User talk : Xeno/Archive 33

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]

Arbitration

Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous

Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Eranrabl

Hello Xeno. Eranrabl's standard offer unblock request has disappeared off AN without much input, so I've no idea what happens next. Personally I would implore Arbcom again to allow him to be unblocked. It's patently obvious to me that Eran is not a sockmaster – he was a highly productive editor and never showed any signs of disruption. The disruptive accounts were clearly linked to each other, but not to his account (from which no disruption was ever identified). I can't understand why no-one has been willing to engage with my points about the behavioural evidence. His responses on talk since blocking have been reasonable and eloquent – not something you'd expect from the usual sockmaster.

The whole charade has been a bit of a farce, especially when the blocking admin claimed there was "pretty damning behavioral evidence" that him and SuperJew were the same person (they weren't). It does make me concerned that people are doubling down on a bad block. I won't gain anything from his unblocking, but IMO it's a serious miscarriage of justice that continues to bug me. If there's any chance for reconsideration – I am happy to be a character reference or be a mentor as part of a unconditional block or whatever. Cheers, Number 5 7 12:38, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Number 57: I'm not sure why it was so lightly attended. Following that discussion, there was further discussion of Eranrabl's appeal by the Arbitration Committee and it has been granted. I'm sure Eranrabl looks forward to working with you going forward, and appreciate you taking the time to contribute to the community discussion. –xeno^talk 13:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Excellent news – thanks! Number 5 7 14:19, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Did Eranrabl do anything wrong? Yes or no. I want to know if you (anyone) can believe people. Eschoryii (talk) 06:42, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I haven’t found or been pointed to anything in the contributions of Eranrabl that is considered wrong. –xeno^talk 08:10, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Consensus

I have been editing five years and I just read for the first time Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. It would have been helpful explaining that Wikipedia is not a democracy when I wanted to count votes. Just thought I would remind you when you want to direct editors to the principle of consensus. Maybe it should be added to the welcome to new editors template. Anyway you just get my random edits. I read and like your dedication. Eschoryii (talk) 14:32, 15 February 2020 (UTC) PS. Thanks for the response about Eranrabl.

That’s a good observation, Eschoryii. Certain things that longtime wikipedians take for granted might not be as obvious to those who are newer to the project. I’ll keep this in mind! Happy editing, –xeno^talk 18:27, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Bureaucrat chat for RFA - Money emoji

I've opened a bureaucrat chat for the current RfA. Your input would be most appreciated at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Money emoji/Bureaucrat chat. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 15:01, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Xeno, thanks again for your RfA nomination, but more importantly thanks for your principled opposition in the portals case. I don't envy the arbs, but as a group I think you all summarized the main ideological conflict well: how do we weigh civility with non-violent and non-punitive remedies? It's probably a bellwether for what the community will need to consider in the future, and I would recommend you write up your thoughts in a more cohesive essay; dissents are important after all. I agree with SmokeyJoe on the ArbN talk page: I see that firm civility line from ArbCom as being strongly influenced by WP:FRAM, and the realisation that the WMF considered en.wikipedia to be weak on civility. Maybe RH and BHG got a harsh deal, but this hard response was coming. I think between WP:FRAM and this set of ArbCom cases, the community is realizing that we need something...else...and the issues ArbCom has been dealing with will be kicked back to the community soon enough.

I'm glad to see the discussion about RFC/U taking off; it's one of the more productive discussions I've seen. I skim the RFC/U archives every so often for fun, and I always find it interesting how similar it is to WP:DRN and WP:ARBCOM discussions. ArbCom has hosted RfCs before, right? I vaguely remember a decision at some point where an RfC was to be held on a subpage of WP:ARBCOM and maybe moderated by Arbitrators or clerks. It would be interesting if something like that could succeed RFC/U. I haven't put much more thought than that into the idea, but I thought you might find it interesting. Sorry for the novella, and I hope you're keeping well. — Wug·a·po·des 23:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm still on this idea of a "suspended" remedy in consideration of a commitment to improve. I don't know that it would work in all cases, but some. Is it a half-measure? Does it put an undue burden back on the community to monitor the admin on probation and bring them back to the committee if necessary?

We're to have an RfC on dealing with harassment it's coming soon, I hope.

Interesting idea. I'll mull it over.

And you're welcome! Hope your adminship is going well. –xeno^talk 23:37, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I had seen the idea about "suspended" remedies and the reasoning makes sense. It's a half measure, sure, but that's the point of it, yeah? An option other than all or nothing. I don't think it puts an undue burden back on the community. If the admin were to keep their bit, they'd probably still be under similar scrutiny and taken to task if the behavior recurred anyway. This way it actually encourages early intervention so that editors can have their come-to-jesus meeting before things get out of hand. I'd say don't be afraid to try something new; it's how we got WP:ECP after all.

Adminship has been going well! I've been doing history merges of old cut-and-paste moves to help with the backlog at Wikipedia:WikiProject History Merge, and that's been a lot of fun. In another age I'd be doing jigsaw puzzles, but instead figuring out how to fit page histories together is becoming my passtime. Plus the Admin noticeboards are a lot more useful when I can do stuff other than participate in drama. — Wug·a·po·des 08:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Sword of Damocles, though? –xeno^talk 02:00, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Sword of Damocles wasn't my favorite song from the movie. To be serious though, if you haven't read that part of Cicero's Disputations (Book 5, parts 62 through 74-ish), you should. I studied Latin for a while, and one of my assignments at one point was actually to translate that passage. I feel like it frequently gets misunderstood despite being an interesting reflection on power, tyranny, and virtue.

Cicero ends the parable with the rhetorical question satisne videtur declarasse Dionysius nihil esse ei beatum, cui semper aliqui terror impendeat? which roughly translates to "Doesn't it seem that Dionysius has declared that no one can be happy who always has fear hanging over them?" It's also a great pun, impendeat literally translates to "overhang" (the root is pendeo from which we get the English "pendant") with the sword representing the "terror" Dionysius feels as a result of his own actions, having taken power and oppressed the people of Syracuse for 40 years. The takeaway I always got from the story was that the fruits of tyranny are tempting from the outside, but they don't bring true happiness; for all the visible laurels it comes with, a constant invisible danger hangs over. The sword is not what destroys Damocles and Dionysius, the fear alone does that. Fear led Damocles to abandon his envy, and that same fear led to Dionysius abandoning the throne and living among fugitives. Cicero wraps it up with sequitur ut ea existat ex honestate: "it follows that a happy existence comes from honesty". Vice brought about the fear, but virtue prevents it.

This is a long way to say no, I haven't really felt the ever present fear which Damocles felt (yet). That the community trusts my judgment is enough to ward it away. If I were to feel that, I would worry that like Dionysius I was not using my power honestly and with virtue, but in a way that made me justifiably suspicious of treachery. Fear is dangerous in-and-of-itself, and it must be kept at bay. So long as I believe I'm acting in good faith and that others trust in my abilities, having such a fear hanging over me threatens to make me ineffective and unable to serve the community. — Wug·a·po·des 02:17, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation- no I've not read it (and with your explanation it's perhaps not the correct descriptor of the situation that an admin-on-probation would be in?) so I do appreciate the Wug's notes. –xeno^talk 13:45, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Kudpung, you have long explored ways for the community to effectively curtail undesired behaviour from administrators. In the absence of an RfCU or BARC-like process, arbitration really seems to be the only structured way right now. However it seems that once an administrator is brought before the committee, it is difficult to create effective/acceptable remedies short of removal of user rights. It’s no secret that I would have preferred to retain BHG and RHaworth as administrators, if the behaviours identified could have been self-moderated. How would the committee effectively implement a remedy to allow an administrator to self-moderate themselves and continue as an administrator without throwing the issue back to the community that was unable to handle it initially? And without the administrator feeling paralyzed to act and thus not being able to demonstrate improvement? How long should the committee retain jurisdiction, and should they directly monitor or allow the community to do so? I would appreciate your thoughts on these questions, if you have time. –xeno^talk 12:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure that while the jury is still out on my Arbcom case and you as a sitting arb, that it would be appropriate for me to offer an opinion until Arbcom who is district attorney, judge, jury, and executioner, have reached their verdict and pronounced their penalty. I mean this quite politely as you are one of the few people for whom I have extraordinary respect. Nevertheless, I'll try to answer this without offending anybody. I guess the arbcom case against me might be somewhat of a challenge for the Committee as was the case against BrownHairedGirl, and possibly will be used as a test case - indeed I have said to someone in a private exchange within the last 48 hours, that as adminship is no big deal, I don't mind being a lab rat. I lived and worked without the tools for many years before I let myself be persuaded into running for adminship, and even then my RfA was a kind of test case in view of the research I had already begun into adminship and the RfA system. The problem is, as others have suggested, that it is nigh on impossible for a defrocked admin to regain the tools again through a future RfA - the reason being that where only 15 or so arbs decide on the case, 3,000 users who have ever had their wrist slapped or their article deleted are going to come out of the woodwork to oppose. That's assuming we're talking about cases for which there is no common law precedent in contrast to clearly defined cases of flagrant, excessive abuse of the tools and admin privilege (COI, socking, paid editing, constant misuse of deletion and blocking tools, and blatant name calling or harassement).

In the absence of an RfCU or BARC-like process, some admin have stated that they are open to recall. That's a system that might work, but the community prefers to go straight for the jugular rather than calling an admin's bluff to see if he really would resign his tools and/or run a reconfirmation RfA.

Yes, whether guilty or not, some admins do feel paralyzed to act - to the extent that people will call for a desysoping because the defendant exercised their Miranda rights on one hand, and accused of doubling down if they say anything at all - Catch 22! I'm also not sure that all Committee members are able to exercise a lawyer's neutral detachment and not let their decision be clouded by their emotions; we have seen cases where a Committee's mind seems to be made up without taking the time to fully investigate beyond the claims of a mob - many of whom are not even involved but who are there for the Schadenfreude - who demand to see justice done whether the defendant is actually guilty or not, or his/her extent of guilt. It is undeniable that on Wikipedia many like to see someone thrown under a bus. Once an admin has actually done a lot of good in their time on Wikipedia, and then brought to Arbcom by users seeking to settle old scores, the damage is done.

Some might continue to edit, others like me and BHG may call it a day and kiss the project goodbye, especially if they are already at an age when it doesn't really matter any more and may not even be fit enough to go for RfA again years later - I know I wouldn't; who wants to be an admin in their 80s? So to answer your questions, each arbcom case against an admin has to handled as unique, with the only possible solutions being either admonishment or removal of the tools (which in some cases is quite clearly a punishment rather than a prevention). Depending on the outcome of my case therefore, my options are to leave, or to become a Wikignome for years. Both will keep me out of the way of those who are determined to stalk my every edit (as some are already doing now), but where I have been successful at leading some major policy changes to fruition, my raison d'être has already been lost, where others who no longer have their tools (either 'for cause' or handed them in without a cloud) continue to put their technical and social skills to good use.

How long should the committee retain jurisdiction, and should they directly monitor or allow the community to do so? Would a "suspended" remedy in consideration of a commitment to improve actually work? I suppose it depends on the individual. This would require a change not necessarily to policy, but to process: like users are blocked for set periods on an adminstrator's discretion, so the Committee could also quite easily decide to revoke the use of admin tools for a while and see how the editor behaves during that period. The big problem at the moment is again: once desysoped, always desysoped, because there is no right of appeal. Appeal is a feature from which only non-admins benefit, and with the option of the 'standard offer', but for someone established and intelligent with the reputation of hard work and close to 2 million edits, to force them to eat humble pie will get the reaction BrownHairedGirl has chosen.

Some editors who pass RfA melt into the background and either hardly use their tools, or use them in safe areas, while others who are bold enough, venture into the front lines because someone has to do it. Others develop leadership skills which though not necessarily requiring the admin tools, enable them to get good things done. Yes, that Sword of Damocles is no understatement. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to provide your thoughts. I will dwell on this. –xeno^talk 15:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

In fact Cullen328 makes a similar observation here about temporary suspension of admin rights. I expect others will have suggested something similar too, but so much has been said about recent Committee work that it would take a couple of hours to read through it all. Disciplinary noticeboards have the unfortunate aspect that everyone, involved or not involved, is permitted to have their say and that was also one of the issues with RFC/U. In a traditional court case anyone can watch from the public gallery but they are not allowed to comment, while what we have with ANI and Arbcom however, is the additional drama stirred up by what is loosely (and I mean no PA here) called the peanut gallery. The BARC (obviously my play on the words of 'bark worse than bite') which I proposed with the collaboration of Worm That Turned was designed to avoid such an affray: The group's deliberations should be public and separate from general community discussion. The process should be considered a formal, binding process, driven by the community but not as open a forum as the Administrator's noticeboard, but it would have required the Bureaucrats, as our most trusted users, to slightly extend their sphere of activity. I think the comment by Swarm sums up well the intention of the proposal. Perhaps 'the encyclopedia anyone can edit' was originally intended to mean article content and that slogan is not wholly appropriate for the democratic and sensitive issue of handling user behaviour. In my opinion, on these noticeboards there really is often too much background noise - in an educational setting the students do not decide on the guilt and punishment on an unruly pupil or college undergraduate. The faculty or school board reaches verdicts that require severe measures. I know you opposed, but you gave your reasons. Consensus can change and perhaps now, nearly 5 years later, it's time to revisit BARC or something like it; it ended with an overall majority in favour but on the strength of the arguments it was closed as 'no consensus'. BARC was a based on the outcomes of two previous RfCs that were proofs of concept, and there was this follow up by a user who has since retired. Of the many high-level RfCs I have proposed or participated on, these were some of the more intelligently subscribed, What people failed to understand is that WTT and I launched the BARC RFC more to just test the waters by at least proposing something; many users took it as a defiant attack on their own precepts (mainly that an admin is guilty until proven innocent) and there were nevertheless the traditional detractors who, as usual, tried to turn it into another long-winded side discussion on gender politics, others used it for their regular backdoor snipe at me, some tried to discredit the proposal on the grounds of false claims of incorrect discussion procedure. Both RfC are nevertheless well worth reading again for any one who has the time. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:40, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Kudpung, briefly: such remedies (temporary de-sysop) used to be employed but not for over 8 years, I think. (It seems a bit punitive, to me. I'm also not sure if the community would still approve of it!)

As far as BARC, community de-sysop, and the like, you'll remember my never-proposed process (or "jury" tweak to BARC). Though perfect typically wins out, perhaps it's time for another conversation about the good. (Not my process. A fresh one, from fresh minds.) –xeno^talk 14:13, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

I admit that I had never stumbled on your never-proposed process. Probably because I missed the link in a related proposal. It certainly has its merits but its caveats in the summary raise reasonable concerns. My main concerns - like those in your project - aim for a system that unlike ANI and Arbcomn, disallows the participation of non involved users and/or prevents frivolous claims. As I said above, a traditional court case does not permit the yelling of abuse from the public gallery. Even the life of an acquitted defendant is ruined forever and with no compensation from the state or community - even someone who has been brought into police custody for questioning to be released later without being charged. Wikipedia is not a nice place for anyone accused of disobeying its rules even if they turn out to be completely innocent and perhaps the victim of spite or vengeance. That's why fresh suggestions from the fresh minds of people, especially those who are supportive, might not be a bad idea. But new ideas nowadays are becoming increasing rare, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose - even those fresh minds are going to need a stimulus. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Or you’re read so many that you just forgot =) –xeno^talk 00:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Hmm... now that was indeed a very interesting discussion, so much so that like so often, it was unfortunately confined to a user talk page and not more public. My memory may be getting weaker now since I am no longer as chirpy and fit as I was then, but its very interesting to note that I am still saying exactly the same things - almost verbatim - nearly 5 years later. Anyway however, for obvious reasons, I'm now becoming more and more disenchanted and detached from Wikipedia and by the end of this week I may be forgetting all about it forever. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:22, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Flowers and music

... on Handel's birthday, enjoy --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda =) –xeno^talk 14:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Viva flowers. It was a good idea deleting that; suggest you delete my response to it also per deny. Cheers, ——SN 54129 14:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Sure, that's reasonable: I've done that. –xeno^talk 14:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much! The fact that it also saves my blushes, of course, is a complete coincidence :) ——SN 54129 14:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

A happy accident =) –xeno^talk 14:13, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

SN, a happy accident to meet you here. I wanted to pass you some Handelien flowers, but debated with myself if that could be seen as canvassing. In this quiet corner: check out Handel: no "bloody" discussion, just a short exchange back in 2014. Could be a model, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:33, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Now then Gerda Arendt, now you make me feel small. I agree that if all discussions could be as short and civilised as that, where would be the problem? But, in other cases, when it's treated as a battering ram, you know...? ——SN 54129 14:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I have tried to avoid them since 2015, you know ...? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry!

Hi! I was scrolling my watch list on mobile and accidentally rolled back your edit on the Kudpung PD page. Just wanted to say: sorry for that mistake! I think I've fixed it now, but just wanted to meet you know it was an accident. :) Thanks, Puddleglum ^2.0 18:47, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

No worries- It happens :) Thanks for the note, –xeno^talk 22:07, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

j'accuse

I find the complaints lodged against Kudpung to be so weak that they're laughable. I also find your assessment of Kudpung's behavior unreasonable and your decision to remove his mop unmerited. While I have great respect for our admins that remain polite and unflappable in every circumstance, I think that attitude is neither required nor reasonable for all admins. While you may think that you protected this project by punishing Kudpung or preventing personal attacks, your actions today have only played into the hands of a certain clique of editors who took advantage of this opportunity to remove an obstacle to their plans. I can only assume that you've joined the "hasten the day" crowd. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Chris troutman: This feedback might be better placed at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung closed. –xeno^talk 01:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Administrator changes

Money emoji

Athaenara • DeltaQuad

Fishhead64 • Kudpung • Mikaey

Bureaucrat changes

DeltaQuad

CheckUser changes

DeltaQuad

Oversight changes

DeltaQuad

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Comment

Why does Wikipedia eat its young? Someday it will turn on you. Eschoryii (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I hope to simply fade into senescence like so many before me. Time will tell. –xeno^talk 21:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Pings

Your ping wont go through unless there is pure addition of text (no removals or changing existing text) along with a new signature. So this still won't work. GMG ^talk 17:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I've given up =) –xeno^talk 17:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

If you mess up a ping: 1) remove your message entirely, 2) repost the message in a separate edit with a new signature. GMG ^talk 17:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Jytdog bad news

It looks like the new case review of Jytdog has mountains of evidence lining up against him with little support. I know you must be involved somehow and I do not want any advise or assistance to me to hurt your standing or objectivity as a decision maker. Send me to another editor to help me. I want to add evidence on the notice board but I do not know how to copy forms for the next user. I do not want to offend or let someone else not be able to present evidence if I use the last template. I want three things in evidence: a)Jytdog's User page User:Jytdog which shows his support to the community, b) his talk page User Talk:Jytdog#That's all folks which shows how much he did and the fact that he would be missed by his friends, and c) User:Jytdog/How is an essay by Jytdog on how Wiki works. I would like these three items to help balance Jytdogs vindictive enemies. They are out for blood. I do not know Jytdog. Maybe I should be talking to a guy named DocJames. Anyway I only do things at the last moment. Please help if you can Eschoryii (talk) 04:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Eschoryii: Usually the clerks would be best placed to assist with this, but given the deadline for evidence is less than 12 hours, I've created a section for you: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence#Evidence presented by Eschoryii. –xeno^talk 12:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

You were asleep when I started to contact you, but the fluffly little man is gone. Have a good day>Eschoryii (talk) 04:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

That's okay, it's not healthy for him to oversleep. –xeno^talk 12:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

ThanksEschoryii (talk) 23:00, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Administrator changes

Cabayi • Lee Vilenski

Boing! said Zebedee

Jonny-mt • MarkGallagher • PeaceNT

Money emoji → Moneytrees

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork • WereSpielChequers

CheckUser changes

NativeForeigner

Oversight changes

Someguy1221

Daniel Case

Guideline and policy news

There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda. It’s hard to believe that was only a year past, it seems like a lifetime ago. –xeno^talk 13:18, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Jytdog

Is the Jytdog decision tough or very clear for you? Eschoryii (talk) 09:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I’ve not been following this one very closely, to be honest. Too much going on. –xeno^talk 13:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

You voted and you are still my hero. Eschoryii (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Aw shucks, thanks Eschoryii. –xeno^talk 23:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Mottainai case request

Hi Xeno, happy Easter. You linked to Special:PermanentLink/949718329#Response on the case request page; I wanted to bring to your attention the later statement, Special:Diff/949718329, in case you wanted to link that on the case request page, too. Cheers, Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 19:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out Levivich. –xeno^talk 15:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:MIXEDCAPS" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:MIXEDCAPS. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 23#Wikipedia:MIXEDCAPS until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:23, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy Happy

Wishing Xeno a very happy bureaucratship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Xeno a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! History DMZ ^{(talk)+(ping)} 19:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy Bureaucratship Anniversary

Wishing Xeno a very happy bureaucratship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:10, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Just wanted in on the fun, not part of a committee. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:13, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Happy Bureaucratship Anniversary!

Just wanted in on the fun, not part of a committee. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:13, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

My but it's been a year, hasn't it? Thanks for the well-wishes everyone. –xeno^talk 23:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Administrator changes

Malcolmxl5

John • TheCoffee • Tim!

Creffett → GeneralNotability

DeltaQuad → AmandaNP

CheckUser changes

Bbb23

Interface administrator changes

TonyBallioni

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.

Technical news

Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).

Arbitration

Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Bbb23

Why was this user bad? Did the community eat another of its young like DocJames?Eschoryii (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Eschoryii: I wouldn't say User:Bbb23 was "bad": they were acting in good faith while operating under a different understanding of the checkuser policy than the committee. The issue was that they chose to express their disagreement by continuing to take disagreeable actions instead of working to have the policy/interpretation changed via discussion first. –xeno^talk 14:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

It seems policy trumps all the past years, contributions and benefits to the encyclopedia. All decisions balance various elements and sides by the current decision makers but I would give more precedent to past contributions. Eschoryii (talk) 19:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC) Only my thoughts, no need to respond. Thanks for your responses to this and my past edits.

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Barnstar for your Admin work! — Sincerely, Dero 14:04, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy...

Hey, Xeno. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! CommanderWaterford (talk) 06:51, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:38, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:ABUSELOG" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:ABUSELOG. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 29#Wikipedia:ABUSELOG until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 19:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

Red Phoenix

Euryalus • SQL

Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

GB fan

Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Correcting Television screenplays categorized as Films

Thread retitled from "Television episode writer categories".

I agree with the move of Category:Films with screenplays by Peter Gould (writer), but just pointing out that Too Big to Fail (film) is a film and should not be in that category. --Gonnym (talk) 15:58, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Gonnym! I ~~will re-create and put that one back~~ moved that one to Category:Works by Peter Gould. Is there an easier way to speedily split? –xeno^talk 16:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I guess either don't rename this and manually move the episodes to a new category, or rename this and then move the film to a new category. --Gonnym (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym I prefer the latter. What about Category:Films with screenplays by Eriko Shinozaki where there would only be 1 extant entry after renaming. Is it worth having the category anymore? –xeno^talk 17:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

That's a good question. I really don't know. Specifically for Eriko Shinozaki, I'm not even sure if that is a valid category. There is no article (or even redirect) for Eriko Shinozaki, and that category has manga articles such as Kurosagi (manga) which are irrelevant and TV series articles like Tokyo Girl (2008 TV series) which don't mention him, and even if it did, it does not mention if he wrote it all, or if he wrote some of the episodes. --Gonnym (talk) 17:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym: Ah, so if there is no article for the person there need not be a category for their works, in other words? (Thank you for reminding me that manga series are not television.) –xeno^talk 17:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC) (looking at Category:Films with screenplays by Ding-yu Xie, is that something that should simply be deleted?)

There is no rule that I know of, but I'm looking at notability. If we don't have an article about a person, assuming that it is because he isn't notable, then why would we need a category for that person? But again, there is no rule that I know of. Maybe @BrownHairedGirl: would know how to handle such a category? --Gonnym (talk) 17:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gonnym, I agree that if there is no article for the person there need not be a category for their works ... unless they are so clearly notable that there's no question of a biog article on them being deleted. But if all we know about someone is that they got one of three screenwriting credits on some minor TV episode, then no cat.
I most often encounter this case with redlinked cats when I am working on Special:WantedCategories, and in those cases it's simple to just remove the redlink. But if such a cat already exists, send it to CFD as WP:NONDEF. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

BrownHairedGirl, thanks for the insight. Maybe we can look at some examples Category:Films with screenplays by Noriko Gotô (3 entries), Category:Films with screenplays by Song Jae-jung (6 entries) ? It would be better to propose deletion (rather than renaming to reflect they are television shows, not films)? –xeno^talk 18:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Xeno: is they have that many credits, they may be notable. So some research needed before a CFD. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

← BrownHairedGirl: ok, thanks. I sent the first to CfD anyway as it's a smorgasbord. If you have any thoughts on television films, please let me know below, as that is another large portion of the current effort. –xeno^talk 18:48, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

X201 if you have time, could you check why the petscan link you made for me still includes the results for stuff that was already fixed to Category:Television episodes written by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss (e.g. Winter Is Coming) ? –xeno^talk 16:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
- Xeno, petscan has some cacheing of results. It may take an hour or two before the updates show up. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  - BrownHairedGirl Hmm, I think in this case it's something else, as these changes were made back in July? –xeno^talk 18:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
    - @Xeno: Ah, I see the problem. Category:Television episodes written by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss is a subcat of Category:Films with screenplays by American writers. That's wrong: TV is not a subcat of film. And since it's currently categorised like that, the search is picking it up correctly.
      Here's a search which finds the miscategorised categories: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=17014855 --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
      - Thanks! Those will be whatever television someone else fixed since 18 Aug 2019... I'll work on that too. –xeno^talk 18:27, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
And what of television films! Should they remain as Films with screenplays by, Television films written by, etc.? –xeno^talk 18:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Xeno: the way I look it is that a TV film is both a film and TV show. So for the works of the great Comrade FooBar (the famous Ruritanian writer of marine biology romantic thriller comedy documentaries), there are two options:

categorise it in both "Films with screenplays by Comrade FooBar" and "Television shows written by Comrade FooBar"
or
Create a "TV films with screenplays by Comrade FooBar" as a subcat of both "Films with screenplays by Comrade FooBar" and "Television shows written by Comrade FooBar"

HTH. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

FTR, WP:FILMOGRAPHY puts TV movies under "Television", and TV movies are supposed to use {{Infobox television}}, so I think TV movies belong under 'Television' not 'Film'. FWIW. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@IJBall, WP:FILMOGRAPHY is about how to organise a list. Unless the list has duplicates, an entry has to appear under one heading or the other (TV or Film, not both) ... but that doesn't apply to categories.

Category:Television films is categorised under both TV and film, and has been for many years. Same for most of its subcats. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:30, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

BrownHairedGirl I think #1 probably. What of miniseries with very few episodes? This one has a lot of film cats already on it: The Shining (miniseries). –xeno^talk 12:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I am v surprised to see a TV miniseries in any film cats. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

BrownHairedGirl Yea, it seems not uncommon: The Buddha of Suburbia (TV serial). I suspect as media blends more (web series, web films, etc?) this will get more confusing... –xeno^talk 14:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree, xeno. At some points these divisions will be unsustaianble. Some of the distinctions already look very thin, e.g. between Hulu and HBO. And what about Normal People? Web series and TV series. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:45, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Miniseries is a TV series, same goes for game show, talk show, reality series, anime, etc. Regarding the web series vs TV series question, that can't even be agreed upon in the TV project. As of now, the somewhat working consensus is, if it "looks" and "feels" like a TV series - ~25 minutes - ~60 mins runtime, high quality production value then it's a TV series. If it's a vlog or a "series" on YouTube, it's a web series. Netflix and Hulu as far as I know, always count as TV series in that regard. But again, there is no "official" consensus. The Buddha of Suburbia (TV serial) looks like a normal British miniseries. --Gonnym (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Fuzzy at the margins... I'm going to keep cleaning up TV shows and episodes categorized as Film screenplays but I don't think I'll wade into the miniseries debate. A lot are noted as films... –xeno^talk 15:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Films with screenplays by Vince Gilligan, etc.

- JJMC89 how to get the bot to stand down on these now? –xeno^talk 23:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  - Fayenatic london helped me. Thanks both! –xeno^talk 11:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Television episodes written by Vanessa Taylor

A tag has been placed on Category:Television episodes written by Vanessa Taylor requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:54, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to populate it. Thanks for the note. –xeno^talk 03:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Fin

BrownHairedGirl/Gonnym/X201: I think that this project is done (pending a few edge discussions) with 5 days to spare left in the year since the error was introduced. I ignored television films, plays, miniseries, and 3 articles. This is the petscan link (modified from X201's), if you are able to re-jig it to find more erroneously categorized TV other than the exclusions mentioned, I will work on it more. Thanks for the help! –xeno^talk 13:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

"Legal issues" heading

Hi, Xeno. I see that you've been removing the "Legal issues" heading (or similar) as "lending undue weight" in biography articles. While they sometimes do, as in the case of small sections, they don't always lend undue weight. There are times that a public figure is significantly known for their legal issues. And blending that in with other personal life material without a subsection heading separating it may not be best in those cases. To have a section titled "Personal life", but for it to be three or more paragraphs of legal material? That's misleading and makes it seem that the only personal life material worth reporting about the person is legal issues stuff. Also, headings help aid readers when reading a section that is long. Are you looking to have it so that Wikipedia never uses the "Legal issues" heading or similar?

Please don't ping me if you reply. I'll check back. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you want to provide a few examples where you think the header should remain? Putting a heading "Legal issues" for what is often one very small part of someone's life-and doesn't contribute to the understanding of the subject- is what worries me. –xeno^talk 12:36, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I'd nominate Mark Wahlberg as an example. That part of his bio is weighty, and editors agreed it should be its own section rather than part of Early life. Schazjmd (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Schazjmd Mostly I have not touched large sections like that. Look through these edits and let me know what you think. –xeno^talk 16:18, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I did a spot check, and all the ones I opened were single-sentence "sections", and I agree that one sentence being given its own heading is undue weight (unless there is no relevant section in which it can be sensibly included). I'm ambivalent on the Brandon Browner edit. I think it makes sense to remove the subsection headings under Legal issues, but changing the heading to Arrest and conviction implies a single incident; I would have left that header as Legal issues. Schazjmd (talk) 16:31, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough - I set that one back to the original heading, with the subheaders removed. –xeno^talk 14:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Xeno, given the current length of the "Personal life" section in the Justin Bieber article, the "legal issues" heading shouldn't be removed from there. As for the legal material there in general, see Talk:Justin Bieber/Archive 7#"Legal issues and controversies" section. As seen with that archived discussion, I've been concerned about the amount of legal material that should be covered there.

As for this at the Halle Berry article? That incident got a lot of media attention and affected her public image. If mention of it is added back, it should be given better context, though.

Pinging Tenebrae, who regularly edits BLP articles, for his thoughts on all of this. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 04:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree that "Arrest and conviction" is misleading in Brandon Browner. Syntactically, that states one arrest and one conviction. But there are multiple legal issues stated in those two paragraphs, and "Legal issues" is a more accurate and appropriate subhead.

The driving accident is pertinent in Halle Berry since she pleaded no contest, indicating a conclusion against her in the case. This isn't an allegation but a proper conviction. While it doesn't warrant its own section, obviously, we'd be whitewashing by pretending this highly public conviction never occurred.

There seems to be a lengthy "Legal issues and controversies" section, properly, in Justin Bieber. I hope my thoughts are of help.--Tenebrae (talk) 15:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Are there secondary sources that explore how Halle Berre's traffic accident (20 years ago!) contributes to her public perception? Unless someone is notable for their legal issues, I'm afraid I don't see how cataloging every time a notable individual had an interaction with police or the legal system is necessary. (is the fact that Sandra Bullock had to sue her home builder relevant in an encyclopedic treatment of her life?) [as far as the Bieb's, I'm not usually touching large sections like that. Just the coatrack sections.] –xeno^talk 15:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I'll look into the Berry thing and see about re-adding material on that, but with better context (like I stated above). Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd be fine with something properly contexualiezed chronologically in the personal life section (1 incident doesn't warrant an entire section). –xeno^talk 14:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't give that incident its own section. Although I've watched the article for years now, that ~~a lone sentence~~ two short sentences about the incident had its own section didn't register for me. I should look and see when that heading was added. Usually, when I see such a setup, I will remove that heading per MOS:Paragraphs and because I prefer that a section not consist of ~~one sentence~~ one or two sentences. Even a section that consists of a few sentences is likely to get its heading removed by me. The "Relationships and marriages" heading that was there must have thrown me off. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:32, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Flyer22 Frozen: Exactly - I'm glad we're in agreement that a single or two-sentence "Legal issues" section (sometimes called just "Arrest", etc.) isn't generally appropriate for article subjects notable for unrelated reasons. I imagine there's an easier way to identify such sections based on length rather than just clicking randomly here. As for Berry, the section was created in this good faith edit which also looked to be an attempt to remedy undue weight given (at the time, via placement at the beginning of a Personal life section that had been unnecessarily subsectioned). Looking further back, this was set as such in this good faith edit. –xeno^talk 12:40, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Looks like that detail on the incident should be re-added, but with perhaps one or two different sources, and, as already mentioned, with material on how it affected her public image. The "some in the media complained that her misdemeanor hit and run charge was preferential treatment" piece touches on perception, but doesn't specifically mention "public image." I'm also wondering if it's better covered in her Personal life section or Public image section. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 06:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

If the argument for inclusion is that it affected her public perception then I think you're on the right track with the public image section. –xeno^talk 12:04, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

Eddie891

Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration

A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Arb figures

Hi, didn't you increment/decrement the wrong figures here [2]? If you moved from accept to decline, you should have changed "5/8" to "4/9", not to "6/7". Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

(facepalm) editing prior to coffee: guilty as charged. Thanks for the note =) –xeno^talk 12:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment

Hi there. I was looking at the Warner Bros Interactive page and I noticed it is still part of Home Entertainment. Other pages state that it is part of Warner Bros Entertainment directly while Home Entertainment is moved to WarnerMedia Commercial. Which one is true? WarnerBros.com site states it is still a division of Home Entertainment. Is that an error? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galagahunt (talk • contribs) 16:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Galagahunt: I found this press release cited in Warner Bros. Home Entertainment which said on 7 Aug 2020 that "Warner Bros. Interactive remains part of the Studios and Networks group". Does that help? –xeno^talk 17:08, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. It looked like nobody cares about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galagahunt (talk • contribs) 18:29, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I saw that Warner Bros Interactive page remains same. But what about other articles (Warner Bros. Entertainment)? They contradict each other now, and they should be fixed too according to Warner Bros. com.

Forgot to mention, press release says Home Entertainment is now part of a new commercial unit. Maybe Warner Bros. com isn't updated yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galagahunt (talk • contribs) 13:09, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Galagahunt: This is under discussion at talk:Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. –xeno^talk 13:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

Ajpolino • LuK3

Jackmcbarn

Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM

There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely 1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created.

Technical news

The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).

Arbitration

The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.

Miscellaneous

The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Bot-like edits not stopping

I have noticed that User:AndriiDr has not stopped their mass edits of articles that contain the term 'Kiev'. I've warned them to stop and to contribute to the discussion at AN (as well as tagged the last edit prior to the warning, so as to provide a marker for other editors to evaluate if they heeded the warning or not). I know how busy you are, but there is another discussion at AN about the uptick in Ukrainian-related articles being made by sudden visitors from - you guessed it - Ukraine. I think there is a deeper problem brewing here. What would you advise? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Jack Sebastian: AndriiDr appears to have slowed down in both rate and volume and I see there discussions are ongoing at AN, and it has been pointed out that WP:ARBEE should cover this topic area and arbitration enforcement is available should disruption recur. –xeno^talk 12:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Administrator changes

John M Wolfson

Bduke • Nilfanion • Philosopher • Rspeer • Yunshui

Interface administrator changes

TonyBallioni

CheckUser changes

EdJohnston • Oshwah • Yamla

Yunshui

Oversight changes

Anarchyte

Yunshui

Guideline and policy news

Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.

Arbitration

The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.

Miscellaneous

A reminder that standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. (American Politics 2 Arbitration case).

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Wrapper

Template:Wrapper has been nominated for merging with Template:Wrapper template. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:34, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Automatically prioritized California articles

A tag has been placed on Category:Automatically prioritized California articles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:16, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

Izno

Guideline and policy news

There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.

Technical news

Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.

Arbitration

Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Xeno! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Xeno: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Administrator changes

Hammersoft

Andres • Brion VIBBER • Rkitko • Thatcher

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek • Primefac

Oversight changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek

Joe Roe

Guideline and policy news

Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.

Technical news

You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

Arbitration

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Tendering resignation (Xeno)

I have very recently accepted an upcoming role with the Foundation to help facilitate the second phase of the meta:Universal Code of Conduct consultations investigating key enforcement questions. To protect the integrity of internal committee deliberations, I am humbly tendering my resignation from the Arbitration Committee.

Strong community governance is paramount to the ongoing health and longevity of our projects. My goal will be to ensure community concerns are clearly communicated and considered by the drafting committee while working to demonstrate that community enforcement mechanisms can adequately handle the additional burdens that may be placed on the Foundation and project volunteers by public policy changes.

I enjoyed working with last year's committee and look forward to serving the community in this more focused role. I hope that you will be willing to share with me any general or specific concerns concerning the Universal Code of Conduct, especially as it relates to enforcement. I will act as a conduit for community ideas, questions, and change requests.

Please feel free to let me know if you have any questions.

–xeno^talk 01:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Link to noticeboard discussion on this topic

"Wikipedia:BW" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:BW. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 23#Wikipedia:BW until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. --C o r t e x ^💬talk 11:34, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for your ongoing attention to matters of moderation and safety for Wikimedia community administrators. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:45, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The coffee and the kind words are much appreciated, and thank you for all your insights that I'm coming across! –xeno^talk 00:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

79.67.12.41

Can user:79.67.12.41 please be blocked for triggering the filter. CLCStudent (talk) 01:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi CLCStudent: it looks like they haven't triggered a filter or made a further edit since GW's warning. –xeno^talk 02:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

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

Administrator changes

Hog Farm

Mattflaschen • Nandesuka • Savidan • Wangi

CheckUser changes

Berean Hunter • Xeno

Oversight changes

Someguy1221 • Xeno

Arbitration

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.

Miscellaneous

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!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

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

Administrator changes

TJMSmith

Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

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.

Technical news

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).

Arbitration

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.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Cookies!

Cookies!

Alicced has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hello mrXeno, my name is 5corp10n. Im a grade 12 learner who is hoping to get a mentor/tutor at editing, i have very little skills, I way hoping that you can help me unlock my potentie, Because it has always be my dream to be a publisher.

I hope ill hear from you soon 5C0RP10N 0418 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5CORP10N 0418 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

5CORP10N 0418 has eaten your {{subst:cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{subst:cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

!

5CORP10N 0418 thank you for the message and also helping me finish off the cookies Pink Saffron was kind enough to leave me! I would be happy to try and help you as you begin editing on Wikipedia more, though my time is somewhat limited. My first suggestion is to not post too much personal information, and take a look through the links I left on your user page. After that you could ask a user marked as available here: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters for more in-depth assistance, or just post messages on my talk page with questions. –xeno^talk 17:14, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anxhela_Peristeri

Resolved

Hallo there, my name is Aneglos-Philip Mitsis from Cologne /Germany. I have a huge problem with an editor/administrator(?). His Name is laof2017. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Iaof2017) I have added documented information to an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anxhela_Peristeri) that her father is of Greek origin and this is also proven with the link to an interview with her:

https: // eurovisionfun. com / en / 2020/12 / anxhela-peristeri-karma-will-remain-in-albanian-for-eurovision-video /

The administrator / editor laof 2017 deleted the change! That was an important information about the singer's biography !! Please help me!

he wrote me that I hade attach proofs in albanian language allthogh I wrote ir in the englisch version of wikipedia! He attacked also with inappropriate words in german,what you can see in his disskussion site! I am new here and I thought Wikipedia has nothing with prejudice or hatred.He rejected my amendenment because I am greek.. I feel desperate,pleas help me..whta can I do..?

my regards A.Ph. Mitsis

--Angelos-Philip M. (talk) 16:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Really? Lorik17 (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Angelos-Philip M., I understand it can be frustrating to have your changes undone, especially when thought appropriate. Please note that Wikipedia:Bureaucrats have no special role in content or conduct matters, and I don't speak German, certainly no Greek; despite "Xeno" - I am a stranger [pun intended] to this dispute. I think it would be best to comment on content, rather than contributors - and notice Lorik17 disputed the addition of the claim at Talk:Anxhela_Peristeri: this would be the best place to discuss changes to that article. I noticed another administrator, El_C had also taken a look at this subject. If you need further help with editing disputes, I would recommend visiting the WP:Teahouse for further guidance on next steps as my time for response is limited. –xeno^talk 17:08, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

sorry this was just a repeat of my question , so I had to delet it, sorry for causing troubles..

--Angelos-Philip M. (talk) 18:13, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

No apology needed, I’m glad that this dispute has been resolved. –xeno^talk 13:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Paid editing and Nightingale College

[[3]]

I found your exhaustive RFC preparation inspiring but depressing. Nightingale College has a history of paid editors. It is to the point were the editors now want to put the article up for AfD because they don't want any criticism on the page. There is massive WP:Wikilawyering. I have seen these before with other articles. A well established group of editors, with the same POV, make the article completely and totally criticism free.

Any advice on how I can avoid your same plight, having to spend hours and hours and hours proving WP:COI etc. I would deeply appreciate it. IF you can take a second to look at the talk page. I would be most grateful. I deeply believe that paid editors are only worse than people who bully new editors and delete content. Infinitepeace (talk) 13:43, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Infinitepeace: I will have to take a look in more detail later. Briefly, your post at WT:COI probably belongs at WP:COI/N if you are trying to address a specific article/issue, rather than discuss the guideline in general. MarioGom is also active in this space. –xeno^talk 13:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I'll have a look. There seems to be activity possibly related to a UPE sockfarm I have on my watchlist. Infinitepeace: in the mean time, since you're blocked, I'd suggest that you step back from this, rather than risking making things worse for yourself. Best, MarioGom (talk) 14:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Just to be clear: I'm not saying that the users in direct conflict with Infinitepeace are UPE, and I'm not really sure yet there's enough evidence on other activity to take anything to WP:COIN. MarioGom (talk) 14:31, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

For the record, since this conversation has been quoted elsewhere: I did review the page. Most users involved are established users and certainly have no COI issue. On the other hand, there seems to be issues with ongoing litigation and the reverted content was reverted for a good reason. I won't be further involved in this issue. MarioGom (talk) 20:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

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

Administrator changes

Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

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.

Technical news

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)

Arbitration

A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Perspectives on Paid editing

Thread retitled from "Thank you".

Regardless of the outcome, I'd like to thank you for giving me another opportunity at gaining a new perspective on the situation. Jacobmcpherson (talk) 19:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Jacobmcpherson: Perhaps I should have given you a bit more guidance on your block appeal. I don't think right now it's obvious that you're appealing a partial block, and there has not been enough attention. Paid editing on Wikipedia is in a really weird spot, where some editors really don't want it (and act like it's prohibited), some editors begrudgingly tolerate it (but generally won't speak up against the former group), some editors are fairly neutral on the subject (often noting that whether an editor is paid or not is largely irrelevant - it is the content that needs to be examined for encyclopedic merit), some editors welcome it (as long as appropriate deference is given to site purpose by paid editors), and so forth. The actual guideline is that paid editing is allowed while it discourages direct publishing of changes. There are some editors and administrators who take a very strict view of discouraged (that to me, seems more like prohibiting). The issue is that many paid editors don't take the time to genuinely and sincerely adapt their editing to meet the project's core ideals. If you were to do that, you'd have an easier path to integrating into the community. One suggestion might be to start undertaking non-paid edits! Edit on a subject that is completely and entirely neutral to you, without accepting payment for those edits. This will help you demonstrate you know how and are willing to make proper encyclopedic edits, even as you take payment for other activities. –xeno^talk 13:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Jacobmcpherson: This is good advice. It is much easier to stay within the constraints when you are familiar with working within them. You will get more slack and friendly help when there is no question of a conflict of interests. When you understand what belongs in the encyclopedia and what does not, it will be easier to make paid contributions which have a chance of sticking, and will be able to advise your clients when they want something inappropriate. (I am one of the people who consider the payment to be irrelevant, and judge the quality of the work, not who does it, or even why they do it.) In this way you could become a valuable contributor, rather than a burden on the community. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 07:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Looks like you're getting paid for all these deletions! Cheers. Drmies (talk) 00:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I will definitely share this on in real life if I ever meet a Twinkle developer. That is one scary beast to behold! –xeno^talk 00:16, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The new ones

One of the things I realized early on when coming to Wikipedia was how important it is for us to continually grow our editor base. If we want to achieve the goal of providing the sum of all human knowledge, we need to be welcoming to all who can help with this challenging task.

Our old adage is important advice for us to follow. What I’ve noticed is that being brusque with newcomers will cause them to leave, counter to our goal. It makes me sad when I see that happening, as providing a welcoming and inclusive environment is necessary to our goals.

Meanwhile, I imagine it can be somewhat frustrating to continually have to give the same advice to newcomer after newcomer, and reminding a new editor to cite reliable sources for the 1000th time can be irritating. Another editor's comment helped me to achieve perspective: even though it might be my thousandth time giving the same advice, that contributor is hearing this advice (or possibly even hearing from another editor) for the very first time. What feeling do I want them to experience when hearing from me? The feeling of being dismissed, excluded, or treated unfairly? Or the feeling of collaborative spirit that embodies our project? Our project ideals hold that we must not be abrasive with new editors, even (or especially) when we’re tired of saying the same things over-and-over.

I imagine it may seem like there is a never-ending deluge of edits requiring improvement from newcomers. This is, of course, true. It is also what makes Wikipedia great. We should always be trying to constructively improve on each other’s work with every edit or comment. Appreciate that there is no deadline, and if you’re feeling tired or frustrated dealing with the same issues over-and-over, to take some time off from that work task! Try focusing on another area of the project and come back later, with a refreshed enthusiasm. Someone else can handle it: it's a collaborative project, after all. –xeno^talk

Adapted from coursework for a wikilearn course (wikidata:Q105945892). –xeno^talk 17:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

For further details, see fr:Projet:Lutte contre le harcèlement/Formations WMF (machine translation). @Nattes à chat, Anthere, Kvardek du, and Nehaoua: & others: is there any En- version started? –xeno^talk 17:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey xeno, thanks for the question! There is no version in English for now, feel free to start one :) (we have the notes on the Moodle that seem a good basis) Kvardek du (talk) 21:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
As I recall, when developing Stack Overflow, Jeff Atwood wrote about how online communities need a pipeline to forestall the tedium of responding to newcomers over and over: new community members should gain confidence to be experienced members, answering questions from subsequent newer members, thus allowing those previously filling that role to move on (if they wish) to do other things. isaacl (talk) 14:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC),

I am only doing it in French. I am late actually, the last course was not documented. Nattes à chat (talk) 12:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Was sad after the DST mix up Nattes à chat, have you been able to see the first hour recording? Were you there when this was shown (I think it's an important page vis-à-vis responders). –xeno^talk 12:42, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

We only turn a tiny tiny proportion of trialists into regulars. If we think of every person who creates an account and does an edit or five as a potential regular we are failing badly. If we think of them as Wikipedia readers who might not come across something else they want to fix for years and probably create a new account when they do, then we are doing a great job. One problem is that we don't know what proportion of trialists are people who are looking for a new hobby, and as HJMitchell once said of outreach we are selling a hobby. Where I think we are failing badly with newbies is that our de facto rules are stricter than the published ones that we tell everyone about. So people learn that unsourced edits are no longer welcome, but they don't learn that from the system, they learn it from a harassed volunteer. Probably after they have had an edit rejected. I think that DE has a system that at least prompts newbies for their source. I think we should move in that direction - systems should be setup so that the human side seems to soften the rules rather than harshen them. Ϣere SpielChequers 17:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

So I got a little discouraged after the DST mix up but will catch up. I will continue writing in French and then I can translate parts in English. Would be great if we could continue to meet, I can provide BBB online meeting platform Nattes à chat (talk) 17:25, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Two years??? Why does it feel as if it was 5... –xeno^talk 20:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

OotP

Hi! It's been a few years since we spoke, but nice to see you are still around and editing !! I can't believe it was 12 years ago we put up those banners :¬)

I just dropped by to say hi, but was intrigued to see your top message and thought you might be interested in this.
It seems that even when we try to do something to change things, it ends up getting strangled ... that one only lasted 6 months before it was dead!
I only just found out that it was dead after a user asked me about a blank page there.

Very sad, I helped set up all the pages and some of the policy, then had to go away for a while and dropped out of the guides program.
So strange, as it had involvement from several of the WikiFoundation team trying to increase editor retention, I figured that was one project that would stay around for a few years! Chaosdruid (talk) 17:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Chaosdruid, great to see you around too! I know the Growth team is about to deploy a test on EnWiki to try to increase editor retention. See: Wikipedia talk:Growth Team features/Archive 1#Potential plan for experimental deployment. As far as blasts from the past, I think wiki-adoption is still around in some form, at least. –xeno^talk 20:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I took a Wikivoyage in other clothes ...

They have a process there called "sweeping the wikivoyage:Travellers' pub” (where substantive discussions that occur on the Village pump get archived to the talk page of the relevant place) which I'll probably bring to the idea lab. WhatamIdoing: any thoughts on their process? (Is it unique? Does it scale?) –xeno^talk 20:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

“

Experienced users: Please sweep the pub

Keeping the pub clean is a group effort. If we have too many conversations on this page, it gets too noisy and hard to read. If you see an old conversation (i.e. a month dormant) that could be moved to a talk page, please do so, and add "{{swept}}" there, to note that it has been swept in from the pub. Try to place it on the discussion page roughly in chronological order.

A question regarding a destination article should be swept to the article discussion page.
A discussion regarding a policy or the subject of an expedition can be swept to the policy or expedition discussion page.
A simple question asked by a user can be swept to that user's talk page, but consider if the documentation needs a quick update to make it clearer for the next user with the same question.
A pointer to a discussion going on elsewhere, such as a notice of a star nomination or a request to comment on another talk page, can be removed when it is old. Any discussion that occurred in the pub can be swept to where the main discussion took place.
Any discussions that do not fall into any of these categories, and are not of any special importance for posterity, should be archived to Project:Travellers' pub/Archives and removed from here. If you are not sure where to put a discussion, let it be—better to spend your efforts on those that you do know where to place.

”

— wikivoyage:Special:PermanentLink/4192002

I like their process, because it means that discussions are less likely to get "lost". We do some of this ourselves, with our {{Moved discussion to}} templates. However, it is more work, and I think it would be difficult to find a (single) home for many discussions here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Move unprotection task

Thread retitled from "Move un-protection request for Sleep Deprivation ".

Hi, I saw in like 2009 you move protected Sleep Deprivation for 6 months. I'm not sure why, but it's still protected. I don't see a reason to move it, but at the same time I don't see why it's still protected and believe pages shouldn't be protected unless it's necessary. Do you think it's appropriate to remove the protection at this time? Ben ❯❯❯ Talk 04:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

This might be better looked at en masse as "old move protections from prior to the edit filter"; NawlinWiki (who placed the present case and more): thoughts? –xeno^talk 12:38, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

xaosflux: is this a useful demarcation? –xeno^talk 16:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any protection in force on Sleep Deprivation at all, I do see Sleep deprivation being move protected and in isolation agree with the requester above that this protection should be removed. As far as the larger issue, I do think that a report of articles with only indefinite admin-move protection, that has been there for a long time (esp over 10 years) would be a good thing to review en masse and likely reduce. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

xaosflux/Shadowrvn728: Hey deckers, I unprotected Sleep deprivation. There's an initial list of possible candidates meeting the criteria of move=sysop, edit=all at Special:PermanentLink/1020145753. –xeno^talk 12:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the query on that - don't suppose you have that in like quarry or somewhere where the protection date could be included too? Basically I'll propose removing any of those with ancient (e.g. 10+ year) protection over at AN unless. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Cryptic is my expert here: I think the protect log dates can be a little wonky to pull from the db. There might be a better way to pare the list, perhaps exclude things with "BLP" mention on it, etc. –xeno^talk 14:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Cryptic, ideally a table of: PAGENAME, EDIT PROTECTION LEVEL, MOVE PROTECTION LEVEL, LAST PROTECTION LOG DATE, LAST PROTECTION LOG REASON, LAST PROTECTING SYSOP, and possible "ISREDIRECT?" for these page would be nice, for the set of pages where (NS:0 && editprotection NOT sysop && moveprotection IS sysop). — xaosflux ^Talk 14:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

See WP:RAQ#‎Indefinite move-protections placed long ago on articles. —Cryptic 20:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Epic! Thank you. Now the question is: are we comfortable stepping those down all the way (probably not 100%; looking at the list); or should they be moved to the EC level first? –xeno^talk 20:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@Xeno: probably best asked at WP:AN - but FP-->SPP would probably be better than ECP; the abusefilter is a lot better these days. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

← Discussion ongoing at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Review of indefinitely move-protected articles, log of protection modifications starting from here. (Regarding the first entry: When unchecking the 'Unlock further protect options' when only move-protection is set, the intuitive state would be for the edit-protection to not be increased to match the previous page-move, but to remain as unset.) –xeno^talk 15:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Wugapodes: I didn’t really have a well-thought out plan with regards to dividing up and signalling that items were checked. If you want, just grab one of the 500 blocks and copy to your sandbox. I know TheSandDoctor is working backwards through the 1000 set, so any of the year chunks should be fine! –xeno^talk 01:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. I grabbed the 2009-2010 lot and threw it up at User:Wugapodes/moveprotectreview — Wug·a·po·des 02:43, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
  - Xeno (or others), do you still have OS? Could you take a look at the removed edits from Ona Zee c. 2016? I'm guessing that it's not related to page moves, but private info like names can be oversighted and if that's the case here I'd probably keep it protected. No way to know on my end. — Wug·a·po·des 08:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
    - Wugapodes: I handed back the eraser, and I’m also having trouble working out what happened there. Erring on the side of caution seems fine, though perhaps the protection should be re-applied with BLP as the reason? –xeno^talk 12:32, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

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

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Guideline and policy news

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.

Technical news

The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Confession time

Sigh ... self reminder. Ched - read the WHOLE date. sorry? Thanks Xeno. — Ched (talk) 21:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Ha, that explains it. I’ve been caught out by that, but it’s usually just for a year back, not 6 :p –xeno^talk 12:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ched, work-me encourages both of you to tell @JKlein (WMF) about this problem. Maybe we could get a little note at the top of each section that says something like "last comment six years ago"? WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Note from Heymid

Block me indefinitely

I'm mentally ill and can't help my actions. I shouldn't take it out on editing the encyclopedia in a disruptive manner. --Hey mid (contribs) 22:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Just to touch base, in relation to this post and the relevant SPI, I have blocked Heymid at his request for one month and have provided him with some links to resources that may help him. I'm entirely flexible on the length of the block. Ping me if you have any questions. Risker (talk) 23:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for reaching out and creating space for yourself: that shows incredible strength. –xeno^talk 02:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Mass deletion tasks

Iranian abadis

Query

Hello, Xeno,

I just came across a curiosity and thought you might have an idea about it. You mass deleted a lot of geography stubs earlier today, I'm assuming through Twinkle's batch delete function. But when I went to do my regular check for broken redirects, as you can see here, there were 81 talk pages of redirects for the articles that you deleted. Just the talk pages. So, there must be a bug with Twinkle that, for some reason, it deleted those thousands of articles, the article talk pages and the redirects but not the redirect talk pages. Hmmmmmm. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:29, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, could you please finish what you started at User:Alexis Reggae/Articles for locations oh my what a mess? Section 3 should have been deleted according to Alexis Jazz's deletion plan. Section 4 can also be deleted unless Alexis Jazz wants to work on it (which I do not recommend). Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes this can be done soon. I think Reywas92 also identified another set. I do wonder about these hat notes, whether I got lucky to land on one or there are more that need to be retained. Liz: I’m not sure about the twinkle bug, or maybe was a setting. I will look on my next batch and report the bug if needed. –xeno^talk 19:28, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I see what you're trying to do. I'll try to make a list. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- User:Alexis Reggae/Articles for locations oh my what a mess/hatnotes — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:26, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- User:Alexis Reggae/Articles for locations oh my what a mess/hatnotes for new search results — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 16:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
  - Creating redirects from these hatnotes could be automated, but not without consensus. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 16:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
    - I probably wouldn’t create the ones to "villages or similar name", just anything where we took out a legitimate eventual disambig landing. –xeno^talk 20:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
      I'm still coming back to this. –xeno^talk 12:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
      So I think I'm done blueing the ones from User:Alexis Reggae/Articles for locations oh my what a mess/hatnotes, let me know if you see any more than might need to be restored. A good way to sort them would be the hat target is not another mass-created article. Thank you for the list! –xeno^talk 00:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
← Interested users (4nn1l2—Alexis Jazz—Fram—Hog Farm—Uncle G—Ymblanter) et al. have noted consensus for additional mass deletion: I'm fine to carry them out after I restore the hatnote content I inadvertently deleted in the previous batch, as long as the pages with relevant hatnotes are redirected and removed first (e.g. ANERT), or point me to the list and I will do that content work prior to deleting it (will take time). –xeno^talk 12:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Enter {{subst:ABADI}} when you want to create a redirect. Won't work for deleted redirects. For pages with multiple hatnotes I picked the first target. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 20:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

From User_talk:Ymblanter#Villages_in_Iran: Now I need to fix the links to the pages I just restored. –xeno^talk 17:48, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Done though I'm not sure what to do whether it should be left redlinks (if it's a real village) or removed (if it's a gas station, or farmer's field). In the meantime, I did these edits to fix up the backlink issue identified. Probably 4nn1l2 is best placed to answer. –xeno^talk 18:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Bahua

Hello Xeno, I have no idea what made this article on a populated and legally recognized place (censusindia.gov.in#35597) deleted so can you please refund per WP:GEOLAND? Thank you, GSS ^💬 04:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry GSS seems there was parallel processing of the list I used. Restored! –xeno^talk 04:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

That's okay. Thank you so much. :) GSS ^💬 04:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I think I made a mess of the article history. I'll fix in the morning after coffee. Alexis Jazz did I trip over anyone other than Liz? –xeno^talk 04:37, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

The article at Bahua used to be about an Iranian abadi for which there was consensus to delete. I requested WP:CSD G6 so Bahua, Punjab could be moved in its place. It seems you restored the history for both the Iranian abadi and the village in Punjab as well as the history from 2006 which was prodded by Desertsky85451 on 12 October 2006‎. For historical reference, this was the whole article in 2006: Bahua, according to at least one chinese source, is supposed to have been the eponymous ancestor of the Uar component of the Alchoni. General Bahua was recruited by General Ban Yong (the son of Ban Chao) as part of his mercenaries in a campaign against the Huyan in 126. After the event there were centuries without significant reference to Pahua's army. You'll have to selectively delete the revisions for the abadi:

20:16, 27 April 2021‎ Liz m 7,738 bytes 0‎ Liz moved page Bahua, Punjab to Bahua: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Mass deletion of Iranian abadis
07:54, 27 April 2021‎ Alexis Jazz 1,859 bytes +112‎ Undid revision 1019894434 by John M Wolfson (talk) There's consensus to mass-delete these Carlossuarez46 stubs, making the village in India the only Bahua. User:Xeno, User:Ymblanter? Tag: Undo
01:13, 26 April 2021‎ John M Wolfson 1,747 bytes −112‎ Decline speedy; I see no talkpage or other consensus that the Punjab village is the primary topic Tags: Manual revert Reverted
12:50, 25 April 2021‎ Alexis Jazz 1,859 bytes +112‎ Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G6). Tags: Twinkle Reverted
14:16, 8 December 2018‎ Kevinsam2 m 1,747 bytes +15‎ →‎References: clean up, replaced: {{coord missing}} → {{coord missing}} Tag: AWB
14:24, 3 December 2017‎ JJMC89 bot 1,732 bytes −90‎ Remove unrecognized coordinate parameters. Use |coordinates={{coord}} instead. See Wikipedia:Coordinates in infoboxes. undo
03:21, 12 February 2017‎ JarBot m 1,822 bytes +15‎ Bot:Add Iran's Portal undo
15:06, 6 November 2016‎ GSS 1,807 bytes +39‎ WP:HAT undo
23:51, 4 December 2012‎ Carlossuarez46 1,768 bytes +1,768‎ create

— Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 05:37, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Should be good now! Thank you both. –xeno^talk 16:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

abadi (continued)

I did the rest of the 1372 resulting in 3260 deletions including erroneous immediately above. I checked "unlink backlinks" this time, it may be interesting to view and fix these pages: [4], seeing if any of these links are notability indicators for the deleted article. Let me know if anything needs to be restored. –xeno^talk 03:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Alexis Jazz: As birth place of Saʿd al-Dīn al-Ḥamuwayī, we may be able to source Bahrabad, Razavi Khorasan; Srnec are you sure that's the right Bahrabad and add sourcing? I've restored it (without prejudice). Some of these stubs are questionable. –xeno^talk 01:21, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Other sets for deletion

Alexis Jazz: where are we with list curation? –xeno^talk 13:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Waiting for the deletion of everything but the bottom two articles on User:Alexis Reggae/Articles for locations oh my what a mess 2: Azerbaijan edition, probably? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 13:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Small world, my bot acted on Agamirza obasi. –xeno^talk 13:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Poof. There's a few backlinks. Let these settle and I can do the remainder. I think WP:CSD#G6 applies, anyway. –xeno^talk 13:44, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Let me know what backlinks you find, because after Special:PageHistory/User:Alexis Reggae/Articles for locations oh my what a mess/links there shouldn't be much (if anything) left but redirects. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I see you unlinked some, I left some of these because they were created independent of the existence of the article and/or may refer to another village. Special:Diff/1026117959 for example refers to Padar-Chala in 1524, probably doesn't refer to a Geonet error because Geonet didn't exist in 1524. It may or may not even exist today, but it could be a valid redlink. I have no issues with unlinking everything though. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm The Earwig. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, John McCrea (actor), and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

— The Earwig (talk) 04:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. It turns out that it's not actually that easy for an admin to unpatrol their own creation. DannyS712: any thoughts on an opt-in feature for admins to have your bot unpatrol their creations? –xeno^talk 04:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Maybe I am too naive. There haven't been very many admins whose page creations need patrolling, as far as I can recall. In any case, I patrolled it and it's done now. Risker (talk) 05:13, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

It was kind of an experiment, really. Some admins want to shed autopatrol and they're told "just unpatrol your own creations!" - apparently we can't... But this is probably borne of a misunderstanding of the purpose of autopatrol (person won't create obviously csd-able material) –xeno^talk 05:15, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, I suppose if people really want their work patrolled... On the other hand, given how long the queue is most of the time, taking the autopatrol out of the admin package would be a killer for those brave souls who do the work. I'd like to see autopatrol handed out to a lot more editors, to be honest. Risker (talk) 05:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrator too, for that matter... Here, I did this in your honour =) –xeno^talk 05:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I can see the benefit to occasionally unpatrolling one's own creation (if it's a borderline case, they want a 2O, etc) though I don't think (as implied below) that all creations by an admin should be unpatrolled automatically (though I have seen compelling reasons why AP isn't really necessary for inclusion in the admin toolkit). Primefac (talk) 10:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Xeno: I think I've said this before, but if not: I'm happy to write the code to unreview pages created by admins, and will file a BRFA, if there is an admin who wants their pages unpatrolled DannyS712 (talk) 05:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I do remember you saying that. At the same time I don’t want to cause work for patrollers. Let me stew on it more. It's not like I create that many articles... –xeno^talk 05:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

So, I just came here through looking at Risker's contribs for something else, but... you can un-patrol pages as an admin, I do it all the time for drafts that I've approved etc. Am I just missing something or is having the Curation Toolbar something that isn't standard (genuinely don't remember, had it for ages)?

Okay, I'm wrong, the toolbar doesn't even give me the option of un-patrolling my own page. DannyS712, rather than make an entirely new script, maybe just let the curation toolbar actually allow this action? Primefac (talk) 10:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: You should already be able to do that via the api for now, see phab:T280890 for requesting that it be available in the curation toolbar - I'll try to see if I can work on it DannyS712 (talk) 23:28, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I was a few pages deep into API documentation until I gave up :) There’s an action for Mw:API:Patrol, but that’s as far as I got. –xeno^talk 21:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

To process the request Autopatrolled

Sorry, I submitted my request here. Do I need anything else to do?--Parizad (talk) 14:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, usually you just wait: sometimes the processing time can be long. I took a look at your request and responded. –xeno^talk 21:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your answer, but you have answered another request. Thank you.--Parizad (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, your signature doesn’t match your username so I looked at the wrong one. –xeno^talk 12:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:35, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy Bureaucratship Anniversary!

Wishing Xeno a very happy bureaucratship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

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

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

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

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

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

Administrator changes

Trialpears

AGK • Eliz81 • Mulad • ThaddeusB • Vianello • Who

Lacrimosus → Ikuzaf

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

AGK • DGG

Oversighter changes

AGK

Guideline and policy news

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.

Technical news

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.

Arbitration

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:50, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 2

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 2, July 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the second issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

If you haven’t already, please remember to subscribe here if you would like to be notified about future editions of the newsletter, and also leave your username here if you’d like to be contacted to help with translations in the future.

Enforcement Draft Guidelines Review - Initial meetings of the drafting committee have helped to connect and align key topics on enforcement, while highlighting prior research around existing processes and gaps within our movement. (continue reading)
Targets of Harassment Research - To support the drafting committee, the Wikimedia Foundation has conducted a research project focused on experiences of harassment on Wikimedia projects. (continue reading)
Functionaries’ Consultation - Since June, Functionaries from across the various wikis have been meeting to discuss what the future will look like in a global context with the UCoC. (continue reading)
Roundtable Discussions - The UCoC facilitation team once again, hosted another roundtable discussion, this time for Korean-speaking community members and participants of other ESEAP projects to discuss the enforcement of the UCoC. (continue reading)
Early Adoption of UCoC by Communities - Since its ratification by the Board in February 2021, situations whereby UCoC is being adopted and applied within the Wikimedia community have grown. (continue reading)
New Timeline for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee - The CRC was originally expected to conclude by July 1. However, with the UCoC now expected to be in development until December, the timeline for the CRC has also changed. (continue reading)
Wikimania - The UCoC team is planning to hold a moderated discussion featuring representatives across the movement during Wikimania 2021. It also plans to have a presence at the conference’s Community Village. (continue reading)
Diff blogs - Check out the most recent publications about the UCoC on Wikimedia Diff blog. (continue reading)

Thanks for reading - we welcome feedback about this newsletter. Xeno (WMF) (talk) 17:33, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Regranting Page Mover rights

Hi Xeno. Last month you granted me the Page Mover user right for a period of one month, which has recently expired. I have a good understanding of WP:RMPM and understand the tools this user right provides (especially suppressredirect). As there are still many situations I have found when editing where it has been useful, I would like to request for it be regranted. Happily888 (talk) 07:24, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hope you had an enjoyable three months! That’s been

Done. –xeno^talk 19:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

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

Administrator changes

BusterD

Kees08 • Nickshanks • Protonk • Schissel • Ultraexactzz • Wknight94

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes

ST47

Guideline and policy news

An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

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)

Arbitration

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.

Miscellaneous

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 3

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 3, August 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the third issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

If you haven’t already, please remember to subscribe here if you would like to be notified about future editions of the newsletter, and also leave your username here if you’d like to be contacted to help with translations in the future.

The Enforcement Draft Guidelines - The Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct has just been published on meta in different languages. These guidelines include some definitions of newly introduced terms and recommendations for local enforcement structures. (continue reading)
Enforcement Draft Guidelines Review - Before the enforcement guidelines are finalized, they must be reviewed and discussed by the community. The facilitation team has set up various discussion means throughout this review period. (continue reading)
Conversation Hours & Roundtables - To listen to community opinions and exchange ideas regarding enforcement draft guidelines proposed by the drafting committee, the UCoC facilitation team will be hosting weekly conversation hours. (continue reading)
Wikimania Wrap-up - The facilitation team hosted a Roundtable at Wikimania 2021, featuring some WMF trustees and staff. The session offered some insights on how the Enforcement Draft Guidelines came about, and what next steps are being imagined. (continue reading)
Translation - Because a considerable number of Wikimedians are not English speakers, and that UCoC applies to all members, projects across the wikimedia movement, it’s of a great importance to provide adequate language support throughout this process. (continue reading)
Diff blogs - Check out some interesting publications about the UCoC on Wikimedia Diff blog. (continue reading)
WMF's 2021 Board of Trustees election - Please read the Candidate Presentations and vote! (continue reading)

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (talk) 22:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

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

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

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.

Technical news

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.

Arbitration

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.

Miscellaneous

The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Issues after you helped with rename

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=&user=&page=User%3ASandman30s 16:50, 16 July 2013 Xeno talk contribs moved page User:Sandman30s to User:Sandman1142 (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Sandman30s" to "Sandman1142") (thank) 16:50, 16 July 2013 Xeno talk contribs renamed user Sandman30s (2609 edits) to Sandman1142 (WP:CHU)

I am logged in as Sandman30s But it says: User:Sandman1142 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 (Redirected from User:Sandman30s)

Issue is I want to login as Sandman1142 But Sandman1142 password is broken and there is no email registered to reset it. If I set an email on the the Sandman30s account, can you copy that email to the Sandman1142 account?

I enquired in discord and someone said I should mention this: SuperHamster Just for others' reference: not actually resolved. Sandman logged in on their old username, which persisted as a global Wikimedia account after being renamed locally on the English Wikipedia per their request. Though I guess that might help in proving their identity...(edited)

Sandman30s: Are you just wanting to have that username, or did you also want the edits attributed to the username you'll edit under? Was there some link made by the Wikipedia account to connect it to the Wiktionary account prior to the rename/SUL finalization? (xaosflux: would this be enough to convince for a sysadmin-assisted password reset? “) –xeno^talk 20:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

One of those pages is a redirect to the other, so that it likely that "but it says:" part - nothing special to do with accounts. Neither of these accounts are very prolific or have advanced permissions so I doubt anyone is going to do much with them (or really need to). SUL accounts can not be merged. If I'm reading this correctly what the current ask seems to be is "copy the recovery email from Sandman30s to Sandman1142" - however the former doesn't actually have one now, any rename issues are 8+ years old, and the history is so old that it would be very difficult to attribute these accounts to each other. Sandman1142 has made edits this year, so it is already assumed that someone is in control of that account - that Sandman30s has surfaced after 15 years of no edits isn't convincing to me (as that account could have just had a password guessed) - also the checkuser information is too old to be useful between the accounts. Honestly, though I personally AGF a lot - I think others will be suspicious of anything from Sandman30s due to the 15 year contributions gap - this editor should try to remember their password for Sandman1142 that was active earlier this year or just start a fresh account. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:49, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I have no idea how Sandman1142 has made edits, as I have not been able to login with that account for a long time. I remembered that I had Sandman30s before, and tried to login there, and it worked. So I want to associate an email to Sandman30s. All I'm asking is that email be copied to Sandman1142 so that I can do a password recovery. Sandman1142 is my primary account and I want to make some edits now especially to my favourite snooker and pool pages. Please don't be suspicious lol - even my login page says "User:Sandman1142 (Redirected from User:Sandman30s)" and I can post a screenshot somewhere to prove that. I do not want a new account as my history on wikipedia means something to me personally. Sandman30s (talk) 21:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

If someone called Sandman1142 has made edits earlier this year, it means my account was hacked and I really need to be able to recover it. Xeno did the rename fromSandman30s to Sandman1142 and I'm logged in as the original owner of the account, so this must mean I should own Sandman1142 right. There is just no way that my password is wrong - Chrome remembers it and it doesn't work. Sandman30s (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

"Sandman1142 that was active earlier this year" - I'm really curious now - what edits were made? Please give me a few examples. This COVID era has really turned things into a haze. It's possible the account was working early in the year, or last year, or before COVID, who knows. Sandman30s (talk) 21:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

See Special:Contributions/Sandman1142 - if that account is compromised, it should be globally locked and abandoned (as you should not be associated with edits that someone else is making). — xaosflux ^Talk 21:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wow yes that was me! So it was early 2021 after all. It was all those snooker pages etc. I have been in contact with pool and snooker people and they want me to make some important edits. xaosflux if I associate an email to current login Sandman30s will you help me copy it to Sandman1142? There is absolutely nothing suspicious - it's just the password has broken somehow. I can provide any proof that it's me, whatever it takes. Sandman30s (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

OK I have now set my email address on Sandman30s to (Redacted). Please can you copy that to my Xeno-renamed and current account Sandman1142. I see what the problem is - Chrome is completely confused and saves the wrong passwords?! I even struggled now to login again as Sandman30s because Chrome botched it up. The villain here is Chrome :( Sandman30s (talk) 21:55, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Bureaucrats/global renamers don't have that ability (to set an email on an account). See if you can look in the passwords sections of your browsers to find the Sandman1142 password. –xeno^talk 22:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

OK somehow this has been resolved by logging in as Sandman1142 with the NEW password I associated with Sandman30s. I am so confused and so is Chrome which saves an old password. But I am just thankful this has been auto-resolved somehow. What a mission! Surely there must be easier ways to sort this kind of thing out. Sandman1142 (talk) 22:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sandman1142: OK good to hear you are back on your most recent account and that it wasn't compromised after all. The best way is to ensure that you have a secure password, that you have a working recovery email address, and that your email account is also well secured. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

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

Administrator changes

Blablubbs

Alvestrand • Black Falcon • Deathphoenix • Dppowell • Mark Arsten • JGHowes (deceased)

Oversighter changes

Mkdw

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

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.

Technical news

DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

Arbitration

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.

Miscellaneous

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 4

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 4, October 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the fourth issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

If you haven’t already, please remember to subscribe here if you would like to be notified about future editions of the newsletter, and also leave your username here if you’d like to be contacted to help with translations in the future.

Enforcement Draft Guidelines Review Wrap-up - The Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft Guidelines Review will come to a close on 17 October 2021, after more than two months of extensive consultations. (continue reading)
Roundtable Discussions and Conversation Hours - Another successful roundtable session happened on September 18, 2021 to discuss the EDGR. One last conversation hour will be happening on October 15th, 2021. (continue reading)
Movement Charter Drafting Committee Elections - The Movement Charter Drafting Committee selection process has kicked off and will be open until October 25, 2021. Contributors to Wikimedia projects can elect their favorite candidates on to the committee. (continue reading)
New Direction for the Newsletter - As we round-up the consultation processes for the Universal Code of Conduct, the facilitation team is currently envisioning new directions for the newsletter. (continue reading)
Diff Blogs - Check out the most recent publications about the UCoC on Wikimedia Diff. (continue reading)

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Adoption backlog/count

Template:Adoption backlog/count has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

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

Administrator changes

Clpo13

Brian0918 • JDoorjam • Karanacs • MrDarcy • Mindspillage

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

CheckUser changes

Dreamy Jazz • Ferret • GeneralNotability • Girth Summit • RoySmith

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz • LuK3

Guideline and policy news

Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.

Arbitration

GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.

Miscellaneous

The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Split message

Template:Split message has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Did Q28 make a mess today? 09:05, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

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

Administrator changes

A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration

Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the eighth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Maintainers disappeared to parts unknown... bots awakening from the slumber of æons... hundreds of thousands of short descriptions... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

Our last issue was in August 2019, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. Due to the vast quantity of things that have happened, the next few issues will only cover a few months at a time. This month, we'll go from September 2019 through the end of the year. I won't bore you with further introductions — instead, I'll bore you with a newsletter about bots.

Overall

Between September and December 2019, there were 33 BRFAs. Of these, Y 25 were approved, and 8 were unsuccessful (N2 3 denied, ? 3 withdrawn, and 2 expired).

September 2019

Y Monkbot 16, DannyS712 bot 60, Ahechtbot 6, PearBOT 3, Qbugbot 3 · N2 DannyS712 bot 5, PkbwcgsBot 24 · ? DannyS712 bot 61, TheSandBot 4
TParis goes away, UTRSBot goes kaput: Beeblebrox noted that the bot for maintaining on-wiki records of UTRS appeals stopped working a while ago. TParis, the semi-retired user who had previously run it, said they were "unlikely to return to actively editing Wikipedia", and the bot had been vanquished by trolls submitting bogus UTRS requests on behalf of real blocked users. While OAuth was a potential fix, neither maintainer had time to implement it. TParis offered to access to the UTRS WMFLabs account to any admin identified with the WMF: "I miss you guys a whole lot [...] but I've also moved on with my life. Good luck, let me know how I can help". Ultimately, SQL ended up in charge. Some progress was made, and the bot continued to work another couple months — but as of press time, UTRSBot has not edited since November 2019.
Article-measuring contest resumed: The list of Wikipedians by article count, which had lain dead for several years, was triumphantly resurrected by GreenC following a bot request.

October 2019

Y OAbot 3, DannyS712 bot 47, Pathbot 2, PearBOT 2, DannyS712 bot 59, DannyS712 bot 62, HasteurBot 14, PearBOT 4, WOSlinkerBot 4, MilHistBot 5
Curb Safe Charmer adopts reFill: TAnthony pointed out that reFill 2's bug reports were going unanswered; creator Zhaofeng Li had retired from Wikipedia, and a maintainer was needed. As of June 2021, Curb Safe Charmer had taken up the mantle, saying: "Not that I have all the skills needed but better me than nobody! 'Maintainer' might be too strong a term though. Volunteers welcome!"

November 2019

Y BHGbot 4, YiFeiBot 2, DannyS712 bot III 64 · ? PearBOT
Old bots do new tricks: DannyS712 bot III 64 prowled redirects, YiFeiBot 2 archived GoCE requests, and BHGbot 4 removed links to portals deleted at MfD (until its authorization was revoked in January at operator BrownHairedGirl's request).

December 2019

Y DemonDays64 Bot, DannyS712 bot III 66, Bot1058 6, Monkbot 15, MilHistBot 6, PearBOT 5, DannyS712 bot IV 65 · N2 SportsStatsBot · Xinbenlv bot, SteveBot 8
Redirects to be autopatrolled: A RfC took place at WP:NPP, closing with unanimous consensus that new redirects should be automatically marked as patrolled by bot. DannyS712 wasted no time, and submitted DannyS712 bot III 66 the next day; it passed two days after that.
200,000 bios get short descs: Along a similar vein, Bot1058 6 was approved to remove disambiguation pages from Category:Monitored short pages and a new bot (DemonDays64 Bot) changed lots of http links to https using JavaScript Wiki Browser. One particularly neat task, PearBOT 5, automatically generated short descriptions for more than 200,000 biographies.

In the next issue of Bots Newsletter:
What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?

What happens when two bots want to clerk the same page?
What happens when an adminbot goes hog wild?
Will reFill ever get fixed?
What's up with ListeriaBot, anyway?
Python 3.4 deprecation? In my PyWikiBot? (It's more likely than you think!)

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the January 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 04:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Listing of Template:Iw-matrix/easylang at templates for discussion

Template:Iw-matrix/easylang has been listed at templates for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 (talk) 03:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

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

Administrator changes

Amalthea • Ihcoyc (deceased) • Kateshortforbob • Kirill Lokshin • Rifleman 82 • Ryan Norton • Wrp103

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

CheckUser changes

Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes

Opabinia regalis

Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Oversighter changes

Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes

Opabinia regalis

Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Guideline and policy news

Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.

Arbitration

Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.

Miscellaneous

The functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, January 2022

Bots Newsletter, January 2022

BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the ninth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Vicious bot-on-bot edit warring... superseded tasks... policy proposals... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

After a long hiatus between August 2019 and December 2021, there's quite a bit of ground to cover. Due to the vastness, I decided in December to split the coverage up into a few installments that covered six months each. Some people thought this was a good idea, since covering an entire year in a single issue would make it unmanageably large. Others thought this was stupid, since they were getting talk page messages about crap from almost three years ago. Ultimately, the question of whether each issue covers six months or a year is only relevant for a couple more of them, and then the problem will be behind us forever.

Of course, you can also look on the bright side – we are making progress, and this issue will only be about crap from almost two years ago. Today we will pick up where we left off in December, and go through the first half of 2020.

Overall
In the first half of 2020, there were 71 BRFAs. Of these, Y 59 were approved, and 12 were unsuccessful (with N2 8 denied, ? 2 withdrawn, and 2 expired).

January 2020

Yeah, you're not gonna be able to get away with this anymore.

Y ST47Bot, Seppi333Bot, Qbugbot 4 · N2 PkbwcgsBot 25, PkbwcgsBot 26
A new Pywikibot release dropped support for Python 3.4, and it was expected that support for Python 2.7 would be removed in coming updates. Toolforge itself planned to drop Python 2 support in 2022.
Two new bots dropped in January 2020: ST47Bot, the successor to STBot, and Seppi333Bot, whose task was to perform a weekly update of four "massive" wikitables for WikiProject Molecular Biology.
Cydebot, an adminbot operated by Cyde since 2006, was blocked after going berserk on categories that hadn't yet been CfD'd.

February 2020

Y AnomieBOT 78, Cewbot 2, DannyS712 bot 67, DannyS712 bot III 63, PearBOT 6, DemonDays64 Bot 2 · N2 PearBOT
On February 1, some concerns were raised about ListeriaBot performing "nonsense" edits. Semi-active operator Magnus Manske (who originally coded the Phase II software|precursor of MediaWiki) was pinged. Meanwhile, the bot was temporarily blocked for several hours until the issue was diagnosed and resolved.
On February 18, ST47Bot got into a tussle with Amalthea (bot), and had to be partially-blocked from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cases/Overview.

March 2020

Y MajavahBot, SDZeroBot, TheSandBot 6, TheSandBot 7, Bitbotje, FACBot 6, TheSandBot 8, Qbugbot 5, Cewbot 3, SDZeroBot 2, PrimeBOT 31, WikiCleanerBot 12 · AntiCompositeBot
In March, a long discussion was started at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy by Skdb about the troubling trend of bots "expiring" without explanation after their owners became inactive. This can happen for a variety of reasons -- API changes break code, hosting providers' software updates break code, hosting accounts lapse, software changes make bots' edits unnecessary, and policy changes make bots' edits unwanted. The most promising solution seemed to be Toolforge hosting (although it has some problems of its own, like the occasional necessity of refactoring code).
Some of the twelve bot tasks approved this month were TheSandBot 6 (removing blocked users from Category:Wikipedia usernames with possible policy issues), and TheSandBot 7 (removing unblocked users from Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for promotional user names). SDZeroBot 2 was approved to refine geographic stub tags. New bots approved this month were MajavahBot (to patrol WP:EFFPR), SDZeroBot (to merge stub tags), and Bitbotje (fixing DISPLAYTITLE modifications, DEFAULTSORT errors and broken behavior switches in draftspace).

April 2020

Y TheSandBot 9, BHGbot 5, DannyS712 bot 69, SDZeroBot 3, ST47ProxyBot, WugBot 4, SDZeroBot 4, DatBot 10, WikiCleanerBot 11, WikiCleanerBot 13, WikiCleanerBot 14, AntiCompositeBot 2, Cewbot 4 · N2 DaedanBot 1 · Creffbot
A discussion on the bot noticeboard, "Re-examination of ListeriaBot", was started by Barkeep49, who pointed out repeated operation outside the scope of its BRFA (i.e. editing pages in mainspace, and adding non-free images to others). Some said it was doing good work, and others said it was operating beyond its remit. It was blocked on April 10; the next day it was unblocked, reblocked from article space, reblocked "for specified non-editing actions", unblocked, and indeffed. The next week, several safeguards were implemented in its code by Magnus; the bot was allowed to roam free once more on April 18.
ST47ProxyBot joined the stable in April, after a BRFA started in December was finally completed. As an adminbot, it was authorized to block IP addresses belonging to open proxies, public VPN services, and web hosts. New tasks approved for existing bots included BHGbot 5 (diffusing categories), TheSandBot 9 (taking over some tasks from the inactive RonBot), and WugBot 4 (updating data at {{Interactive COVID-19 maps}}). Also, DatBot 10 was approved to scale down non-free SVGs — I didn't even know that was a thing.
A discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy was started by Thryduulf about whether WP:BOTCOMM should explicitly specify that bot operators must be responsive to concerns raised on English Wikipedia specifically (as opposed to Phabricator, SourceForge, Toolforge, et cetera). Eventually, the policy was amended to its current form:

Issues and enquiries are typically expected to be handled on the English Wikipedia. Pages reachable via unified login, like a talk page at Commons or at Italian Wikipedia could also be acceptable [...] External sites like Phabricator or GitHub (which require separate registration or do not allow for IP comments) and email (which can compromise anonymity) can supplement on-wiki communication, but do not replace it.

May 2020

Y MajavahBot 3, DannyS712 bot 70, CitationCleanerBot 5, Dreamy Jazz Bot 4, QEDKbot, William Avery Bot 2, DannyS712 bot 68, PrimeBOT 32, TheSandBot 10, Bot1058 7, BHGbot 6, EaglesBot 2, Cewbot 5, WikiCleanerBot 17 · N2 MDanielsBot, PhuzBot 3, Gedimon · ? PearBOT 7
MajavahBot 3, an impressively meta bot task, was approved this month for maintaining a list of bots running on the English Wikipedia. The page, located at User:MajavahBot/Bot status report, is updated every 24 hours; it contains a list of all accounts with the bot flag, as well as their operator, edit count, last activity date, last edit date, last logged action date, user groups and block status.
Other approvals for this month were William Avery Bot 2 (processing redirects in {{R from scientific name}}), DannyS712 bot 68 (allowing users to schedule bot reminders for themselves), TheSandBot 10 (removing blocked/locked users from Category:User talk pages with conflict of interest notices), Bot1058 7 (updating Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests/Permalink), Dreamy Jazz Bot 4 (adding {{WikiProject Biography|living=no}} to talk pages where their associated article is in a year of death category), and QEDKbot (deleting and nominating empty categories).
General syntax fixing tasks were approved for DannyS712 bot 70, CitationCleanerBot 5, PrimeBOT 32, BHGbot 6, Cewbot 5, and EaglesBot 2, as well as WikiCleanerBot 15, 16, and 17.
Seven bots who fell below activity requirements (with neither the bots nor their operators having any edits or logged actions in two years) had their bot flags removed. They were NekoBot, Robert SkyBot, DASHBotAV, VoxelBot, JackieBot, ReferenceBot, and CensusBot.
On May 12, EmausBot was blocked.

June 2020

Y QEDKbot 2, AnomieBOT 79, WOSlinkerBot 6, Yapperbot 2, Yapperbot, AnomieBOT 80, Dreamy Jazz Bot 5, WikiCleanerBot 18, HasteurBot 15, MusikBot II 4, NoSandboxesHere · N2 RedWarn · ? Seppi333Bot 2
In July 2017, Headbomb made a proposal that a section of the Wikipedia:Dashboard be devoted to bots and technical issues. In November 2019, Lua code was written superseding Legobot's tasks on that page, and operator Legoktm was asked to stop them so that the new code could be deployed. After no response to pings, a partial-block of Legobot for the dashboard was proposed. Some months later, on June 16, Headbomb said: "A full block serves nothing. A partial block solves all current issues [...] Just fucking do it. It's been 3 years now." The next day, however, Legoktm disabled the task, and the dashboard was successfully refactored.
On June 7, RexxS blocked Citation bot for disruptive editing, saying it was "still removing links after request to stop". A couple weeks later, a discussion on the bots noticeboard was opened, saying "it is a widely-used and useful bot, but it has one of the longest block logs for any recently-operating bot on Wikipedia". While its last BRFA approval was in 2011, its code and functionality had changed dramatically since then, and AntiCompositeNumber requested that BAG require a new BRFA. Maintainer AManWithNoPlan responded that most blocks were from years ago (when it lacked a proper test suite), and problems since then had mostly been one-off errors (like a June 2019 incident in which a LTA had "weaponized" the bot to harass editors).
David Tornheim opened a discussion about whether bots based on closed-source code should be permitted, and proposed that they not. He cited a recent case in which a maintainer had said "I can only suppose that the code that is available on GitHub is not the actual code that was running on [the bot]". Some disagreed: Naypta said that "I like free software as much as the next person, and I strongly believe that bot operators should make their bot code public, but I don't think it should be that they must do so".
Two new bots had their first BRFAs approved: Yapperbot, to replace Legobot for handling the Feedback Request Service, and NoSandboxesHere, to remove {{user sandbox}} from articles in draftspace using Category:Non-userspace pages using User sandbox.

Conclusion

What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?

Will Citation bot ever be set free to roam the project?
What's the deal with all those book links that InternetArchiveBot is adding to articles?
Should we keep using Gerrit for MediaWiki?
What if we had a day for bots to make cosmetic edits?

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the February 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 23:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Administrator changes

AustralianRupert • Cimon Avaro • Euryalus • Jehochman • Nunh-huh

28bytes

Bureaucrat changes

28bytes

Interface administrator changes

Evad37 • Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.

Technical news

The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Community input is requested on several motions aimed at addressing discretionary sanctions that are no longer needed or overly broad.
The Arbitration Committee has published a generalised comment regarding successful appeals of sanctions that it can review (such as checkuser blocks).
A motion related to the Antisemitism in Poland case was passed following a declined case request.

Miscellaneous

Voting in the 2022 Steward elections will begin on 07 February 2022, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2022, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
Voting in the 2022 Community Wishlist Survey is open until 11 February 2022.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Administrator changes

Modussiccandi

BOZ • Brookie (deceased) • Jackmcbarn • Jamesday • Jonathunder • Master of Puppets • Saravask

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes

Guideline and policy news

A RfC is open to change the wording of revision deletion criterion 1 to remove the sentence relating to non-infringing contributions.
A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.

Technical news

The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (T296645)
Special:Nuke will now allow the selection of standard deletion reasons to be used when mass-deleting pages. This was a Community Wishlist Survey request from 2022. (T25020)
The ability to undelete the talk page when undeleting a page using Special:Undelete or the API will be added soon. This change was requested in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. (T295389)

Arbitration

Several unused discretionary sanctions and article probation remedies have been rescinded. This follows the community feedback from the 2021 Discretionary Sanctions review.

Miscellaneous

The 2022 appointees for the Ombuds commission are Érico, Faendalimas, Galahad, Infinite0694, Mykola7, Olugold, Udehb and Zabe as regular members and Ameisenigel and JJMC89 as advisory members.
Following the 2022 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AntiCompositeNumber, BRPever, Hasley, TheresNoTime, and Vermont.
The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey results have been published alongside the ranking of prioritized proposals.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mohawk Island

Hello! Your submission of Mohawk Island at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Flibirigit (talk) 23:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Flibirigit: Thank you for the comprehensive review! I will take a look at implementing those suggestions. –xeno^talk 01:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Formerly

Template:Formerly has been nominated for merging with Template:Thread retitled. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 16:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Mohawk Island

On 11 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mohawk Island, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mohawk Island is sometimes underwater? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mohawk Island. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mohawk Island), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 6,688 views (573.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of March 2022 – nice work!

the automation of this function is in beta testing mode—please let me know if I've screwed up! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 23:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

"Rainbow Six® Vegas 2" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Rainbow Six® Vegas 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 2#Rainbow Six® Vegas 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 20:03, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).

Administrator changes

Firefly • Sdrqaz

Ad Orientem

Geschichte • Ryan Postlethwaite • Sabine's Sunbird • Wassupwestcoast

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

Guideline and policy news

An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.

Technical news

Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928)
When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)

Arbitration

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.

Miscellaneous

Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Movement Strategy and Governance News – Issue 6

Movement Strategy and Governance News
Issue 6, April 2022Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the sixth issue of Movement Strategy and Governance News! This revamped newsletter distributes relevant news and events about the Movement Charter, Universal Code of Conduct, Movement Strategy Implementation grants, Board of trustees elections and other relevant MSG topics.

This Newsletter will be distributed quarterly, while the more frequent Updates will also be delivered weekly. Please remember to subscribe here if you would like to receive future issues of this newsletter.

Leadership Development - A Working Group is Forming! - The application to join the Leadership Development Working Group closed on April 10th, 2022, and up to 12 community members will be selected to participate in the working group. (continue reading)
Universal Code of Conduct Ratification Results are out! - The global decision process on the enforcement of the UCoC via SecurePoll was held from 7 to 21 March. Over 2,300 eligible voters from at least 128 different home projects submitted their opinions and comments. (continue reading)
Movement Discussions on Hubs - The Global Conversation event on Regional and Thematic Hubs was held on Saturday, March 12, and was attended by 84 diverse Wikimedians from across the movement. (continue reading)
Movement Strategy Grants Remain Open! - Since the start of the year, six proposals with a total value of about $80,000 USD have been approved. Do you have a movement strategy project idea? Reach out to us! (continue reading)
The Movement Charter Drafting Committee is All Set! - The Committee of fifteen members which was elected in October 2021, has agreed on the essential values and methods for its work, and has started to create the outline of the Movement Charter draft. (continue reading)
Introducing Movement Strategy Weekly - Contribute and Subscribe! - The MSG team have just launched the updates portal, which is connected to the various Movement Strategy pages on Meta-wiki. Subscriber to get up-to-date news about the various ongoing projects. (continue reading)
Diff Blogs - Check out the most recent publications about the UCoC on Wikimedia Diff. (continue reading)

Thanks for reading. Xeno (WMF) 02:23, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

"Rainbow Six® Vegas" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Rainbow Six® Vegas and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#Rainbow Six® Vegas until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 05:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Updates to bureaucrat minimum activity requirements

Hello Xeno.

Following a discussion at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard, the minimum activity requirements for bureaucrats have been updated to also include the the recently updated minimum editing requirements for administrators (i.e. at least 100 edits every 5 years). This will be enforced beginning in January 2023. Should you no longer wish to volunteer as a bureaucrat you may request removal at SRP and.or let us know at WP:BN.

Best regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:37, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Bureaucrat Chat

Your input is requested at the freshly-created bureaucrat chat. Useight (talk) 03:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Good to see us speedier than we’ve been recently! Thanks for the note. –xeno^talk 19:27, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Administrator changes

Colin M

David.Monniaux • Fribbler • Grue • Kpjas • West.andrew.g

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversighter changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.

Technical news

The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.

Arbitration

Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Administrator changes

Tamzin

Barek • Darkwind • Geometry guy • ProcseeBot • RoyBoy • Sean Whitton • Valereee • Visorstuff • WAvegetarian

Sn0wflake → VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

Several areas of improvement collated from community member votes have been identified in the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines. The areas of improvement have been sent back for review and you are invited to provide input on these areas.

Technical news

Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

Remedy 2 of the Rachel Marsden case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to delete or reduce to a stub, together with their talk pages, articles related to Rachel Marsden when they violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
An arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been closed.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship and Bureaucrat Anniversary!

Dinosaur TrexXX33 (chat?) 12:16, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you User:DinosaurTrexXX33 DinosaurTrexXX33! –xeno^talk 23:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

help with article U.S._Open_Pool_Championship

Hi I am busy making changes to U.S._Open_Pool_Championship with official references and the help of an expert, but user 92.3.101.44 keeps rolling them back. How can I protect my changes please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandman1142 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Sandman1142: Sorry for the rather late reply. If you have a disagreement about edits, best to start a talk page post, and invite the user (in an wp:edit summary) to discuss at the talk page when you are restoring a change that another user undid. If a user is editing in bad faith, you can request protection is WP:RFPP (if it's just a single user, you could seek help at WP:AIV). –xeno^talk 23:29, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Administrator changes

AA • Gwalla • Ioeth • Laurascudder • Moriori (deceased) • Nat • Rfl

Drilnoth → AFigureOfBlue

Bureaucrat changes

Lee Vilenski

Interface administrator changes

Nihiltres

Technical news

user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

An arbitration case regarding conduct in deletion-related editing has been opened.

Miscellaneous

The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Movement Strategy and Governance News – Issue 7

Movement Strategy and Governance News
Issue 7, July-September 2022Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the 7th issue of Movement Strategy and Governance News! The newsletter distributes relevant news and events about the implementation of Wikimedia's Movement Strategy recommendations, other relevant topics regarding Movement governance, as well as different projects and activities supported by the Movement Strategy and Governance (MSG) team of the Wikimedia Foundation.

The MSG Newsletter is delivered quarterly, while the more frequent Movement Strategy Weekly will be delivered weekly. Please remember to subscribe here if you would like to receive future issues of this newsletter.

Movement sustainability: Wikimedia Foundation's annual sustainability report has been published. (continue reading)
Improving user experience: recent improvements on the desktop interface for Wikimedia projects. (continue reading)
Safety and inclusion: updates on the revision process of the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines. (continue reading)
Equity in decisionmaking: reports from Hubs pilots conversations, recent progress from the Movement Charter Drafting Committee, and a new white paper for futures of participation in the Wikimedia movement. (continue reading)
Stakeholders coordination: launch of a helpdesk for Affiliates and volunteer communities working on content partnership. (continue reading)
Leadership development: updates on leadership projects by Wikimedia movement organizers in Brazil and Cape Verde. (continue reading)
Internal knowledge management: launch of a new portal for technical documentation and community resources. (continue reading)
Innovate in free knowledge: high-quality audiovisual resources for scientific experiments and a new toolkit to record oral transcripts. (continue reading)
Evaluate, iterate, and adapt: results from the Equity Landscape project pilot (continue reading)
Other news and updates: a new forum to discuss Movement Strategy implementation, upcoming Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election, a new podcast to discuss Movement Strategy, and change of personnel for the Foundation's Movement Strategy and Governance team. (continue reading)

RamzyM (WMF) 01:39, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).

Administrator changes

Valereee

Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • Capitalistroadster • Samsara

Guideline and policy news

An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion RfC moderator appointments

As part of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case, the Arbitration Committee decided to request community comments on issues related to mass nominations at Articles for Deletion in a discussion to be moderated and closed by editors appointed by the committee.

Valereee (talk · contribs) and Xeno (talk · contribs) are appointed as co-moderators for the discussion. The co-moderators will jointly exercise the responsibilities assigned by the 2 August 2022 decision, which remains in full effect. The panel of three closing editors will be announced on a later date.

Wugapodes (talk · contribs) will serve as their committee liaison. The committee liaison will facilitate communication between the co-moderators and the full committee to ensure the process is carried out efficiently.

The Arbitration Committee sincerely thanks the co-moderators for accepting their appointments and assisting the community in holding this discussion.

For the Arbitration Committee, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Deletion RfC moderator appointments

Merry Christmas!

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas!

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Belated thanks CAPTAIN RAJU (and a gentle reminder to include a time stamped signature =) –xeno^talk 18:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

pre-RfC mass-article creation discussion has begun

As part of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case, the Arbitration Committee decided to request community comments on issues related to mass nominations at Articles for Deletion in a discussion to be moderated and closed by editors appointed by the committee.

Workshopping for the first of two discussions (which focuses on mass article creation) has begun and feedback can be given at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Requests for comment/Article creation at scale. As previously announced, Valereee and Xeno will be co-moderating these discussions.

For the Arbitration Committee, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:08, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § pre-RfC mass-article creation discussion has begun

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).

Administrator changes

DanCherek • DatGuy • Femke • Z1720

Aldux • Graham Beards • Nyttend

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

Guideline and policy news

A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

The impact report on the effects of disabling IP editing on the Persian (Farsi) Wikipedia has been released.
The WMF is looking into making a Private Incident Reporting System (PIRS) system to improve the reporting of harmful incidents through easier and safer reporting. You can leave comments on the talk page by answering the questions provided. Users who have faced harmful situations are also invited to join a PIRS interview to share the experience. To sign up please email Madalina Ana.

Arbitration

An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Please vote in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Board of Trustees election

Hello hello. I hope this message finds you well.

The Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Board of Trustees election ends soon, please vote. At least one of the candidates is worthy of support. --MZMcBride (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Movement Charter Drafting Committee's monthly newsletter

The Movement Charter Drafting Committee explains: what is the purpose of a 'movement charter'?

Wikimedia Summit 2022: The Drafting Committee will present three brief drafts of sections from the Movement Charter for discussion at the Wikimedia Summit on 10 September. The drafts will also be posted publicly on Meta.
Movement Charter video: The Committee and the MSG team created a short video (~8 minutes). The video briefly explains what the Movement Charter is, and introduces the Drafting Committee members. This video was streamed during Wikimania.
Learn about the Movement Charter Drafting Committee's work in August: The Committee released its regular monthly update from August 2022, including highlights about the Movement Charter drafting process and the upcoming Wikimedia Summit.

Subscribe to this newsletter on Meta wiki

11:59, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Administrator changes

ScottishFinnishRadish

Staxringold

Ahoerstemeier (deceased) • Ched

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678

CheckUser changes

GorillaWarfare

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, consensus was found that if the rationale for a block depends on information that is not available to all administrators, that information should be sent to the Arbitration Committee, a checkuser or an oversighter for action (as applicable, per ArbCom's recent updated guidance) instead of the administrator making the block.
Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
Community comment on the revised Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines is requested until 8 October.

Technical news

The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
A modification to the deletion RfC remedy in the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been made to reaffirm the independence of the RfC and allow the moderators to split the RfC in two.
The second phase of the 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review closes 3 October.

Miscellaneous

An administrator's account was recently compromised. Administrators are encouraged to check that their passwords are secure, and reminded that ArbCom reserves the right to not restore adminship in cases of poor account security. You can also use two-factor authentication (2FA) to provide an extra level of security.
Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections open 2 October and close 8 October.
You are invited to comment on candidates in the 2022 CUOS appointments process.
An RfC is open to discuss whether to make Vector 2022 the default skin on desktop.
Tech tip: You can do a fuzzy search of all deleted page titles at Special:Undelete.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish bureaucrat chat

Hi Xeno, I have started a bureaucrat discussion for ScottishFinnishRadish's RfA. It can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ScottishFinnishRadish/Bureaucrat chat. Thanks in advance. Acalamari 01:44, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Acalamari, sorry to have missed the chat - I had taken ill at the time. –xeno^talk 23:42, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Movement Charter Drafting Committee's monthly newsletter

Movement Charter Drafting Committee's participation at the Wikimedia Summit: The MCDC members presented initial drafts of the three chapters of the Movement Charter: Preamble, Values and Principles, and Roles and Responsibilities. The three chapters were prioritized to lay the groundwork for the rest of the Charter. MCDC members attended breakout rooms to discuss the progress with all attendees - both online and offline. The drafts received valuable feedback from the affiliates in many sessions. The Committee also launched a survey to gather feedback and suggestions on the Movement Charter development. Report for the Wikimedia Summit can be found here.
Learn about Movement Charter Drafting Committee’s work in September: The Committee released its regular monthly update from September 2022. It includes highlights about the Committee's progress in creating the Movement Charter content, results of the Wikimedia Summit, and an important announcement about membership.

Coming up:

Community consultations. In November the MCDC will be organizing events to hear your thoughts on the first three drafts. There will be onboarding sessions for community members to learn about Movement Charter and ask their questions to the Committee members. Community members will be able to share their thoughts and feedback via open and anonymous surveys, along with Meta pages, MS Forum and email. Details to be communicated by the MSG team.
Conference engagement. MCDC members will be attending the following conferences in October/November:
- WikiArabia (28 - 30 October): Anass, Ravan, Reda will facilitate a discussion about the Movement Charter. Additional sessions include a conversation about the roles & responsibilities, and a conversation about hubs. .
- WikiIndaba (4 - 6 November): Anasss will present a Movement Charter update.
- WikiCon francophone (17 - 20 November): Anass, Georges and Reda will present a Movement Charter session.
- WikiConNL (19 November): Ciell will present an Movement Charter update.
Movement Charter Ambassadors Package. Individuals and/or groups from various communities will be able to get resources and support to help increase the engagement of community members in the Movement Charter. The details to be shared by the MSG team.

--15:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC).

Administrators' newsletter – November 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).

Administrator changes

- Isabelle Belato
- Whpq

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes

DGG

Guideline and policy news

The article creation at scale RfC opened on 3 October and will be open until at least 2 November.
An RfC is open to discuss having open requests for adminship automatically placed on hold after the seven-day period has elapsed, pending closure or other action by a bureaucrat.

Arbitration

Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 13 November 2022 until 22 November 2022 to stand in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections.
The arbitration case request titled Athaenara has been resolved by motion.
The arbitration case Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block has entered the proposed decision stage.
AmandaNP, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee Elections. Xaosflux and Dr vulpes are reserve commissioners.

Miscellaneous

The 2022 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of two new CheckUsers.
You can add yourself to the centralised page listing time zones of administrators.
Tech tip: Wikimarkup in a block summary is parsed in the notice that the blockee sees. You can use templates with custom options to specify situations like {{rangeblock|create=yes}} or {{uw-ublock|contains profanity}}.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Movement Charter Drafting Committee's monthly newsletter

Ask Me Anything session introduction (12 November), presented by a Movement Charter Drafting Committee member.

MCDC members attended the “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter” sessions to provide more information about the Movement Charter, its goal, why it matters and how it impacts the communities. Recordings of the presentations in different languages can be found here.
The Movement Charter Ambassadors Program: Movement Charter Ambassadors (MCA) are individuals or groups interested in helping to ensure that their communities are fully engaged in community consultations. MCA are interested in supporting their communities to understand the content of the Movement Charter as well as ensuring that their communities can easily provide feedback. Anyone can become a MCA! Dedicated funds are available to support the MCA and their activities. Are you interested in becoming a Movement Charter Ambassador for your community? Sign up here!
The Movement Charter Drafting Committee will close membership: The Committee decided not to add new members or replace those who step down after 1 January 2023, unless for exceptional reasons.
Learn about Movement Charter Drafting Committee’s work in October: The Committee released its regular monthly update from October 2022. It includes highlights about the Committee's progress in drafting the Movement Charter content, its upcoming community consultation and participation at Wikimedia events.

Coming up:

Regional feedback conversations: The MCDC’s community consultations to collect feedback on the first three sections of the Movement Charter will take place between November 20 and December 18, 2022. You are invited to join one of the regional conversations planned for the eight regions (and various languages) of the Movement. Please note that interested people can share their feedback in different ways, including on the Meta talk page, on the Movement Strategy forum, filling out a survey (anonymously) and sending an email to: movementcharterwikimedia.org.
Sign up here to become a Movement Charter Ambassadors from your community and help ensure that your community is aware of the conversations around the Movement Charter!

--13:37, 20 November 2022 (UTC).

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

Administrator changes

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes

Guideline and policy news

Consensus has been found in an RfC to automatically place RfAs on hold after one week.
The article creation at scale RfC has been closed.
An RfC on the banners for the December 2022 fundraising campaign has been closed.

Technical news

A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)

Arbitration

Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 12, 2022 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
The proposed decision for the 2021-22 review of the discretionary sanctions system is open.
The arbitration case Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block has been closed.
The arbitration case Stephen has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 1 December 2022.
A motion has modified the procedures for contacting an admin facing Level 2 desysop.

Miscellaneous

Tech tip: A single IPv6 connection usually has access to a "subnet" of 18 quintillion IPs. Add /64 to the end of an IP in Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Staff account edit

I think you may have accidentally made a personal edit with your staff account here (given that your previous participation was entirely on your volunteer one). Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 22:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Woops. Quite right - good catch. –xeno^talk 22:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Movement Charter Drafting Committee's monthly newsletter

Presentation about the Values & Principles chapter by MCDC member Georges Fodouop.

Presentation about the Roles and Responsibilities chapter (statement of intent) by MCDC member Manavpreet Kaur.

Learn about Movement Charter Drafting Committee’s work in November: As usual, the Committee released its regular monthly updates from November 2022. This month’s updates include highlights about the external facilitator hiring, next in-person meeting of the Committee and updates about the new drafting groups, among others.
First community consultation period: From mid November to mid December 2022 the Committee members took part in 8 regional feedback sessions. Committee members joined the sessions to provide clarifications and answer to questions that came from different language communities on the Movement Charter.
- Recordings of the presentations shared during the regional meetings are available here for those interested.
- A list Frequently Asked Questions that came up in the calls is available on Meta.
- If you have not shared your feedback on the drafts of the Movement Charter yet, please do so by filling out this anonymous survey, which is open until January 2, 2023 and is available in more than 12 languages.
The Movement Charter Ambassador Program received over 15 proposals. The ambassadors are currently putting their initiatives into action in various local communities. The Movement Charter Ambassadors Program will once again be opened for applications in the second quarter of 2023, in preparation for the next round of Movement Charter consultations. Both individuals and organizations will be able to apply. Those interested in becoming Movement Charter Ambassadors are encouraged to sign-up.

Coming up:

Community Conversations summary: The Movement Strategy and Governance team of the Wikimedia Foundation will prepare and publish the final summary report of the community feedback in January 2023. The report will be shared with the MCDC and the communities on different channels of communication.
Feedback on the Movement Charter: There will be additional ways to engage with the Movement Charter content, including the early feedback on the proposed ratification process and a new set of draft chapters in the second quarter of 2023.

--14:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC).

Seasons Greetings

Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}}

Donner60 (talk) 01:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Xeno!

Happy New Year!

Xeno,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 04:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 04:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Administrator changes

Stephen

Interface administrator changes

Nihiltres

CheckUser changes

Moneytrees

Oversighter changes

Guideline and policy news

Speedy deletion criterion A5 (transwikied articles) has been repealed following an unopposed proposal.

Arbitration

Following the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, CaptainEek, GeneralNotability, Guerillero, L235, Moneytrees, Primefac, SilkTork.
The 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review has concluded with many changes to the discretionary sanctions procedure including a change of the name to "contentious topics". The changes are being implemented over the coming month.
The arbitration case Stephen has been closed.

Miscellaneous

Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Bureaucrat chat - invitation to participate

The RfA for MB has gone to a bureaucrat chat. Please join in the discussion. Primefac (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).

Administrator changes

Gimmetrow

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, the administrator policy now requires that prior written consent be gained from the Arbitration Committee to mark a block as only appealable to the committee.
Following a community discussion, consensus has been found to impose the extended-confirmed restriction over the topic areas of Armenia and Azerbaijan and Kurds and Kurdistan.

Technical news

The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

The arbitration case Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 24 February 2023.
In December, the contentious topics procedure was adopted which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period. There is a detailed summary of the changes and administrator instructions for the new procedure. The arbitration clerk team are taking suggestions, concerns, and unresolved questions about this new system at their noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Movement Charter Drafting Committee's monthly newsletter

First Community Consultation: A concise summary of the community consultation on the initial three drafts of the Charter is now available for your review on Meta and on the Diff platform. In addition, you can read about MC Ambassadors are sharing about their experiences:
What’s next after the community feedback period? The Committee is currently reviewing the detailed feedback which consists of 59 pages of comments, in March the Committee will share their response to the comments. The detailed version of the feedback, which the Committee is reviewing, is also available on this Meta page.
MCDC’s Virtual Working Session: The Committee gathered virtually from 3rd to 5th February to work on the drafts of the following new set of chapters of the Movement Charter: Global Council, Hubs, Decision Making, and Roles & Responsibilities. The Committee members worked in their smaller drafting groups first. The full Committee then convened, with representatives of each drafting group presenting the progress made so far, as well as about what type of support is needed for their future sessions.
Learn about Movement Charter Drafting Committee’s work in January: The update includes details of the meetings held by the Committee in the month of January 2023, stakeholder conversations, completed work as well as about the new drafting groups, creating glossary and independent legal review.

Coming up:

Community feedback on the ratification methodology proposal of the future Movement Charter. The feedback was postponed until March 2023. The communities will be able to review the ratification methodology and share their early input on the open questions.
The MCDC will soon announce a “Call for Advisors”. The call will be an invitation for interested individuals with relevant expertise and knowledge to participate in drafting the Charter. Advisors will be considered non-voting members.
Responses to the community consultation feedback by the MCDC. The Committee has been carefully reviewing feedback collected in the consultation from November & December 2022, and will publicly share responses to the feedback by March.

--14:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC).

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Administrator changes

The Wordsmith

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes