source as an inline citation:
Cite Book template window, awaiting data entry in Wikipedia's 'Source Editor'. (click image to enlarge)
Cite Book template - autofilled from a Google books url. (click image to enlarge)
Cite Book template - showing all available extra fields. Note the Preview at bottom of the window. (click image to enlarge)
The key point to be aware of is that inline citations are inserted into an article, immediately after each factual statement they support. But cleverly, the software then displays just a small citation number within the article (like this[1]), but then displays the full citation against that number at the bottom of the page, in the 'References' section. You do not need to edit the References section at all - the work is done for you.
  • Every editor will inevitably be using one of our two editing tools (either "Source Editor" or "Visual Editor") to add text. Both of these editing options have an obvious Tools menu at the top of the page, albeit in slightly different positions.
  • When editing a page, just look for the button labelled "Cite".
  • Then position your cursor in the article at the end of the factual statement that you want to add a new reference to. Now, simply click the "Cite" button to reveal a box (a simple template) into which you can enter all the author, title, date, publisher, url details, etc., of your reference.
  • These two editing tools vary slightly in how they operate. In Source Editor (which you will have used for editing the Teahouse page) you first have to click "Cite" and then select a further Template button on the left hand side of the editing toolbar. This lets you select the best template into which you paste your reference details, according to whether you're citing a journal, a book, a newspaper or a website. There's also a Preview button to let you see what your details will look like before you decide to click the "'Insert" button to add your reference into the page.
  • If you want to avoid having to manually enter all the reference fields in the 'Cite template' window, look for the tiny button beside some fields (e.g. URL, ISBN), which is a good way to quickly fill out some of the fields. This means that you can paste in a value (like a URL copied from your browser) in the field, click the button, and it will attempt to look up and fill in some of the fields for you (there may also be a few seconds delay in working these out). It often misses out date fields, and sometimes gets author name confused, but it still saves time. But you will need to check every field matches the source. For online sources, though not paper books, don't forget to add the 'Access date' which is usually today's date, when you last checked the availability of the reference.
  • Click Preview to see the result before you click 'Insert to add the reference as an inline citation.
Alternatively, in the Visual Editor, if you click the "Cite" button, it starts by offering to let you paste in a url or ISBN number to a reference source, and then attempts to automatically look up the reference details for you. It's also not perfect, so manually checking and tweaking to get the best reference is advisable. Being aware that you can add reference details from within either editing tool is something that's not really made terribly obvious in the Help page, referred to above.
Although the detail of your reference is inserted right after the factual statement added to your article, be aware that the full reference text appears automatically at the bottom of the page in a sub-section marked "References". All that appears "inline" within the article is a small number in square brackets at the end of the relevant sentence. This corresponds with the number that appears in the References section. So please don't try to add your references into that section .. it won't work like that!

Re-using a REFERENCE; adding page numbers

To reuse a reference you first neged to give the reference a name (called a 'refname'), then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to re-enter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation. You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards, like this: First fact found on page 29 of a book.[1]: 29  Second fact found on page 114 from the same book.[1]: 114  Third fact found on page 117 from the same book.[1]: 117  And so on... It appears in the references section as just one entry, with superscript letters indicating each use.
You'll find it easier to allocate a 'refname' to your citation if you use our WP:Source Editor for that task as the Cite template has a very visible refname field for you to pop in a memorable name. You might also wish to read our simple tutorial on adding references via the 'Cite' button. See this official guidance page or this alternative one that I produced. Hope this helps.

References

  1. ^ a b c Willmot, A.; Moyes, N. (2015). The Flora of Derbyshire. Pisces Publications. ISBN 978-1-874357-65-0.
I hope this wasnt too long, and that you found it helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 05:30, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

1st Battalion, Parachute Regiment

Hi, Is possible to move this picture [13] to Wikimedia Commons?

Morus kot [14] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morus kot (talk • contribs) 01:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Morus kot: Good question, but a bad idea to try to move it. As a non-free omage it would almost certainly be deleted from Commons, whereas it should be ok on just this wiki. I'm no expert on Commons image licencing, but have made the same mistake myself, and then lost the ability to use the image entirely. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-24

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

Recent changes

  • Logged-in users on the mobile web can choose to use the advanced mobile mode. They now see categories in a similar way as users on desktop do. This means that some gadgets that have just been for desktop users could work for users of the mobile site too. If your wiki has such gadgets you could decide to turn them on for the mobile site too. Some gadgets probably need to be fixed to look good on mobile. [15]
  • Language links on Wikidata now works for multilingual Wikisource. [16]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Future changes

  • In the future we can't show the IP of unregistered editors to everyone. This is because privacy regulations and norms have changed. There is now a rough draft of how showing the IP to those who need to see it could work.
  • German Wikipedia, English Wikivoyage and 29 smaller wikis will be read-only for a few minutes on 22 June. This is planned between 5:00 and 5:30 UTC. [17]
  • All wikis will be read-only for a few minutes in the week of 28 June. More information will be published in Tech News later. It will also be posted on individual wikis in the coming weeks. [18][19]

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

20:25, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

The Curious Case of Kiaraakitty

Hey Nick, take a look at this if you will. I find it exceedingly curious that this editor's only contributions have been to Shane Jordan (writer) and Kiaraakitty. My hunch is they just made a bunch of random (honestly pointless) edits to Shane Jordan just to get their edit count high enuf to edit the now protected Kiaraakitty article. Whoever the troll is (I sure hope it's not an army of trolls), their game seems to have become more sophisticated. Unlike yesterday's blatant vandalism, I'm now unsure of how to proceed. But my hunch is that this user isn't here for good too. I mean, it's just obvious to me if you look at their contribs what they're here for. Very curious... If it isn't the subject herself trying to delete the info, I wonder how hardcore of a fan one must be to try all ways and means to do so. Kingoflettuce (talk) 16:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

The Shane Jordan edits just leave me scratching my head... Why? But I'm nonetheless convinced that she's just here with one true motive, that is to continue remove supposed "BLP violations" from the page. Anyway it's probably not worth my time much longer if it's going to be deleted, but simply curious... Kingoflettuce (talk) 17:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
And now she's reported me for edit-warring. Hilarious! Kingoflettuce (talk) 17:06, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Kingoflettuce: To be frank, I do have to warn you that you really are now straying into 'getting a block' territory, I'm afraid. I don't think you're seeing past your own work and how others view the content you've added. The editor did appear to give a half-reasonable edit summary for removing content and you gave none back, bar a revert and an accusation of trolling. Even in good faith you have transgressed 3RR if it wasn't obvious vandalism. That is not the way to behave - so always base all your comments and actions on policy, and communicate with the other users, explaining all your concerns to what you perceive as a bad faith editor, and seek an explanation from them, perhaps taking the discussion on sources to the article talk page to ensure openness. This edit does not reflect well on your ability to stand behind policy and to deal collaboratively with awkward users. I do agree their edits are curious - especially for a newcomer to understand about our noticeboards, but it does happen, and some of the tittle-tattle in those sources I would probably think about removing, myself. You also have to remember that AFD itself draws in all sorts of editors, so my strong advice to you is never (ever) revert content removal in such a perfunctory way again, and especially as this particular article looks likely to meet a 'delete' consensus. There are far better hills to die on than this one. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
It's just so curious, it can't be a coincidence - it just so happened that a bunch of red-link new users came to engage in all-out vandalism yesterday, got blocked, and then the very next day a supposed newbie comes along, whose sole intention is to make the exact same edits as the previous day's users?? That's why I sort of trigger-happily reverted their edits coz to my mind it was obvious they were 99% likely the same person!!! It was only when they brought it to ANI that I did a second take, but I'm still sceptical about their being a genuine editor. My work has virtually never gotten such intense vandalism so this is a scenario I haven't dealt with before. Thank you for your fair advice - I'll be more mindful in future, but let's hope things stay peaceful for a while... Kingoflettuce (talk) 19:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
WP:QUACK...?! Kingoflettuce (talk) 19:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Kingoflettuce: Quite possibly, but I've decided I am going to remove the fraud allegation section myself. I've spent some time looking at the sources and don't feel they are sufficiently strong enough to justify the section remaining. Even if the sources are reliable, they're mostly hearsay and unsubstantiated allegations, and our WP:BLP policy requires us to have robust sourcing. This one just alleges it is the subject; this one just repeats other social media comments and there are no charges or prosecutions mentioned. A video from anyone denying allegations would not be unreasonable under the circumstances, but that doesn't substantiate the allegations as being true as far as I'm concerned. We need stronger sources than these, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:43, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
No argument there, I now agree with you. (Even if I didn't, there's no way I'm reverting your removal! :P) I still think the subject herself is notable enough to have an article, but that's another story. Truth be told, I might just have gotten a little bit carried away/emotionally invested in this - it'd be my first ever deleted article! :( And I've created quite a few. Kingoflettuce (talk) 19:54, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Kingoflettuce: I remember the first (and possibly only AFD) of an article I created (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Hunt Painter) and it really does get one's back up - it feels like a personal slight or insult when content is deleted. But it's so important that you to stand back and react on policy and on evidence - definitely not on emotion. And always assume the other editor is acting in good faith (especially when they leave edit summaries). Only when it's clear that the new individual is acting badly is it then reasonable to revert obvious vandalism without an edit summary. So I'm guessing this is probably a good lesson learned for you, and perhaps I can ask you to regard this as a friendly (non-templated) warning to be a lot more careful not to get into potential edit-warring situations in your future editing. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Seems like it's friendlier in Derbyshire than Cambridge Bay, but fair is fair—should have seen that coming. Thought I'd never get blocked in my Wiki-Lifetime😅 Lesson learnt... Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

And now that the edit-warring issue has been resolved, I think we ought to do something about the flagrant sock-puppetry. I've lost count of the number of new accounts whose few edits have exclusively been to Kiaraakitty. I don't think I've encountered such a phenomenon before. It's rather amusing if not concerning, if I may say. Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:46, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

I thought this was a normal user, but looking at their contribs makes me scratch my head once again. [20] Emilio = Elisabetta = ??? What are the odds that so many new users are particularly interested in Kiaraakitty? It's like they are sleeper agents or something 😂Kingoflettuce (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Kingoflettuce: I tend to suspect that myself too, though (as I said earlier) AFD does draw people out of the woodwork. You could post a report at WP:SPI, and definitely add them to your watchlist (which I've also done for a month). I see you and Elisabetta both got blocked from the article for a week - something I'm not surprised to see happen, so just chalk that down to experience and reflect on the advice in our earlier chats. I'm not going to reinstate the deleted edits - the article looks doomed for deletion anyway, and I don't strongly disagree with the deleting rationale. And I've also spent way too long on this one (sorry to say it) seemingly pointless article to exert any more effort into it. Cheers. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Editing news 2021 #2

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

Junior contributors comment completion rate across all participating Wikipedias
When newcomers had the Reply tool and tried to post on a talk page, they were more successful at posting a comment. (Source)

Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:

  • Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
  • The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nick_Moyes/Archive_21&oldid=1044338738"