User talk:Pkbwcgs/Archive/November 2018
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Abuse log false positives
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Why is my abuse log showing false positives of filter 856 when I didn't remove any revdel template. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:57, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's not really a FP, the filter is set to identify any non-admin changes to revdel templates. Praxidicae (talk) 17:10, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Praxidicae: The filter says "Non-admin removing revdel templates" so it is tracking non-admins removing revdel templates so I still think it is a false positive. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's not a false positive in the sense that adding "Billy Jack Bitch" would generate a fp for a new user adding it to the Prince article. Praxidicae (talk) 17:14, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Praxidicae: I can't continue to add revdel templates to articles if it continues to trigger the abuse filter. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- Pkbwcgs Why? It doesn't disallow you from doing so... Praxidicae (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Praxidicae: It will continue to trigger the abuse filter. The purpose of filter 856 is to filter edits from non-admins that are removing the revdel template from an article. I think the filter should be amended so that it only filters non-admins removing the revdel template. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:50, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- The filter is working as it's intended though. Just because the name says one thing doesn't mean much but if you feel that way, the complaint board is thataway. Praxidicae (talk) 19:53, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Praxidicae: It will continue to trigger the abuse filter. The purpose of filter 856 is to filter edits from non-admins that are removing the revdel template from an article. I think the filter should be amended so that it only filters non-admins removing the revdel template. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:50, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- Pkbwcgs Why? It doesn't disallow you from doing so... Praxidicae (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Praxidicae: I can't continue to add revdel templates to articles if it continues to trigger the abuse filter. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's not a false positive in the sense that adding "Billy Jack Bitch" would generate a fp for a new user adding it to the Prince article. Praxidicae (talk) 17:14, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Praxidicae: The filter says "Non-admin removing revdel templates" so it is tracking non-admins removing revdel templates so I still think it is a false positive. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
I am curious why some users still newly use this deleted template Hhkohh (talk) 08:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Hhkohh: I am look into this. It could have been added by default by ArticleWizard when going through that process to create a draft. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:15, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. |
Hello Pkbwcgs/Archive,
- Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
- Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.
- If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.
- We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.
- With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Stale Drafts
No need to bring these to MfD. Most you can U5, G11, or Redirect (like the train article). See Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts for guidence. Feel free to ask me any questions as I have a lot of experience on those lists. Legacypac (talk) 16:34, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Pkbwcgs. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)