User talk:Winged Blades of Godric/Archive Unsorted

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Season's Greetings[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 07:12, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Request[edit]

I think you understand basic Nepali language, please Google "प्रमोद खरेल" you will find reliable sources (all front line media in Nepal). Please don't oppose the request in reduction of protection level. Thanks --Binod Basnet (talk) 09:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WBG! I have submitted the draft Draft:Pramod Kharel 2. All the citations are reliable. For the information --Binod Basnet (talk) 14:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Binod Basnet, that I'm active elsewhere does not mean that I'm bound to provide you an instant reply; unless I'm being held accountable for any of my actions. So, don't be childish and remove posts after a few hours.
I've seen the draft and will pass it after some copy-edits and culling of sources. ∯WBGconverse 19:57, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. Sorry for any mistakes. --Binod Basnet (talk) 20:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I created Pramod Kharel directly in mainspace. Please review the article. Thanks --Binod Basnet (talk) 05:33, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

We wish you a Merry Christmas,
We wish you a Merry Christmas,
We wish you a Merry Christmas,
And a Happy New Year!
May your holidays be filled with peace and joy. 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! Binod Basnet (talk) 11:22, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Adapted from {{Xmas6}}. Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:User:Altamel/Christmas}} to their talk page.

Greetings.[edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Winged Blades of Godric, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
DBigXrayᗙ 15:16, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Hope the new year will bring more friendly debates for us. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:16, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:11, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus:-Dispatching the entire bunch soon......∯WBGconverse 10:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus:-- Done ∯WBGconverse 12:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Got most of them, thanks! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:37, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 19 – 27 December 2018[edit]

Facto Post – Issue 19 – 27 December 2018
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Learning from Zotero

Zotero is free software for reference management by the Center for History and New Media: see Wikipedia:Citing sources with Zotero. It is also an active user community, and has broad-based language support.

Zotero logo

Besides the handiness of Zotero's warehousing of personal citation collections, the Zotero translator underlies the citoid service, at work behind the VisualEditor. Metadata from Wikidata can be imported into Zotero; and in the other direction the zotkat tool from the University of Mannheim allows Zotero bibliographies to be exported to Wikidata, by item creation. With an extra feature to add statements, that route could lead to much development of the focus list (P5008) tagging on Wikidata, by WikiProjects.

Zotero demo video

There is also a large-scale encyclopedic dimension here. The construction of Zotero translators is one facet of Web scraping that has a strong community and open source basis. In that it resembles the less formal mix'n'match import community, and growing networks around other approaches that can integrate datasets into Wikidata, such as the use of OpenRefine.

Looking ahead, the thirtieth birthday of the World Wide Web falls in 2019, and yet the ambition to make webpages routinely readable by machines can still seem an ever-retreating mirage. Wikidata should not only be helping Wikimedia integrate its projects, an ongoing process represented by Structured Data on Commons and lexemes. It should also be acting as a catalyst to bring scraping in from the cold, with institutional strengths as well as resourceful code.

Links
Diversitech, the latest ContentMine grant application to the Wikimedia Foundation, is in its community review stage until January 2.
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Czechia moratorium[edit]

Hello, I would like to ask you, as on main article Czech Republic is in effect name moratorium until July 2019, doesn't that apply also on country data templates as CZE, CZ which are being changed over the Wikipedia templates now, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template? Thank you, --ThecentreCZ (talk) 01:04, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ThecentreCZ, not a bright-line case and I need to dwell a bit on this locus. ∯WBGconverse 05:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well[edit]

...I'm not seeing the blatant errors Ammarpad is accused of making. Are you? Modernpaper co. appeared to be handled properly. I don't see anything about a bong using/weed smoking species of animal that eats pizza. My interactions with Ammarpad have been normal reviewing. Are you seeing something I'm not? Atsme✍🏻📧 04:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Atsme, Greetings of the new year:-)
If I am going to indulge in excessive nit-picking about Modernpaper co. (which Ritchie333 has now draftified); the timeline of major events goes as:-
  • Probably, the textbook definition of WP:BITE.
  • 5 minutes after the tagging; the author adds some quasi-spam-content and A3 was thus, void. He subsequently draftified the article, which though weird (given the state of the article), was probably per the request of the author on the article-t/p.
  • I don't see any fault; over the draftification. AGF, IAR and all that......
  • Soon afterwards, more spam was added and Ammarpad responded by slapping a G11, which was.
  • Pretty accurate.
  • Thereafter, it's primarily a contest between the author on one side and Ammarpad/GMG on the other side to keep the CSD-tags on the page; before it ultimately got deleted.
  • Again, nothing wrong, IMO.
To conclude, I don't get K's rationale (about not recognizing it as spam) and if I am compelled to oppose, using Modernpaper.co as the only locus, the first point concerning WP:BITE is miles better.
As to the other case concerning Ammarpad's dealing with weed smoking species of animal that eats pizza; I have no idea until some good samaritan chooses to un-delete it or provide the broader context. ∯WBGconverse 06:24, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with you about bitey...but, look what just happened to me over Naman Ambavi and the confusion over the Draft:Naman Ambavi. Talk about a time sink for 3 or 4 different reviewers! I think the confusion began when the sock/creator tried to bypass the AfC declines and moved the article to mainspace himself - tried to get it out there as far back as 2013 - so I question the newbie concerns that were shown him considering his webmaster skills (plus the fact he never responded to any of our posts on his TP). Admins forgave his sock activity (when he deleted our CSDs) - they considered it a new user simply not logging in even though the evidence strongly supported socking and defiance to get his promo bio published. I think we also need to consider that our volunteers deserve at least equally as much consideration as we're giving newbies. Wish it was easier to find a middle button instead of full-speed ahead, or slower than a slug. Atsme✍🏻📧 17:22, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Atsme, entirely agree about the last point.
As to this specific case; the creator was lucky enough to have come across quite-considerate sysops. Any other day, he would have been blocked. FWIW, see this edit of mine which would have prevented you-folks from being gamed into launching AFDs. ∯WBGconverse 10:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Naturopathy[edit]

I put the POV tag on this article because it is the most biased article I have ever seen. It states opinions as a matter of fact. The NPOV approach would be to describe the subject and what it purports to do, then describe the arguments for and against, with refs. The article doesn't do this. It expresses a point of view as if it is an indisputable fact. The bias is right there in the opening sentences of the intro, where it says "pseudoscientific", without providing even the pretence of a ref.

Sardaka (talk) 08:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you know a biased article when you see it? Or are you one of the gatekeepers who look after this article and make sure it stays the way it is, which is biased?

Sardaka (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sardaka, I don't give a damn about your perceptions of bias in the article. If you wish to reinstate the tag/edits, you need to gain a consensus. See our dispute resolution ladder.
You might wish to note that Lead typically does not require citations because it's (sort of) a summary of the body; wherein all the stuff are rigorously cited.
Naturopathy is pseudoscience and there's not a whiff of doubt about it. Wikipedia is not a place where everyone's opinion is of equal validity and the only opinions that matter are of reliable sources. If the sources of the latter kind paint a subject as pseudoscience/BS; we go with that. As Jimbo sed, the work of lunatic charlatans is not the equivalent of 'true scientific discourse'. And we, as an encyclopedia will reflect the mainstream scientific discourse in our articles.
Coming to your editorial behavior, you are not only flouting a host of policies (including but not limited to WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:PSCI and WP:FRINGE) but also indulging in intentional gaming of the system (3RR is not an entitlement) in an area governed by 2 discretionary sanctions, as notified on your t/p. When compounded with your IDHT behaviour and an indulgence in casting blatant personal attacks on opposing editors; your editorial future looks quite bleak in this area.
Move away or I will ask for a TBan at AE. ∯WBGconverse 10:14, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My last word: consensus means little when it's a consensus of the biased, which it is in this case. At WP, you occasionally find an article that is "looked after" by a cabal of editors who stop others from changing it. One user called them "gatekeepers", which is a good way of putting it. The naturopathy article is just one example. Therefore, I won't waste my time working on it anymore, because I can see I'm beating my head against a brick wall. Have a nice day. Sardaka (talk) 11:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Moving CreditMantri to draft status[edit]

Hi, We are part of them Brand team at CreditMantri and recently saw that the page was moved to draft status on 25th Nov.(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:CreditMantri) As you may be aware, CreditMantri is a consumer facing company and offer products and services PAN India. Current and prospective customers search about us to get more information and hence the Wiki page is a great verified resource for the same.

Kindly let us know if we can help clarify concerns if any so that the page can be re-instated?

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

Thank you and looking forward to your response.CHtohCW (talk) 09:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replying soon. ∯WBGconverse 12:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for your prompt response. We were wondering if you could also suggest a way we could reinstate this article at the earliest. As you may know, Wikipedia is a great way for a brand to establish its reputation, and we want to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines to have a presence of our brand on this platform. Do let us know if there is any change required from our end. We'll rectify the draft at the earliest to have it reinstated. Thanks again. CHtohCW (talk) 14:08, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, We were wondering if you had the chance to view our draft page. It would be really helpful for us if you could look into our request, as we want to resolve it as soon as possible. Please let us know the process we could apply to move our page back, and if you could also tell us the specific issues with our article that led its moving to drafts, we would ensure those issues are never repeated again. Thanks. CHtohCW (talk) 12:16, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify[edit]

This [1] was an attempt to remove your post and just walk away from this stinking pile of poo. As it happens, you snuck in an edit right before my attempt to remove, so I ended up undoing your edit, which was not my intention. Sorry about that. Jehochman Talk 18:03, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jehochman, no qualms and certainly nothing to apologize for:-) Cheers! ∯WBGconverse 18:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jehochman:-YGM ∯WBGconverse 19:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relists[edit]

Just a couple of observations since I just fixed your relist at Talk:Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi. First, you added the Relisting template BEFORE the nominators signature, which the bot could not recognize. Please be sure to place the Relisting template AFTER the nominator's sig. Second, you relisted the debate after only six days. We should wait until an RM debate is at least seven days old before we relist it. Thank you for your contributions and Happy New Year! Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  23:00, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weird; somehow my scripts were displaying it to have been opened prior to 7 days. Placing the template before the sig was a silly error on my part. Thanks for informing me and have a great year:-) ∯WBGconverse 05:27, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sometimes scripts do weird things. Wouldn't hurt to double check them for awhile. And Happy New Year to you and yours! Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  09:34, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

India FAR[edit]

Hi WBG, can you either change the indentation of your comment at WP:FAR#India, or change the word you in: "Can you list out all the changes that you &..." as I'm quite sure that you here doesn't mean Mathglot, as the indentation might lead others to infer. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 09:37, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ∯WBGconverse 10:14, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Murray Howe[edit]

Hey, I noticed you had added "Do NOT unmark, without notifying me." to Draft:Murray Howe and I think maybe you weren't. So just giving a headsup, it was unmarked as under review and is still pending. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:20, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

KylieTastic, this has an OTRS connection and we were conversing over there. Are you over OTRS? FWIW, it's a good decline with suboptimal reasons. I will copy-paste my comments from OTRS; soon.
@Jovanmilic97:, I expect you to notify the reviewer; if you are unmarking stuff in future. ∯WBGconverse 10:21, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No I've not been involved on the OTRS side of things, as long as your aware alls good. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Systematic violations of active community sanctions by Smallbones[edit]

Hi, and best wishes to the year 2019. I want to inform you about the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Systematic violations of active community sanctions by Smallbones. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 11:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seen. No interest. ∯WBGconverse 10:26, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-02[edit]

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

Tech News writers, editors and translators wish you a pleasant 2019 year.

Recent changes

  • RelatedSites extension has been undeployed. It was used to create interwiki links on Wikivoyage, now handled by Wikidata. [2]
  • Advanced item MediaWiki logstash logging is moving to a new infrastructure. This is an ongoing deployment. [3]
  • Advanced item codesearch.wmflabs.org has been updated, with new and updated repositories and a new search options for code. [4]
  • Advanced item On several wikis, an account named "Edit filter" has been created on December 17 to perform some technical maintenance on AbuseFilter. This account has sysop rights but it's a system user and no human can use it. The account already existed on wikis where AbuseFilter can perform blocks, which are issued using this account. See T212268 for more information and future plans.

Problems

  • Advanced item In AbuseFilter, the "Throttle" action takes three parameters: count, period and groups. They must now strictly respect the requirements listed on mediawiki.org. A list of broken filters is on Phabricator. If you're familiar with AbuseFilter, please take a look and fix them. [5]

Changes later this week

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

Meetings

  • Search Platform Office Hours is rescheduled to January 9. Check the details for time and date.

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

18:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

OMICS[edit]

Per OMICS Publishing Group, numerous discussions and the fact that OMICS staff are banned for spamming, I typically remove OMICS journal citations, along with predatory open access and other known compromised sources. Guy (Help!) 13:31, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bengal Famine 1943[edit]

  • Saw your comments. Putting it in WP:PR for two months. You don't hafta commet if you don't want to. Lingzhi2 ♦ (talk) 02:05, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You've finally settled on an account? Goodness. ∯WBGconverse 08:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A email I sent.....[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 13:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

 << FR 13:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing; I was inactive for a few days.∯WBGconverse 08:03, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RfC:_The_Sun[edit]

Another 48 Hrs.? --GRuban (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Or 127 hours? FOARP (talk)

Tech News: 2019-03[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • You can now use Google Translate in the content translation tool. [6][7]
  • You can now add captions to files on Commons. Captions are short descriptions of the file. They can be translated to all languages we use. They can't use wikitext markup.
  • Earlier a quoted HTML attribute had to be followed by a space. Now it doesn't. This means that some pages could look different when you save them even if you didn't edit that part of the text. [8][9]
  • Advanced item Templates with <templatestyles> could not show the difference between the live template and the sandbox version when they were tested. This has now been fixed. <templatestyles> has a new wrapper parameter now. You can use it for selectors like .mw-parser-output <wrapper parameter value> <selector from CSS page>. [10]

Problems

  • When you see an edit in the recent changes feed or in the history of a page some of them have tags. Some tags are added automatically. You can also add tags manually. Tags for edits that have been added manually can be edited. This didn't work for a little while. This has now been fixed. [11]

Changes later this week

  • You can move files from your wiki to Wikimedia Commons and keep the file history with the new FileExporter. It will be a beta feature on all wikis from 16 January. If you want to test it you activate it and check your wiki's configuration file.
  • Users who could cause more damage to the wikis if someone took over their account have to have more secure passwords. This includes administrators and other user groups. They can't use passwords that are in a list of common passwords. Accounts with common passwords are easy to take over. The list of common passwords was made longer a few weeks ago and has a different error message. Some user groups have been added to those who can't use common passwords. This is to protect all accounts with user rights that could cause damage. [12]
  • Advanced item The AbuseFilter variable minor_edit has been removed. It was deprecated in 2016. Now you can't use it. You can fix the filters using it. You can find them if you use the search bar on Special:AbuseFilter.
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from January 15

17:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

BGR-34[edit]


The wonderful throw away SNU[edit]

Can you write a closing statement, as we have no idea what the decision is regarding The Sun RFC at RSN?Slatersteven (talk) 14:24, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I got caught in some hectic RL stuff:( Have closed it, yesterday. At any case, what's SNU? ∯WBGconverse 07:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rajendralal Mitra[edit]


Wikipedians by philosophy[edit]

Hi Winged Blades of Godric

I see that you closed Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_December_15#Wikipedians_by_philosophy.

Per WP:BADNAC#2, you should not have done so. The discussion centred on the rejection by some involved editors of a long-established gudieline, and was bound to be controversial. Your closure gave no indication of any attempt to evaluate the discussion against policy or guideline, and such appears to be a headcount.

Please revert your closure, restore the CFD tags, and leave to an experienced admin to weigh the discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BrownHairedGirl, read Inter&Anthro's !vote and you are seeking a solution in search of a problem.
But, that you seem to have got into a recent obsession with cats; I will reopen this. So, kindly waste some more time. ∯WBGconverse 10:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And given the amount of users, it affects, kindly put that over CENT. ∯WBGconverse 10:18, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) More time to bludgeon the discussion, anyhow. ——SerialNumber54129 10:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What a pity. I made a civil request for your to revert an action which seemed to me not to accord with policy. I did not suggest or imply an bad faith, but you have chosne to respond with both a personal attack and a statement you prefer the !vote one of one particular user.

Since you clarify above that your intention was in fact to align yourself with one editor instead of weighing against Wikipedia policy the many arguments made on both sides, you most certainly should have added your own comment(s) to the discussion rather than casting what now appears to have been a supervote. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BrownHairedGirl, thanks for your note, follow SN's sage advice. ∯WBGconverse 11:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats. You are making a truly excellent case for why you should not have closed the discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:24, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BrownHairedGirl, noting this for posterity. At any case, I've listed the CFD over CENT and it has attracted new voices. Best, ∯WBGconverse 07:18, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AN[edit]

Dealt via off-wiki channels.∯WBGconverse 07:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I’ve suppressed the content you added to AN because we typically don’t allow that linking on-wiki even if there are real name accounts, but if you would email me it, I’d really appreciate it. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:28, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni, thanks for the note but you're wrong. Please cite the policy that authorizes removal of a highly-relevant link about a person, who has already outed himself. (Also, see the WMF blog post about Aouda)
Otherwise, please reverse yourself. And, the same link has been posted by Bonadea, in the same thread, hours ago. So, now go, redact it and create a mess of the history. ∯WBGconverse 16:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And given that you have already seen my entire comment (including the link), I don't have an idea about why you would want that emailed again.∯WBGconverse 16:48, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, I had not seen the previous link by bonadea at AN, thank you for making me aware of it. The policy is WP:OUTING. We don't allow identifying specific contributors with specific off-site profiles, especially on as highly a trafficked board as AN. A profile on a job-posting site is "other contact information" and since it was specifically linked to one contributor, when I got the ping, it pretty clearly looked like outing and Suppression is a tool of first resort in removing this information, which means that our practice is to suppress the content first and then reverse if it turns out not to be necessary later.
I asked two other oversighters to review the link (@Primefac and Amorymeltzer:), and they agreed that under normal circumstances it would constitute outing. We then found that the link had previously been cited in a 2011 AfD, and he had replied, which was not apparent at the time of your ping. I'm reversing myself because the information is already available on-wiki from 8 years ago and while it would have been able to be suppressed then, it's out of the bag now. This wasn't apparent when you first made your comment, which is why it was suppressed.
Re: why I wanted it emailed: I was going to forward it along to Trust & Safety and some ar.wiki functionaries I know. I assumed you may have known more of the context and would be able to provide it, which would have been helpful to forward. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
TonyBallioni, seeing this after I have already typed out and send an email:-) ∯WBGconverse 17:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey![edit]

Continuing discussion here, since it's not in the scope of the AfD itself. Look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Association of Court Reporters and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio Justice, from an admin no less. I promise I will take your suggestion and act by it, but it will happen by someone else. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-04[edit]

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

Tech News

  • Some people did not get last week's issue of Tech News. This was because of a problem with MassMessage. If you did not get last week's issue, you can read it on Meta. [13]

Recent changes

  • The content translation tool can now use version 2 as the default version for users who turned on the beta feature. For example it adds the tracking category Pages with unreviewed translations to translations that might have used machine translations without fixing the problems. This is so others can find them. You can find this category in Special:TrackingCategories on Wikipedias.
  • https://mediawiki2latex-large.wmflabs.org can now convert collects of up to 800 pages to PDF, EPUB or ODT. Previously this was 200 pages.

Problems

  • When a template was edited with the visual editor, it would sometimes put all information on one line. This makes it difficult to read for editors who use the wikitext editor. It also makes it more difficult to see what happened in a diff. This problem affected edits made between 8 and 17 January and is now fixed. [14]
  • MassMessage is used to post a message to many pages. It has not been working reliably. Some messages have not been posted to everyone. [15][16]
  • Because of a database problem that had to be fixed immediately you could not edit most wikis for a couple of minutes on 17 January (UTC). This has now been fixed. [17]

Changes later this week

  • You will be able to use template styles in the Module namespace. [18]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 22 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 23 January. It will be on all wikis from 24 January (calendar).

Meetings

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

20:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Mail[edit]

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

--SamHolt6 (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing mistaken overwrite at India deletion discussions[edit]

Dear Winged Blades of Godric, I just happened to check the India deletion discussions page and I found that one deletion discussion had overwritten some of the previous ones. The edit in question is [19]. I reverted this [20], which restored the original content but this also had the side effect of removing your discussion. I am not sure how to format and add back the content you pasted. Could you please take a look at this and help fix it? Otherwise, I think your discussion might be lost. My apologies for the inconvenience.--DreamLinker (talk) 02:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ramblersen2[edit]

Sorry to be bothering you with this again but I consulted you on my User:Ramblersen password problems at User talk:89.23.235.183. I have now solved the problem by creating the new account User:Ramblersen2 but I now have to pass those annoying "letter recognition"-tests again and again and have to await the attention of a reviewer be able to create new articles. Would it be possible to get my autoreviewer status back or whatever it will take for me not to encounter these problems. Then I can start contributing to [[Wikipedia:The 2500 Challenge (Nordic)[[ initiative again, it has gone a little dead as of lately.Ramblersen2 (talk) 12:19, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-05[edit]

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

Recent changes

Problems

  • When someone moves a page to a name that already exists that page that had the name the article is moved to is deleted. For a couple of months this didn't always work. Some users saw an error message instead. This has now been fixed. [21]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

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

18:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

The reply-link newsletter, issue 1[edit]

Hi! Welcome to the new reply-link newsletter, which I made because the ol' list on the reply-link talk page was unwieldy. In case you haven't been following development recently, I've sent out some new updates that should let it reply basically anywhere, even in transcluded pages or under hatted discussions (two locations people have been wanting for a while). Reliability has also gone way up, as I've implemented a couple of sanity checks that help prevent the script from responding to the wrong message. Unfortunately, that means the script fails a bit more often. Anyway, try it out if you haven't done so in a while, and let me know what you think! I always appreciate feature requests or bug reports on the talk page. Happy replying! (Signup list/Unsubscribe) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 20 – 31 January 2019[edit]

Facto Post – Issue 20 – 31 January 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Everything flows (and certainly data does)

Recently Jimmy Wales has made the point that computer home assistants take much of their data from Wikipedia, one way or another. So as well as getting Spotify to play Frosty the Snowman for you, they may be able to answer the question "is the Pope Catholic?" Possibly by asking for disambiguation (Coptic?).

Amazon Echo device using the Amazon Alexa service in voice search showdown with the Google rival on an Android phone

Headlines about data breaches are now familiar, but the unannounced circulation of information raises other issues. One of those is Gresham's law stated as "bad data drives out good". Wikipedia and now Wikidata have been criticised on related grounds: what if their content, unattributed, is taken to have a higher standing than Wikimedians themselves would grant it? See Wikiquote on a misattribution to Bismarck for the usual quip about "law and sausages", and why one shouldn't watch them in the making.

Wikipedia has now turned 18, so should act like as adult, as well as being treated like one. The Web itself turns 30 some time between March and November this year, per Tim Berners-Lee. If the Knowledge Graph by Google exemplifies Heraclitean Web technology gaining authority, contra GIGO, Wikimedians still have a role in its critique. But not just with the teenage skill of detecting phoniness.

There is more to beating Gresham than exposing the factoid and urban myth, where WP:V does do a great job. Placeholders must be detected, and working with Wikidata is a good way to understand how having one statement as data can blind us to replacing it by a more accurate one. An example that is important to open access is that, firstly, the term itself needs considerable unpacking, because just being able to read material online is a poor relation of "open"; and secondly, trying to get Creative Commons license information into Wikidata shows up issues with classes of license (such as CC-BY) standing for the actual license in major repositories. Detailed investigation shows that "everything flows" exacerbates the issue. But Wikidata can solve it.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/BGR-34[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, it's been over three weeks since you were going to come up with a new hook for your nomination. Please try to get to this soon. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:56, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BlueMoonset, sorry. I will look within 12 hours. ∯WBGconverse 14:37, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's been another five days without, and another editor has pinged the nomination as stale. I hope you do something with this soon, before it's marked for closure. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments[edit]

Where does it say I read Wikipediocrqcy? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:57, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kudpung, AFAIS, the report (which credits you as the sole author) states:-

GorillaWarfare, an arbitrator on the English Wikipedia, appears to be best informed, and explains in one of her posts on Wikipediocracy: "..............."

The edit-history of the page also has a diff where you had explicitly included a Wikipediocracy thread; which discussed James' case.
About 3 years back, you were mentioning Wikipediocracy as some place, where you had never been to and was not likely to go either. Furthermore, you've also never felt the need to follow blogs or that vile place they call Wikipediocracy. In your bid for being an arbitrator you described it as a site where people hide behind the anonymity afforded by Internet traditions to say terrible things about other people with impunity and even went on to advice others to avoid frequenting sites which exist to disparage Wikipedia editors and are known to harbour the bad, very bad hand of some good hand Wikipedians.
6 months back, you were asking others to ignore and deny that (notorious) site's existence (which was used for) sheer downright bloody-mindedness. You further wrote If one has to evoke Wikipedia hate sites where trolls, blocked and banned users abound, and users with a Guinness record block log..................
Given, all these there was a definite element of surprise to discover you (of all people) to refer to information, posted over there. Anyways, as they say, there's a first time for every act:-)
At any case, I sincerely hope that no editor gets tempted to visit the site, after reading your Signpost article and somehow gets sucked into the unholy vortex. Cheers! ∯WBGconverse 12:24, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) FYI, WBG, we editors at The Signpost do receive tips via email, so for this reason alone it is not logical to conclude that knowledge of an off-wiki writing means one has personally visited that site. I can personally attest that op-eds (not necessarily by me or K, preserving confidentiality) have contained content received via tips. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:18, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have never said that K has written the stuff only as a result of the post over the BADSITE or was led from there. What I've stated is that he has surely read over the stuff, however he might have been led and then proceeded to mention it; which is quite surprising given his extreme long-standing antipathy against the site and even visiting it.
Bri, if your above statement means that receiving a tip stating $ABC$ had stated $Blah...Blah....Blah....$ over $XYZ$ will lead to yours' writing the stuff without any vetting (or inspecting the background); that only points out the dubiousness and non-credibility of your journalism (which I hope isn't the case).∯WBGconverse 15:41, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you believe that everything that gets mentioned is first discussed openly on Wikipedia, then you are very much mistaken. (Even Bri and I discuss The Signpost over an official but non-public email list). I've been around for a relatively long time on Wikipedia, and met literally dozens of editors personally. All journalists have their sources, on top of that I also have a pretty good insight into what goes on behind the scenes. There are people I trust implicitly on Wikipedia (even, believe it or not, in the WMF) some of whom are extremely good friends, but not those who deliberately monitor the action and frequent the drama boards in the hope of tripping people up. That is not AGF. Sooner or later they will fall on their own swords. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:02, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Rajendralal Mitra[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rajendralal Mitra you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of L293D -- L293D (talk) 03:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Adams bridge[edit]

The RAMSETU that many people are calling Adams bridge is wrong...Ramsetu was constructed by hindu deity Lord Ram....And this thing is accepted in both countries (India and Srilanka)...so please change it... I respect every religion but Adam has nothing to do with it.... Master7511 (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Master7511, we, at en-wiki, are concerned about which of the two synonymous terms are used to a greater extent by the English-language-sources. And, that comes out to be Adam's Bridge.
Also, current archaeological evidence asserts it to be a natural feature.∯WBGconverse 16:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK review[edit]

hi there, are you still reviewing the DYK, if not can you please self revert and allow another reviewer to take this up. I would hate to see this linger on till it gets stale. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK; not ITN:-) I will probably pass by today late-night (ITC).∯WBGconverse 14:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, The author mentioned on his talk page that he had tried for a ITN, but for whatever reasons had to withdraw it. So lets try for a faster DYK if that is possible.--DBigXrayᗙ 06:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2019[edit]

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

Administrator changes

added Enterprisey • JJMC89
readded BorgQueen
removed Harro5 • Jenks24 • Graft • R. Baley

Interface administrator changes

removedEnterprisey

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
  • Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

Technical news

  • A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of a User-Page[edit]

Hey! Thanks for deleting the Medhavigandhi/HappyHands user page : I had created it when I was quite new to Wikipedia and unaware of how it worked. By the time I learnt, I had forgotten the password to that account (or its existence)! So thanks much! Medhavigandhi (talk) 07:19, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No qualms:-) Keep your editathons coming! ∯WBGconverse 17:31, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-06[edit]

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

Changes later this week

  • It was easy to untick a box by accident in Special:Preferences. This will now be fixed. [22]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 February. It will be on all wikis from 7 February (calendar).

Meetings

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

17:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

To do[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/India--∯WBGconverse 18:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sooner or later[edit]

In your close of the 2014 MU69 move review,[23] didn't you mean "whichever is sooner" rather than "whichever is later"? — JFG talk 11:14, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please confirm your stance? I fail to understand the logic of a "whichever is later" closure. Surely if this object gets an official IAU name soonish, we should not have to wait an arbitrary 6 months to discuss a title change again. Same thing if editors separately get consensus to clarify WP:NCASTRO in a way that would mandate a title change here before an official name is announced. — JFG talk 23:14, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@JFG:-I apologize for the wording-error (what was I thinking?!) as well as for the gravely late reply; courtesy my missing out this thread. Amending in a moment.∯WBGconverse 07:51, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

For helping out with Dice. I’ve been watching the article for 2 years and it’s quite possibly the most frustration I’ve experienced over such a relatively minor subject. The amount of repeating “We discussed this one of the last 5 times he took to Twitter over this article” was driving me mad. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:19, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni, welcome; delved into the topic from Iri's t/p :-) ∯WBGconverse 14:29, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Shri Ram Murti Smarak College of Engineering and Technology[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Shri Ram Murti Smarak College of Engineering and Technology".

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. DannyS712 (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest[edit]

To answer your question: No. I'm semi-retired from the project, which I actually enjoyed at one time. Where is this coming from?--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:30, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep conversations at a single thread (the reply ought have been posted over your t/p) and I do not like the outright rejection. What's your interest in creating (and editing) certain weapons (esp. gun) related articles? ∯WBGconverse 04:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I have an interest in weapons, animals, classic cars, classic rock, Catholicism, the US Military and movies; so that was what I spent my time editing or in some cases creating. I was at one time the coordinator for the firearms project and worked on improving those articles as time allowed, so that was probably the bulk of my work on here. There are probably very few of those articles which I have not edited.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 04:28, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are intentionally stonewalling my queries. I asked where does your interest in weapons (and related territory) stemmed from and your conflicts (if any) in that part. territory. It was not a request to give a list of your interests. ∯WBGconverse 04:33, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I have been editing here for 15 years and we are always supposed to assume good faith and you are accusing me of stonewalling you. I will assume you are not harassing me. Are you some kind of an Admin? Second of all...I got involved with weapons and martial arts at a very young age and became a US Marine at 17. I've been shooting guns, building guns, etc for over 3 decades. This is where my interest in weapons stems from. If you mean, do I have a conflict of interest with regard to paid editing, no I do not and why don't you talk to some of the administrators whom I have helped in that regard when I found a site soliciting editors to write articles on wikipedia in exchange for money. I apologize if my knowledge and use of weapons frightens you or if there is a slight language barrier.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 04:46, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the above post. In light of certain off-wiki evidence (which I can't disclose courtesy outing prohibitions), it's quite difficult to accept your statement of no conflict-of-interest at face-value but then we are bound to assume good faith. I though take the oppurtunity to remind you that PE is only a subset of COI, as documented over WP:COI. We likely won't meet again but let's see where this leads, if at all. Ta, ∯WBGconverse 04:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INCOTM[edit]

Hi, WP:INCOTM was a fine initiative, IMO, and again it could not be continued. Would you like to collaboratively to restart it? --Titodutta (talk) 21:07, 10 February 2019 (UTC) I mean of course I'll join. We need a group of 2-3 editors to restart the process, editors who are actively editing. If we want to start it for March, this might be a good time. --Titodutta (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will give a quasi-detailed reply on my plans. Give me a few hours:-)∯WBGconverse 11:19, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE[edit]

In regards to diff, Fae actually took this to AN/I (probably following a link in the AfD to an open AN/I discussion). Take a look at ANI archive (you need to open the collapsed box) - "This appears to be a deliberate attempt at doxxing or outing a Wikipedia contributor's off-wiki social media accounts. My understanding of policy is that this is strictly forbidden, and speculating about accounts on-wiki is normally considered harassment. Unless the editor has voluntarily chosen to connect these accounts on-wiki, not only is there nothing to do here, but this section should be revision deleted for privacy concerns. --Fæ (talk) 17:04, 4 February 2019 (UTC)". Icewhiz (talk) 09:30, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and thanks. Will slightly amend the wording.∯WBGconverse 11:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

E[edit]

won't be able to look till I get home. Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No issues. Hardly time-dependent.∯WBGconverse 11:01, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chairs[edit]

Look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Sabrosky who was no-consensused (I disagree about this one) for having a named chair ("General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research") at the US Army War College (or the associated Strategic Studies Institute - not sure which). IIRC this chair has the distinction of the recipient of the chair receiving an.... actual chair. Icewhiz (talk) 16:52, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-07[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • You can use the ambox CSS class to show page issues to mobile readers. When you use ambox there are classes you can use.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 February. It will be on all wikis from 14 February (calendar).

Meetings

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

18:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Request for moving Draft:Vinci Da to main space[edit]

Hi, you moved the page Vinci Da to Draft:Vinci Da. I have added couple more references. The film has completed principal photography (I have added a reference in Bengali language stating the progress of shooting). Meets WP:NFF. Please move it to main space. Thanks! Regards, --Dwaipayan (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/BGR-34.
Message added 11:45, 12 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Courtesy notice. North America1000 11:45, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Growth team updates #5[edit]

Welcome to the fifth newsletter for the new Growth team!  

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

New projects for discussion[edit]

We began the "Personalized first day" project with the welcome survey so that we could gather information about what newcomers are trying to accomplish. The next step is to use that information to create experiences that help the newcomers accomplish their goal – actually personalizing their first day. We asked for community thoughts in the previous newsletter, and after discussing with community members and amongst our team, we are now planning two projects as next steps: "engagement emails" and "newcomer homepage".

  • Engagement emails: this project was first discussed positively by community members here back in September 2018, and the team how has bandwidth to pursue it. The idea is that newcomers who leave the wiki don't get encouraged to return to the wiki and edit. We can engage them through emails that send them the specific information they need to be successful – such as contact from a mentor, the impact of their edits, or task recommendations. Please read over the project page, and comment on its discussion page with any ideas, questions, or concerns. Do you think this is a good idea? Where could we go wrong?
  • Newcomer homepage: we developed the idea for this project after analyzing the data from the welcome survey and EditorJourney datasets. We saw that many newcomers seem to be looking for a place to get started – a place that collects their past work, options for future work, and ways to learn more. We can build this place, and it can connect to the engagement emails. The content of both could be guided by what newcomers say they need during their welcome survey, and contain things like contact from a mentor, impact of their edits, or task recommendations. Please read over the project page, and comment on its discussion page with any ideas, questions, or concerns. Do you think this is a good idea? Where could we go wrong?

Initial reports on newcomer activity[edit]

We have published initial reports on each of the team's first two projects. These reports give the basic numbers from each project, and there are many more questions we will continue to answer in future reports. We're excited about these initial findings. They have already helped us define and design parts of our future projects.

  • Welcome survey: the initial report on welcome survey responses is available here. Some of the main findings:
    • Most users respond to the survey, giving it high response rates of 67% and 62% in Czech and Korean Wikipedias, respectively.
    • The survey does not cause newcomers to be less likely to edit.
    • The most common reason for creating an account in Korean Wikipedia is to read articles—not for editing—with 29% of Korean users giving that responses.
    • Large numbers of respondents said they are interested in being contacted to get help with editing: 36% in Czech and 53% in Korean.
  • Understanding first day: the initial report on what newcomers do on their first day is available here. Some of the main findings:
    • Large numbers of users view help or policy pages on their first day: 42% in Czech and 28% in Korean.
    • Large numbers of users view their own User or User Talk page on their first day: 34% in Czech and 39% in Korean.
    • A majority of new users open an editor on their first day – but about a quarter of them do not go on to save an edit during that time.

Help panel deployment[edit]

The help panel was deployed in Czech and Korean Wikipedias on January 10. Over the past four weeks:

  • About 400 newcomers in each wiki have seen the help panel button.
  • About 20% of them open up the help panel.
  • About 50% of those who open it up click on one of the links.
  • About 5% of Czech users ask questions, and about 1% of Korean users ask questions.

We think that the 20% open rate and 50% click rate are strong numbers, showing that a lot of people are looking for help, and many want to help themselves by looking at help pages. The somewhat lower numbers of asking questions (especially in Korean Wikipedia) has caused us to consider new features to allow people to help themselves. We're going to be adding a search bar to the help panel next, which will allow users to type a search that only looks for pages in the Help and Wikipedia namespaces.

How to create a good feedback page?[edit]

What is the way to built a good help page? What blocks you when writing an help page? Your replies will help to create better help contents to newcomers, that would be used on Help panel.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot, 14:15, 13 February 2019 (UTC) • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

Nauroti Devi[edit]

Greetings. I assume there was some kind of Twinkle hiccup here, because the actual discussion page for your AfD nomination here was not created. Have a good day. --Finngall talk 17:10, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Dice AfD[edit]

You've closed an AfD as speedy keep. I'd like to know which WP:SKCRIT you used for that. Two editors !voted to delete, which disqualifies the criteria 1 and 2. Thanks, wumbolo ^^^ 11:00, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I'm surprised no-one invoked WP:IAR based on WP:NOTBURO, personally. ——SerialNumber54129 11:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Qwerty's !vote was in bad faith (check his contribs) and the other delete !voter was near-certainly socking . Moreover, that nomination with a dubious rationale was not going anywhere.
If you really believe that Dice is non-notable, feel free to put forward a good nom. ∯WBGconverse 11:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By way of explanation[edit]

I forked out Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack from the 2019 Pulwama attack article, but I did not write it. I should have made that clear in the edit summary. My goal was to get that junk out of the article quickly, since it was on the Main Page. Abductive (reasoning) 01:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion without consensus[edit]

Deletion review for Kingman Group[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kingman Group. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Skirts89 15:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

For this. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-08[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • When you thank someone on the mobile web you will now have two seconds to cancel the thank. This is in case you clicked on the thank button by accident. [24]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 19 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 20 February. It will be on all wikis from 21 February (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

  • There is a proposal to add a red link to mobile search results if there is no page with that name. This is how it works on desktop. You can leave feedback. [25]

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

23:13, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Medimix (soap)[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Medimix (soap), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: products are not eligible for A7, this one claims significance anyway and there are non-spammy revisions to revert to, so fails G11. Thank you. SoWhy 14:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Christianity in Nepal/GA1[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, were you planning on taking over this GA review, or should the review be ended and the nomination be placed back in the pool of GANs waiting for a reviewer? If the latter, I'm happy to do the necessary edits to make sure it's done without any loss of seniority. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:18, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset:-Please place back the nomination in the pool. My intention was merely to stall a poor-quality review and I personally don't have enough experience, over the topic-area. ∯WBGconverse 17:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: death threats and TPA[edit]

Replying here since BN is going nowhere fast and you and I have always been able to talk even when we disagree: I always revoke TPA for death threats when blocking, and would recommend all admins do the same. To me, it’s similar to an oversight block (where this is also the norm): the individual, whether an account or IP is being blocked because their on-wiki actions have real life implications and the advantages to having an open project need to be balanced with the real life implications of death threats, etc. If you want the policy I suppose it’d be disruptive editing, as there’s strong potential for disruption that is difficult to undo if access is allowed.

On the broader BN point, yeah, it annoys me that we don’t have a logged actions standard for inactivity desysops, but I also don’t like what is a fairly normal pair of actions being turned into some major scandal. There are active admins who do a lot worse with IPs and vandalism blocks in my view, and get barnstars for it, so I don’t like seeing others held up to higher standards than we’d reaaonably expect from someone who is more active. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will reply tomorrow. ∯WBGconverse 19:13, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warwan Valley[edit]

Information icon Hi, you recently edited Warwan Valley. Your contributions are welcome as long as they are not disruptive. But looking at this diff it seems you have blanked a whole sourced section while mentioning in your own summary that you where only removing a reliable source. Looking at your recent edits the intention looks quite clear. Please stop these sort of disruptive editing as you did in Warwan Valley, otherwise you will also find yourself at ANI.  MehrajMir (talk) 08:04, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that you are not trolling, Mehrajmir13, what part of WP:V do you fail to comprehend? Or, is it a problem with English language?
The travelogue was a reliable source but that supported precisely nothing of whatever you wrote over there using that as a citation. So, the source as well as the unsourced stuff gets simultaneously removed.
And, my edit summary was explicitly clear.
I will take the oppurtunity to remind you that this's not the first time that you have indulged in a blatant falsification of sources. Mend your ways before the ban-hammer strikes.
And by the way, feel free to take me to ANI but I suggest a reading of WP:BOOMERANG ∯WBGconverse 09:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk to us about talking[edit]

" icon depicting two speech Bubbles"

The Wikimedia Foundation is planning a global consultation about communication. The goal is to bring Wikimedians and wiki-minded people together to improve tools for communication.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis, whatever their experience, their skills or their devices.

We are looking for input from as many different parts of the Wikimedia community as possible. It will come from multiple projects, in multiple languages, and with multiple perspectives.

We are currently planning the consultation. We need your help.

We need volunteers to help talk to their communities or user groups.

You can help by hosting a discussion at your wiki. Here's what to do:

  1. First, sign up your group here.
  2. Next, create a page (or a section on a Village pump, or an e-mail thread – whatever is natural for your group) to collect information from other people in your group. This is not a vote or decision-making discussion: we are just collecting feedback.
  3. Then ask people what they think about communication processes. We want to hear stories and other information about how people communicate with each other on and off wiki. Please consider asking these five questions:
    1. When you want to discuss a topic with your community, what tools work for you, and what problems block you?
    2. What about talk pages works for newcomers, and what blocks them?
    3. What do others struggle with in your community about talk pages?
    4. What do you wish you could do on talk pages, but can't due to the technical limitations?
    5. What are the important aspects of a "wiki discussion"?
  4. Finally, please go to Talk pages consultation 2019 on Mediawiki.org and report what you learned from your group. Please include links if the discussion is available to the public.

You can also help build the list of the many different ways people talk to each other.

Not all groups active on wikis or around wikis use the same way to discuss things: it can happen on wiki, on social networks, through external tools... Tell us how your group communicates.

You can read more about the overall process on mediawiki.org. If you have questions or ideas, you can leave feedback about the consultation process in the language you prefer.

Thank you! We're looking forward to talking with you.

Trizek (WMF) 15:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Waldorf education discretionary sanctions[edit]

Hi. ArbCom are considering removing discretionary sanctions from Waldorf education and related articles. I note you recently had concerns regarding one of the editors who was a party to the Waldorf case: [26]. Do you have any views on the matter? If so, please comment at: [27]. SilkTork (talk) 09:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will reply in a day or so but I don't have any objections against the motion. Thanks, ∯WBGconverse 04:12, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Neo-Bechstein[edit]

On 23 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Neo-Bechstein, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Neo-Bechstein was a pioneering electric grand piano in which the mechanics of the piano were no longer involved in the direct production of sound? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Neo-Bechstein. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Neo-Bechstein), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Vanamonde (Talk) 12:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert related to Proof and Persuasion[edit]

You added p. 161 of Proof and Persuasion (a page which is part of Tapati Guha-Thakurta's chapter, although you didn't credit them) in this edit on 12 November 2018, at the same time you appended the phrase "to study and obtain casts of Indian sculpture" to the end of the first sentence of the paragraph. The source fails to support much of the earlier part of the sentence: "Under the patronage of [the] Royal Society of Arts and the colonial government, Rajendralal led an expedition into the Bhubaneshwar region of Odisa during 1868-69." The source says:

It had been the government's express desire in 1870 that 'as far as possible intelligent "natives" should be employed in, and trained to, the task of photography, measuring and surveying buildings, directing excavations and ... deciphering inscriptions.' The most eminent of such 'intelligent natives' who entered the field in this period was Rejendralal Mitra (1822-91), by then an established antiquarian and Indologist and an important member of the Asian Society of Bengal. He came to head one of the most extensive documentation and survey projects that the government had got under way since the late 1860s. Taking up a scheme floated by the Royal Society of Arts, London, for obtaining casts of old Indian sculpture, Rajendralal Mitra turned to the ancient temple architecture and sculpture of Orissa, taking with him on his study tours ...

The page makes no mention of "the Bhubaneshwar region". Nor does it mention specific dates for the expeditions, although by starting the paragraph with what the government wrote in 1870, and introducing the expeditions with "one of the most extensive documentation and survey projects ... since the late 1860s" (emphasis mine) it strongly implies that the expeditions were in or after 1870.

Perhaps "into the Bhubaneshwar region of Odisa during 1868-69" had been supported by a source cited later in the paragraph, and your 12 November insertion inadvertently broke text-source integrity. In any case, thank you for now adding a source for his beginning work on Orissa in 1868, and for your edit summary promising that a source for Bhubaneshwar will be forthcoming. Now that you have those matters in hand, I will re-implement the remainder of the edit that you reverted, which dealt with the citation of Proof and Persuasion, specifically complying with WP:PAGELINKS and clarifying the author, chapter, and editors. If you have an objection to that, I'd be obliged if you would discuss your concern. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The very first edit of mine, linked by you, is exactly indicative of what transpired over here, (as you had ascertained late into your post). I will explain in a detailed manner, though:-
Aprior to my edit; the content read:-

Under the patronage of Royal Society of Arts and the colonial government, Rajendralal led an expedition into the Bhubaneshwar region of Odisa during 1868-69. The results were compiled in The Antiquities of Orissa which has been revered as a magnum opus about Odisan architecture.{{sfn|Ray|1969|p=131}}

I (personally) used to think that inline-citation must be provided after every line but post some miscellaneous advice, I came to understand that best practices forbid such redundant referencing. If an entire paragraph, consisting of multiple lines, is cited to the same source, mentioning that source once (and at the end of the paragraph) is optimal business.
As expected, both the lines were indeed entirely supported by Pg 131 of Ray.
Now, in my edit, I introduce a new phrase to study and obtain casts of Indian sculpture at the end of the first line and accompanied it with a relevant reference.
Un-knownst to me; this broke the integrity between text and cite because the reference that supported the first part of the first line, now lay at the end of the second line. ∯WBGconverse 16:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-09[edit]

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

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • When you look at your watchlist or the recent changes page you can use the new filters for edit review. There you can choose tags to filter different edits. Empty tags will no longer be shown. [29]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 February. It will be on all wikis from 28 February (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

  • The Wikipedia app for Android will invite users to add Wikidata descriptions to Wikidata objects that have Wikipedia articles but no Wikidata descriptions. It will only invite users who have added a number of Wikidata descriptions in the app without being reverted. This is to avoid spam and bad edits. You can read more and leave feedback.

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

21:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 32[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • New and expanded partners
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 21 – 28 February 2019[edit]

Facto Post – Issue 21 – 28 February 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
What is a systematic review?

Systematic reviews are basic building blocks of evidence-based medicine, surveys of existing literature devoted typically to a definite question that aim to bring out scientific conclusions. They are principled in a way Wikipedians can appreciate, taking a critical view of their sources.

PRISMA flow diagram for a systematic review

Ben Goldacre in 2014 wrote (link below) "[...] : the "information architecture" of evidence based medicine (if you can tolerate such a phrase) is a chaotic, ad hoc, poorly connected ecosystem of legacy projects. In some respects the whole show is still run on paper, like it's the 19th century." Is there a Wikidatan in the house? Wouldn't some machine-readable content that is structured data help?

File:Schittny, Facing East, 2011, Legacy Projects.jpg
2011 photograph by Bernard Schittny of the "Legacy Projects" group

Most likely it would, but the arcana of systematic reviews and how they add value would still need formal handling. The PRISMA standard dates from 2009, with an update started in 2018. The concerns there include the corpus of papers used: how selected and filtered? Now that Wikidata has a 20.9 million item bibliography, one can at least pose questions. Each systematic review is a tagging opportunity for a bibliography. Could that tagging be reproduced by a query, in principle? Can it even be second-guessed by a query (i.e. simulated by a protocol which translates into SPARQL)? Homing in on the arcana, do the inclusion and filtering criteria translate into metadata? At some level they must, but are these metadata explicitly expressed in the articles themselves? The answer to that is surely "no" at this point, but can TDM find them? Again "no", right now. Automatic identification doesn't just happen.

Actually these questions lack originality. It should be noted though that WP:MEDRS, the reliable sources guideline used here for health information, hinges on the assumption that the usefully systematic reviews of biomedical literature can be recognised. Its nutshell summary, normally the part of a guideline with the highest density of common sense, allows literature reviews in general validity, but WP:MEDASSESS qualifies that indication heavily. Process wonkery about systematic reviews definitely has merit.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Hou Xun[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, you posted here on February 19 that you were not satisfied with the review and would be doing one the next day. It's now February 28. Are you going to return to conduct a new review? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:34, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sir[edit]

I understand your valueable suggesion i must take care while editing.sir i have one question icant do editing in some articles plz solve my problem... 

    Thanking you. Indiamerijaan2001 (talk) 02:25, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 India–Pakistan standoff[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2019 India–Pakistan standoff; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:35, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nigel Ish:-If you can't follow WP:DTTR; I don't wish to see you on my t/p ever. Ta, ∯WBGconverse 11:43, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/S. Dharmambal[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, I was wondering whether the new sourcing added by the nominator has addressed your concerns. Please stop by the nomination when you can to let us know how you think things stand. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:44, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will check within a day:-) ∯WBGconverse 15:15, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus' User Scripts[edit]

Dear all. Recently, our community lost a dedicated user, Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk). Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of Abelmoschus Esculentus' scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.

If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-10[edit]

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

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 March. It will be on all wikis from 7 March (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 6 March at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • You can give feedback on the future of talk pages.
  • The mobile website will use the standard fonts on your computer or phone instead of a generic font. This will make it easier to read text in many scripts. [30][31]

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

16:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of BGR-34[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article BGR-34 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:01, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Questions[edit]

Trying to understand your reasoning for the revert without checking the spelling, verifying content or checking sources? Secondly, what will happen to DRAFT:Pathadipalam if your suggestion is followed and what is not even an acceptable stub gets moved to Pathadipalam?? It wasn't until after I prodded it that an editor showed up and added another sentence including Pathadipalam metro station misspelled at first and not wikilinked, and then expressed discontent over the prod on the TP. If anything, the stub should have been sent back to Draft because it's not only misspelled, it lacks content and RS. Thirdly, if I had sent it to draft when there is a current draft with the correct spelling in waiting, then what? Finally, the misspelled stub has remained pretty much in the same state it's in now for 12+ years, so I really don't see that reverting the prod was helpful under the circumstances. I'm all ears eyes... Atsme 📣 📧 18:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-11[edit]

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

Recent changes

Problems

  • Some wikis will not be able to edit for a short period of time on 19 March (UTC). This will start at 15:00 UTC. It will last up to 15 minutes but probably shorter. You can see the list of affected wikis. This is because of network maintenance. You can still read the wikis.
  • Editors who use Firefox to edit with the visual editor had a problem with copying text. When they tried to select text that included footnotes, templates or block images in the middle they would often only get part of the text. This has now been fixed. [32]
  • Some maps didn't work for a while on 8 March. This has been fixed. [33][34]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 March. It will be on all wikis from 14 March (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 13 March at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

19:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric,

News
Discussions of interest
  • Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
  • {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
  • A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
  • There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.
Reminders
  • NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
NPP Tools Report
  • Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
  • copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
  • The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

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

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:19, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nightscape for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nightscape is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nightscape until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by PC78 (talk • contribs)

Hi, @PC78: WBG is not the creator of this article. – Ammarpad (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ammarpad: I know, didn't say they were! I notified Winged Blades of Godric since they contributed to the article and may be interested in the discussion. PC78 (talk) 13:06, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Growth team updates #6[edit]

Welcome to the sixth newsletter from the Growth team!

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

Plans for the next three months[edit]

The Growth team has been working on features to increase new editor retention for the last seven months. We have made a lot of progress and learned a lot, and we've just finished planning for our next three months. During the next three months, we're going to focus on iterations of the help panel and the newcomer homepage. We have decided not to start the engagement emails project, because we think that we will be able to do better work by improving the projects we have already started. Specifically, these are our team goals:

  • Deploy and iterate on newcomer homepage
  • Continued iteration on help panel
  • Make the help panel available to more wikis
  • Add a fourth Wikipedia to our set of target wikis
  • Publish in-depth quantitative reporting on the data from this year
  • Assemble a report on what our team has learned so far about newcomers

Newcomer homepage[edit]

Mockup of potential design for newcomer homepage
The newcomer homepage is our current major project. We hope that community members can read over the project page, and comment on its discussion page with any ideas, questions, or concerns. You can see in the accompanying mockup how we are thinking about the homepage.

We have recently decided on the specifications for an initial version that we can deploy and iterate on:

  • Shown in the User space
  • Desktop only (mobile comes next)
  • Four modules
    • Help module: help links and ability to ask help desk questions
    • Mentorship module: all newcomers assigned a mentor to whom they can ask questions
    • Impact module: shows the number of pageviews for pages the newcomer edited
    • Account completion module: gives some very simple recommendations of how to get started (add an email, start your user page)
  • Layout not yet personalized for each user

We're currently running live user tests on this configuration. Future work will include adapting the homepage for mobile, working on a task recommendation module, and considering how to encourage newcomers to visit their homepage.

Help panel[edit]

Screenshot from Vietnamese Wikipedia showing the help panel open on the Community Portal, including the "search" bar.

During the last month, the help panel was deployed on Vietnamese Wikipedia, adding it to Czech and Korean Wikipedias.As of 2019-03-14:

  • 2,425 newcomers have seen the help panel
  • 422 of them have opened it
  • 175 have clicked links
  • 27 have run searches
  • 40 have asked questions

We have been analyzing the data around usage, and we'll be publishing numbers in the coming weeks. At a high level, we see at least some users are being helped by the panel, with many clicking on links, running searches, and asking questions. We do not yet see any problems that have arisen from the help panel. Therefore, we think that the help panel is generally a positive feature – though data is still coming that will allow us to see its numerical impact. If other wikis are interested in using the help panel, please contact us on our team's talk page, in the language of your choice.

Over the past month, we have iterated on the help panel to take into account the usage patterns we are seeing. You can see in the accompanying image how the help panel currently looks.

  • We added a search capability, in which users can search the Help and Wikipedia namespaces.
  • The help panel was previously available whenever a newcomer was in "edit" mode. We are now also showing the help panel when a newcomer is in "read" mode on a page in the Help, Wikipedia, or User namespaces.

We want to see whether users find the "search" useful. If so, we may spend time on improving search results. We're also looking forward to learning whether exposing the help panel in "read" mode in more namespaces will increase usage.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

White supremacism???[edit]

Hi WBG, you closed [[35]] with a note that there is a consensus for including the term "white supremacism" in the article. Given that the vast majority of commenters were against inclusion, I wonder where did you observe the said consensus?

Also, if you read subsequent discussion on Talk, a few other editors express surprise at the term being used in the article.

Hope you will revisit the topic. Thanks. — kashmīrī TALK 18:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kashmiri:--NOTAVOTE. Discussions are closed on the merit of !votes. Original research is prohibited∯WBGconverse 19:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@WBG: You might be confusing RfC with XfD. There was no consensus, irrespective of your reading of the value of arguments presented, and your claim that there was one does not seem to reflect the discussion there. In my view, RfC could safely run for a few more days, there was no urgency to close it within 36 hours (sic!). Care to reopen or make a new one? — kashmīrī TALK 19:17, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, you should not have closed that RfC as you are neither an admin nor WP:UNINVOLVED, having earlier participated in heated discussions on the article. — kashmīrī TALK 19:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I had not remotely commented anything about white supremacy/manifesto stuff and my sole editorial involvement was whether or not to include the name of Tarrant. Your arguments are fundamentally flawed and it was not an RFC either. You might wish to approach AN for any reversal per CLOSECHALLENGE.
You need not ping me over my t/p either:-)∯WBGconverse 20:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) It is a fundamental part of consensus that it is determined by the strength of arguments, not by votes - there is no difference in how consensus is determined for RfCs and XfDs. FWIW I preemptively endorse the close - all the policy-based arguments were made by those supporting inclusion, and a bunch of people making non-policy based arguments based on their interpretation of the manifesto does not change that. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Galo. Wot you se. ∯WBGconverse 20:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-12[edit]

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

Changes later this week

  • When you use rollback you will be able to get a confirmation prompt on most wikis. It asks you if you wanted to do the rollback. This is to avoid misclicks. You will have to opt in to get it. On German Wikipedia it will be an opt-out feature from 28 March. [36][37]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 19 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 20 March. It will be on all wikis from 21 March (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 20 March at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Admins will be able to block someone from editing a page or a namespace. This already works on a few Wikimedia wikis. You can read more. If your wiki wants to be an early tester of this, you can tell the developers. [38]
  • Advanced item Toolforge will shut down the Ubuntu Trusty job grid. This will happen the week of 25 March. Tools that use this grid needs to be moved to the new Debian Stretch job grid. If they haven't, they will be taken offline. Maintainers can restart the tools later. Users may not be able to use them in the meanwhile. You can see a list of affected tools.

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

19:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Sentinelese[edit]

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Sentinelese has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the GAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FR30799386's User Scripts[edit]

Dear all. Recently, FR30799386 (talk) was blocked for sock puppetry. Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of FR30799386's scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.

If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: TWL question[edit]

No, I am not currently an account coordinator for any resource. ~ Rob13Talk 01:37, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-13[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • The new version of the content translation tool will be used for all new translations. The older version will still be used for translations that were started with it. Most users won’t see any change. More than 80% of the published translations are already using the new version. [39]

Problems

  • There was a problem with editing with Safari on iOS. When you wrote an edit summary you couldn't save the edit. This has now been fixed. [40]
  • The editing toolbar sometimes disappears when you scroll on iOS devices. This will be fixed soon. [41]
  • Wikis can over-ride interface messages on-wiki. A problem meant that sometimes an old versions of any changed messages were shown instead. This included the sitenotice and other important parts of the interface. This was fixed at around 2019-03-22 16:00 (UTC). Logged-out users may still get the wrong message. Purging the page should fix it for them. [42]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 March. It will be on all wikis from 28 March (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 27 March at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

18:05, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Question about citation bot[edit]

Hi WBG, I'm a bit confused over whether or not User:Citation_bot works or if it's blocked. I have it enabled in Gadgets but when I use it, there's a message at the bottom of the preview page that says it's blocked: ! Account "Citation bot" or this IP is blocked from editing, and I have seen the bot name struck in edit history (enabled feature in prefs) but it appears the changes were made when I review the diffs. Any clue what's going on there? Atsme Talk 📧 16:08, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Atsme:--To use the Citation Bot in a blocked state; you need to choose wiki-text editing mode (away from VE, if you do use that) and additionally, must not have WikiEd (check gadgets) or 2017Wikitext editor (check Beta features) installed. Now follow Route 1 as mentioned at User:Citation_bot/use#via_the_citation_expander_gadget.
Using the bot itself or the toolbar option won't lead to anything since the edits can't be committed.∯WBGconverse 16:35, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you - so we should be in edit view to run the tool, not from the left margin toolbar. Atsme Talk 📧 17:01, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

mail[edit]

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

Cinadon36 (talk) 21:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 22 – 28 March 2019[edit]

Facto Post – Issue 22 – 28 March 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
When in the cloud, do as the APIs do

Half a century ago, it was the era of the mainframe computer, with its air-conditioned room, twitching tape-drives, and appearance in the title of a spy novel Billion-Dollar Brain then made into a Hollywood film. Now we have the cloud, with server farms and the client–server model as quotidian: this text is being typed on a Chromebook.

File:Cloud-API-Logo.svg
Logo of Cloud API on Google Cloud Platform

The term Applications Programming Interface or API is 50 years old, and refers to a type of software library as well as the interface to its use. While a compiler is what you need to get high-level code executed by a mainframe, an API out in the cloud somewhere offers a chance to perform operations on a remote server. For example, the multifarious bots active on Wikipedia have owners who exploit the MediaWiki API.

APIs (called RESTful) that allow for the GET HTTP request are fundamental for what could colloquially be called "moving data around the Web"; from which Wikidata benefits 24/7. So the fact that the Wikidata SPARQL endpoint at query.wikidata.org has a RESTful API means that, in lay terms, Wikidata content can be GOT from it. The programming involved, besides the SPARQL language, could be in Python, younger by a few months than the Web.

Magic words, such as occur in fantasy stories, are wishful (rather than RESTful) solutions to gaining access. You may need to be a linguist to enter Ali Baba's cave or the western door of Moria (French in the case of "Open Sesame", in fact, and Sindarin being the respective languages). Talking to an API requires a bigger toolkit, which first means you have to recognise the tools in terms of what they can do. On the way to the wikt:impactful or polymathic modern handling of facts, one must perhaps take only tactful notice of tech's endemic problem with documentation, and absorb the insightful point that the code in APIs does articulate the customary procedures now in place on the cloud for getting information. As Owl explained to Winnie-the-Pooh, it tells you The Thing to Do.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:46, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019[edit]

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

Tech News: 2019-14[edit]

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

Changes later this week

  • Notifications tell you about things that happen on the wiki. You can turn on notifications about new links to pages you created. For performance reasons you can no longer get e-mails about this. [43]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 2 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 3 April. It will be on all wikis from 4 April (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 3 April at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

16:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

BRG-34 GA review[edit]

I know that I have come in and stomped all over the article, just as it was nearing the end of the GA review process. Despite my query there, I do agree that a Good Article can be written about a product with bad science. I want to state here that my background (parts on my User page) includes a doctorate in nutritional biochemistry from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and until recently retired, 14 years as an expert science consultant to U.S. companies in the dietary supplement industry. In my opinion, the article captures the debate within India as to whether this product was prematurely brought to market, and how politics was involved. David notMD (talk) 09:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Your User page states you are taking a Wiki-break. If that status has changed, may want to revise. David notMD (talk) 09:57, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019[edit]

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

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-15[edit]

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

Recent changes

Problems

  • You will be able read but not edit most wikis for 30 minutes on 11 April at 05:00 (UTC). This is because of a hardware problem. You can see a list of the affected wikis. [46]
  • A map update caused some problems on 29 March and 30 March. It was rolled back. [47]
  • Pages on some Wikivoyages had problems with the top headline. This has been fixed. [48]

Changes later this week

  • When you add an edit summary the VisualEditor will search your recent edit summaries in case you want to re-use one. This works in both the visual and wikitext modes on desktop. It also works on the mobile site. [49]
  • The Wikimedia wikis will get a URL shortener. This will work from 11 April. You can read more. [50]
  • Advanced item The {{REVISIONID}} magic word will no longer work. This is for performance reasons. When you preview a page it will return "" (empty string). When you read a page it will return "-" (dash). For now this will only affect content namespaces. [51]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 9 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 10 April. It will be on all wikis from 11 April (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 10 April at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • You will be able to preview references. This means that when you hover over the link you will get a popup that shows you a preview of the reference. It will work much like page previews. This is so you don't have to go to the bottom of the page to see a reference. This will now be available as a beta feature on German and Arabic Wikipedia. [52][53]
  • Advanced item The Wikidata JSON output will change. Empty containers will be serialised as empty objects. This is a breaking change that will affect tools that use JSON outputs and APIs. It will happen on 30 April. You can read more and see how to test your code.

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

18:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at User talk:RexxS, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. I realize you aren't a new editor, but I feel you should still be templated for refactoring my comment. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 14:17, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a jerk. ∯WBGconverse 14:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kunal Kamra[edit]

User:Winged Blades of Godric/Kunal Kamra. Best, Black Kite (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Draft:Lee Dae-hwi[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Lee Dae-hwi. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Otterlyhwi (talk) 05:21, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback message from Tito Dutta[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Titodutta's talk page.
Message added 10:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Titodutta (talk) 10:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Me Too movement (India)[edit]

This – [54] – was per discussion regarding inclusion of the alleged "harassment" claims against Vishwa Mohan Bhatt (on his BLP, Me Too movement and Me Too movement (India)) at Talk:Vishwa Mohan Bhatt#Sexual harassment mentions and WP:BLPN#Vishwa Mohan Bhatt and sexual harassment allegations. See also Talk:Me Too movement (India)#Vishwa Mohan Bhatt. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 19:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[m:Special:MyLanguage/Tech/News/2019/16|Tech News: 2019-16]][edit]

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

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 16 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 17 April. It will be on all wikis from 18 April (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 17 April at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

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

23:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Reverts[edit]

I'm not going to edit war with you. Please let Feezo answer my question. What's the problem with my question? Activity levels are in the focus now, as seen from many recent comments from WP:BN. This would be like if I had the bit, based on activity levels, which should scare everyone. Mr Ernie (talk) 18:40, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you honestly have no clue about what's wrong with your question (and the tone of it), you are beyond the purview of mine helping out. Dweller might be able to offer some sage advice. FWIW, when we are losing admins at a phenomenally rapid rate, you are asking someone to retire who has over 500 logged sysop-actions (9 blocks in 2016, 10 blocks in 2017, 11 blocks in 2018 and 25 blocks in 2019; about 270 page/rev deletions in 2016, 98 page/rev deletions in 2017, 34 page/rev deletions in 2018 and 122 page/rev deletions in 2019 and other tool-usage) across the last three years and these four months. What's your activity standard, 5000? How many main-space edits have you managed to incur, after all these years? Bye, ∯WBGconverse 18:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm pretty proud of 1986 Mount Hood Disaster and Luitpoldpark, both of which I created in the last year. But that's not the point because I'm not an administrator. Those were very difficult for me, as I'm not as good a writer as others, and it's challenging for me to create good prose. I've got some good ideas for another 3-5 articles over the next year or so, depending on time constraints with my job, family, and personal issues. The point is I'm not out there dropping blocks on people with an activity level of 50-100 edits per year. Do you think Feezo would pass RFA if they ran today? Mr Ernie (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mr Ernie Your last question is irrelevant but I believe that he would easily pass a re-RFA with flying colors, even after this block, if his blocks and deletions across the years are all solid enough.
Also, if you genuinely believe that the folks over BN were asking people with (a) 81 edits in 2016 (and at least another 279 logged actions) , (b) 72 edits in 2017 (and at least another 108 logged actions) , (c) 200 edits in 2018 (and at least another 45 logged actions) & (d) 181 edits in 2019 (and at least another 147 logged actions) to give up their tools, you need to heavily brush up your understanding-skills (and I'm being extraordinarily polite). Find me one editor who supports that someone with these counts shall be de-flagged for inactivity.∯WBGconverse 19:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comment. Per this discussion, I bet there's a few people there who may agree that you should do more than 39 edits in a year (2015) to keep your administrative privileges. I guess we won't agree on it, but to me it seems fine to drop the bit for the time when you won't be active, and then request it back when you have more time to contribute. Mr Ernie (talk) 19:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very active at the moment and just don't have the time to look into the background properly, but please, let's be kind to each other. Wikipedians are a scarce and valuable resource and admins are as rare as hen's teeth. I value you both for your experience and contributions. Cheers --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 22:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC) PS Sorry if that wasn't very sage.[reply]

Please discuss on the talk page[edit]

Rather than reverting the edits of an editor in good standing, it is best form to discuss first on the talk page. Happy to meet you at Waqar Zaka talk page to discuss further.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have thrice re-incorporated the same stuff despite objections of mine, SN54129 and Saqib. That is text-book edit-warring in direct contravention of Bold-Revert-Discuss cycle.
You are also asked to clarify as to how this rollback of your's satisfy the relevant usage policy.
And, I note that you continue to engage in your new found hobby of taking up edit requests via Twitter. The entirety of your intervention over Zaka's t/p, post that bonhomie, has been a net-negative and resembles of acute clueless-ness. ​∯WBGconverse 06:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If Jimmy continues with this nonsense, just take him to AE for a BLP topic ban. He’s been made aware that discretionary sanctions are in force, so he should know better than to use rollback to insert promotional content from one of his twitter friends into a BLP. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:43, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Revert all 5 edits?[edit]

May I know what’s wrong in mentioning about their diet with citation ? Joshi punekar (talk) 18:47, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will explain my revert of your edits in entirety:-
  • In the 21st century, we don't say that Community X resides to the north of Himalayas, Community Y between the Y and Z ranges and so on. Administrative territories are used because they are far more specific and easily identifiable to a reader.
  • That's the reason as to why your addition to lead was a dis-improvement.
  • There was a community-discussion over reliable sources noticeboard that added a paragraph to our guide of identifying reliable resources in scientific areas. The addition states:--

    However, primary sources describing genetic or genomic research into human ancestry, ancient populations, ethnicity, race, and the like, should not be used to generate content about those subjects, which are controversial. High quality secondary sources as described above should be used instead. Genetic studies of human anatomy or phenotypes like intelligence should be sourced per WP:MEDRS.

  • It, for all practical purposes, asks us to avoid such stuff and at any case, the book you cited is not remotely close to being a high quality source.
  • And, finally, vegetarian or non-vegetarian food habit. Per your quote from it, Singh notes that the entire community is vegetarian but there are outliers.
So in this case do visit saraswat brahmin page.Recent edits are based on this diet,intercaste marriage etc .Doesn’t it applicable there? Joshi punekar (talk) 19:16, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:INDENTATION and abide by that.
Saraswats are distinct from other Brahman communities, specifically due to their meat-eating habits. This was the core reason, as to why they were placed in the lower rungs of the Brahmanical hierarchy and numerous authors document this. So, obviously the non-vegetarian diet habit and social status deserves a mention.
That I am now looking at your broader editing patterns, I am increasingly growing suspicious of your motives and it very much seems that you are trying to right great wrongs. You are effectively trying to whitewash the Saraswats (which Serial Number 54129 duly reverted) by removing all references that speak of their non-vegetarian habits whilst simultaneously setting up a false similarity between the Saraswats and Deshasthas by trying to prove that even the latter follows a non-vegetarian diet.
@EdJohnston:--This is a real good idea and can be placed at individual sysop discretion, per WP:GS/CASTE. ∯WBGconverse 19:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why what happened ?Is this Wikipedia or a group of POV setters as per requirements when needed?If no means apply same method in saraswat Brahmins page. Regards, Joshi punekar (talk) 19:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a chat-board; you need to read the stuff before posting a reply that seems to be functionally identical to trolling. Any more un-indented garbage and I will revert you. ∯WBGconverse 19:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Expand G5 to include undisclosed paid editing[edit]

On 14 April you noted that you were closing Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Proposal: Expand G5 to include undisclosed paid editing, but haven't apparently completed it yet. If you are no longer planning to perform the closure, please could you release it to another admin (note that this cannot be me as I'm very involved with the discussion). Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 09:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In T minus 24. ∯WBGconverse 12:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Jim Carter[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Talk:The Tashkent Files.
Message added 16:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jim Carter 16:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Can you point me to the guideline which states that articles on which sanctions apply cannot have non-administrators put a template specifying that sanctions apply? --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:46, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-17[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • The advanced search function URL now shows which namespaces you search in. The namespace field is collapsed by default on the search page. You can also add new fields to the search interface through a hook. [57][58][59]
  • The wikis now look slightly different in the mobile web version. [60]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 23 April at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Wikipedia articles will have the sameAs meta property. It adds structured data. This makes it easier for search engines to find Wikipedia articles. It also makes it easier to reuse content. There will an A/B test. [61][62]

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

19:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

3A...[edit]

...a complete failure thereof. ——SerialNumber54129 16:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't say that; there's a template over the GAR, that features a nice GA sign, after the 3A criterion :-)! One of the lamest and poorest reviews, I've ever seen. Sources that did not contain any bibliographic data, sources that failed WP:INTEGRITY, sources that were right-wing-mouthpieces -- all were allowed. And, I have not the slightest of clues, as to how did the reviewer evaluate it to be broad enough.
I was initially hell-certain that some fly-by vandal had slapped the GA sign over the article; before I migrated to the t/p and came across the gem of a review. And, now I need to go across his remaining GAR(s)......∯WBGconverse 16:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Is this the same one you brought to my talk page, or another? Vanamonde (Talk) 17:19, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Vanamonde93, same :-) ∯WBGconverse 17:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It was probably her ~first GA review. At least, I hope so. For an example of the kind of review I have come to expect from her, from a few months later, see Percy Glading. Who also, ironically, went to India to cause trouble  :) ——SerialNumber54129 17:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my impression of Catriona/Buidhe before this has been consistently positive, and I was quite surprised when I saw Godric's post. Perhaps Buidhe will be kind enough to do a reassessment themselves, and so avoid some bad blood. Jaydayal, I don't know if you've seen any of this yet, but I hope you understand it's not personal. It's not a bad article. It simply doesn't go deep enough to be a GA. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:41, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's a solid review and it's re-assuring to hear both of your impressions of her:-) Given the circumstances, I guess Buidhe will kindly do a reassessment and delist. ∯WBGconverse 17:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On a side-note, how to find the entire history of one's GA noms and GA reviews? For example, a list of all GARs done by TRM or all nominations by V93. ∯WBGconverse 17:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's funny you should say that—I was looking for just that a minute ago (also re. this case), and, of course, I couldn't find out, hence that I had to use one of my own as an example. There's Legobot's list, but it doesn't link to anything, so doesn't mean much more than the Userpage userbox I guess  :( perhaps the Helpdesk would know? ——SerialNumber54129 17:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is a good way. I've wrestled with this myself, to no avail. A good way to find the reviews is to filter page creations by namespace, but that's far from perfect. Finding nominations is even harder. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:01, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Asking over the HelpDesk is a good idea! A rough method is to search for new creations in the talk-namespace and then browser-search for the string--GA Review. The GAR pages are almost always created by the reviewer and the creation edit-summary is constant. ∯WBGconverse 18:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Buidhe started this GAR over the same day and that decline looks solid, at first glances whilst another simultaneous one seems to be mediocre. Her later reviews do seem to be good enough, though I have some reservations about Ernst Klink. Overall, more or less concur that the Parkala one was very likely an extreme outlier. ∯WBGconverse 18:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please respond first rather than keep putting your version/reverting. I don't think that is how a dispute resolution proceeds. If you were removing content I could have still understand, you are deleting multiple references, I am not able to understand that. Thank you. --Jaydayal (talk) 13:06, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Visual editor on mobile feedback[edit]

https://medium.com/freely-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge/report-card-visual-editing-on-wikipedia-da346478dd42

User:Carrite#Wikipediocracy's_infamous_"Vigilant"_on_the_problem_with_WMF_Engineering

Question[edit]

Hi WBG, what exactly is "revision deleting" that is meant to be hidden? Atsme Talk 📧 12:02, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REVDEL. Ivanvector was cautioning other sysops against reversing Bbrox's revision-deletion of the part. edit summary w/o prior consensus which was a bit weird, given that it does not seem that some other sysop had any intention of reversing (or had reversed) him. ∯WBGconverse 12:08, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. Atsme Talk 📧 14:33, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Growth team updates #7[edit]

Welcome to the seventh newsletter from the Growth team!

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

Newcomer homepage release this week[edit]

Screenshot of newcomer homepage in Test Wikipedia, in English.
The main feature that the team has been working on over the last month is the newcomer homepage. This feature gives newcomers a place on the wiki to get oriented, learn about editing, and see their impact (see the accompanying screenshot from Test Wikipedia). We intend to release this feature to Czech, Korean, and Vietnamese Wikipedias on May 2nd.

Like the other Growth team features, this will be deployed in a controlled experiment, in which half of newcomers will have access to their homepage and half will not. Users with the feature will be able to access it by clicking their username at the top of their browser, and it will only be available on desktop -- not mobile. Experienced users who want to see their homepage will be able to turn it on in their preferences.

Wikis receiving the newcomer homepage can expect these things:

  • Additional questions will come to the help desk from the "help module" on the homepage.
  • Mentors who have signed up for the "mentorship module" will start to receive questions on their user talk pages.
  • More users may create and edit user pages through the "start module".
Mockups for potential designs of mobile homepage

Recent and future homepage development[edit]

The most important piece developed for the homepage over the last month is the "start module", which gives newcomers clear actions to take when they are new: add/confirm their email, go through a tutorial, start their user page. We learned about the need for this module from user tests last month. The next priorities for the newcomer homepage are:

  • Mobile design: to work well in mobile browsers, the homepage needs a separate design and engineering. See the accompanying mockups for potential mobile designs.
  • Features for discovery: only about 15% - 30% of newcomers will discover their homepage by clicking their username at the top of their browser. We are going to be designing additional ways for newcomers to find out about it.
  • Additional modules: the initial version contains some of the simpler modules. Potential upcoming modules include task recommendations and a feed of activity on the wiki.

Other updates[edit]

  • Help panel leading indicators: our team published data on the help panel's initial performance. The evaluation exposes some areas for improvement, but we think the help panel's behavior so far is healthy and that it is not having a negative impact on the wikis. We will be publishing additional data, making plans, and asking for community thoughts around the future of the help panel over the course of the next two weeks. If you are interested in trying out the help panel on your wiki, please let us know on our team's talk page.
  • Long term plans: the team had a week of planning meetings, in which we talked about some longer-term ideas for Growth work. Some of the top ideas are: to extend the newcomer homepage to help user's build their identity through a user profile, and to revisit the "engagement emails" project that the team put on hold. Over the next month, we will be asking for community conversation around how the team can spend our time in the next fiscal year, that starts in July.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Your statement at RFAR[edit]

I think if you're going to say another editor is accusing others of being in a right-wing conspiracy at arbitration, you need to support it with diffs. Could you add one please?

Timings on this are a bit awkward for me. I will look in in about half an hour but then I'll be offline until tomorrow morning UTC. If you haven't added a diff in the next half hour, I'll remove the accusation. Feel free to add it back in with a diff even if I've removed it. GoldenRing (talk) 18:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Goldenring:--Thanks for the notice; I mis-linked the thread in the very above line and have now-corrected it. Over the linked thread; Rama had asserted:--yes you are arguing for deletion, and you are also letting far-Right talking point slip. to which RdnDude replies You've openly admitted being politically motivated.....I don't see how my pointing it out makes me "far right". Also, see the second point of Sitush over the case request where he had provided the exact diff. ∯WBGconverse 18:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I hadn't even tried the link and it wasn't at all obvious that the one is explaining the other. I'll drop a note on the clerks' mailing list pointing others to your explanation here, but don't be terribly surprised if someone else gets upset about it too. GoldenRing (talk) 18:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Diff-ed. Meh. ∯WBGconverse 18:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. GoldenRing (talk) 10:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-18[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • The Wikipedia app for Android now invites users to add Wikidata descriptions to Wikidata objects that have Wikipedia articles but no Wikidata descriptions. It will only invite users who have added a number of Wikidata descriptions in the app without being reverted. This is to avoid spam and bad edits. [63][64]

Problems

  • Tech News was late last week because of a MassMessage bug. Other newsletters had the same problem. [65]

Changes later this week

  • You will see when you last refreshed the recent changes page. This is so you can see how recent the changes are. [66]
  • When you write a comment in Structured Discussions but have not posted it yet your web browser will save it in local storage instead of session storage. This means you do not lose them even if you close your web browser. Structured Discussions used to be called Flow. [67]
  • You will be able to turn off milestone notifications. Milestone notifications congratulate you when you have made certain numbers of edits. [68]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 30 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 1 May. It will be on all wikis from 2 May (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 1 May at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Advanced item The Wikidata wb_terms table will be dropped. This will affect some Wikidata tools. They need to be updated. The table has become too big which is causing problems. This will happen on 29 May. You can read more. You can ask for help if you need it.
  • Advanced item Wikimedia wikis will soon use a token when you log out. This changes how the API works. Some tools might need to be updated. [69]

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

22:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 23 – 30 April 2019[edit]

Facto Post – Issue 23 – 30 April 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Completely clouded?
Cloud computing logo

Talk of cloud computing draws a veil over hardware, but also, less obviously but more importantly, obscures such intellectual distinction as matters most in its use. Wikidata begins to allow tasks to be undertaken that were out of easy reach. The facility should not be taken as the real point.

Coming in from another angle, the "executive decision" is more glamorous; but the "administrative decision" should be admired for its command of facts. Think of the attitudes ad fontes, so prevalent here on Wikipedia as "can you give me a source for that?", and being prepared to deal with complicated analyses into specified subcases. Impatience expressed as a disdain for such pedantry is quite understandable, but neither dirty data nor false dichotomies are at all good to have around.

Issue 13 and Issue 21, respectively on WP:MEDRS and systematic reviews, talk about biomedical literature and computing tasks that would be of higher quality if they could be made more "administrative". For example, it is desirable that the decisions involved be consistent, explicable, and reproducible by non-experts from specified inputs.

What gets clouded out is not impossibly hard to understand. You do need to put together the insights of functional programming, which is a doctrinaire and purist but clearcut approach, with the practicality of office software. Loopless computation can be conceived of as a seamless forward march of spreadsheet columns, each determined by the content of previous ones. Very well: to do a backward audit, when now we are talking about Wikidata, we rely on integrity of data and its scrupulous sourcing: and clearcut case analyses. The MEDRS example forces attention on purge attempts such as Beall's list.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 April 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

For S.R.Jangid my edits were perfectly made in wiki style but some other new users had ruined it. Help me to restore the old version. Please Wiki tamil 100 (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please[edit]

Restrain your delete button and suggest changes on talk pages. Victuallers (talk) 09:50, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

True dat. WBG well known for having a bigger button than Donald's :p ——SerialNumber54129 09:54, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Victuallers: -- You are asked to clarify as to how this rollback of your's satisfy the relevant usage policy. ∯WBGconverse 10:31, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I regret that edit. I was confused by the deletion of the patent list and I can see that your edit had merit. I cannot revert my edit, but I would if it was possible. Apologies. Victuallers (talk) 11:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rama Arbitration Case[edit]

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Previous listing as a party[edit]

My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DeltaQuad: -- No qualms :-) ∯WBGconverse 06:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redaction[edit]

For the record, I made this redaction because I received two off-wiki complaints about it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:39, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What I see is the end-result and that's what solely matters. You might encourage others to be more transparent, though. ∯WBGconverse 11:34, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) I wonder how many off-wiki complaints were made about the redaction :D ——SerialNumber54129 11:36, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For better or worse, some people do not feel comfortable coming forward on-wiki because they feel the environment is hostile, and I have now got a reputation where people can chat to me via email and be confident that I will keep our conversation private. I can tell people if they've got a problem with you, to approach you directly on their talk page, but I am not their mother and if they don't want to do that because they don't feel comfortable with the response, that's their perogative. I don't really want anything to do with this rubbish over Clarice Phelps, but when I get multiple on and off wiki messages from editors I get on with and trust, all contradicting each other's opinions without realising it, I'm at a complete loss as to what to do without brassing somebody off. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:40, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333:-As someone once told:- "Friendly space" is an attempt to mollycoddle people. Real life is tough, real life needs interaction (unless you're a hermit), and real life involves disagreements: you have to stand up to be counted.
You are free to agree with the unknown voices about it being a redact-able comment, you ought to have come over here and requested me to strike it off. (On retrospection, it indeed seemed a bit OTT and I would have most-certainly re-framed/struck it). But, removing someone's comment w/o even having the minimal courtesy of notifying them is deplorable.
The conversation pasted over the very top of my previous version of talk-page (between Davidson and SoWhy) is an indicator of the wiki-lawyering extent, these folks specialize upon. A very similar argument was used by Rosiestep over some AfD or some miscellaneous t/p, months back. So, I have my own reasons to be skeptical of any argument that invokes Katherine and I decline to not call out any nonsense, just because they were sugar-coated with civility. ∯WBGconverse 12:12, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know Katherine Maher from John Maher, but in this specific case, what you were objecting to was the claim "the percentage of articles about women has increased from 15 to nearly 18 percent." That's a fact. You can't claim argument from authority on facts. If you think the fact is wrong, produce some evidence to say why. If you think the fact is irrelevant, say why (for example, pulling out say 100 recently created BLPs, noting issues and talking about quality vs quantity, or something like that). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you do seriously interpret it as a bare bones fact, I bid you bye. ∯WBGconverse 13:29, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333:--You have been pinged over another t/p.∯WBGconverse 14:01, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Mahendra Nath Pandey[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, on April 26 you posted to this nomination, saying "passing soon". I think people read that as you were planning to return to finish the review soon, and you (presumably) expected it to pass. Will you be returning to it soon, or should I call for a new reviewer? Please let me know. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:25, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for forgetting the thread; completing review in T minus 12 hours. ∯WBGconverse 10:25, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of BGR-34[edit]

The article BGR-34 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:BGR-34 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 12:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BGR-34[edit]

Congrats on this (finally)getting through GA. A Good Article about an unproven dietary supplement, with marketing that got way ahead of its science. In the U.S., one of the most interesting supplement sagas is Red yeast rice. If correctly manufactured (right strain, right process), it works, i.e., lowers cholesterol, but is banned for containing a molecule identical to a prescription statin drug. If different strain and different process, RYR is then basically a traditional food coloring agent with no cholesterol-lowering activity, which none-the-less is legally marketed as a dietary supplement as long as no health claims are made. In brief, banned if it works, allowed if it does not. It appears there is a RYR-containing product in India named PreLipid. RYR is just one of the ingredients, and not clear from website content if it is claimed to be a monacolin-containing version. David notMD (talk) 12:23, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One clinical trial ==

My understanding of WP:MEDRS is that any one clinical trial - results positive or results negative - is not sufficient to include as a reference, even if clearly described as such. Hence my deletion, which you have reversed. I will not restore my edit, but I stand by my reasons for it. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite accurate in your interpretation and I (too) often remove such reviews, in line with what you did over BGR-34. But, the situation's slightly different over here and I will leave a detailed reply:-) ∯WBGconverse 13:40, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.qedk (t 桜 c) 14:59, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-19[edit]

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

Problems

  • Special:Watchlist can show the wrong information. It does not always show which edits are read and which are unread. The developers are working on solving the problem. [70]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 May. It will be on all wikis from 9 May (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 8 May at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

16:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi can you help me[edit]

Hi I noticed you seem to be familiar with Wikipedia deletion nomination process. I created a new deletion discussion here [71], but it didn't seem to work. can you help me? thanks --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 08:37, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eng.M.Bandara: - Hi, Bandara, welcome to my t/p:-) I can fix your AfD nomination but (as someone who have been here, for years) let me warn you that there's nil chance of the article getting deleted. I can understand your locus of your argumentation but the community has repeatedly rejected your interpretation of NOTNEWS.
If you still wish to proceed, leave a note of confirmation and I will fix the AfD:-) Regards, ∯WBGconverse 09:08, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Winged Blades of Godric: Thanks so much for your reply, yes I'd like to continue with my nomination, even if it were unsuccessful the discussion would provide assistance in how the community interprets Wikipedia policy. This would help other Wikipedia users and myself better understand the applications of policies to contribute to Wikipedia with a uniform application of policy. And off course interpretion of policies may change over time. Also, do you know why AfD wasn't created properly? What did I do wrong? Thanks again --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 09:20, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) Wikipedia deletion doesn't function on precedents but on the interpretation of policy as applied to each nomination separately. I strongly advise against intentionally creating an AfD discussion you know has no chance of passing just to test Wikipeida delation policy against the huge number of articles created in relations to shootings in the United States, as it's very likely to be considered intentional disruption. If you want to try to get Wikipedia's notability rules changed to exclude a given topic you'll need to create a WP:RFC, but it will need considerably better arguments than "I don't personally think it's important", given that it's trivially easy in these case to demonstrate the significant non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources which constitutes "notability" in Wikipedia's terms. ‑ Iridescent 09:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Err...I have already created the AfD:-( It will be a snow-call, at any case. ∯WBGconverse 09:40, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You did nothing wrong; if someone is determined to commit wikicide by charging into an unwinnable battle, it's nobody's fault but their own. It will hardly be the first time somebody has confused "this isn't important to me" and "this isn't important to anyone". ‑ Iridescent 10:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For you[edit]

The Original Barnstar
Just a regular ol’ Barnstar; I think you can guess what it’s for. I admire your level-headedness and ability to keep your cool when dealing with difficult contributors. Thank you for your excellent work; it’s not unnoticed. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:49, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Ceoil (talk) 18:48, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-20[edit]

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

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 14 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 15 May. It will be on all wikis from 16 May (calendar).

Meetings

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

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

00:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Winged Blades of Godric. An edit that you recently made to Buddha in a Traffic Jam seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Why were you de-linking stuff and introducing incorrect grammar? ∯WBGconverse 11:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • With great respect, I would like to state that I was not testing nor practicing edits. I am de-linking because the pages do not exist on Wikipedia. Secondly, the pages can exist only and only if the subject is notable. As per my knowledge, we should link them only when we are clearing the orphan issue. Regarding grammar yes it might have been a near miss due to an automatic restart of the computer and restoring of pages in the web browser. For this, I apologize. I accept constructive criticism and would love to abide more to Wikipedia policies. Kindly enlighten more on de-linking.Steven Knieling 12:23, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Stevenknieling, Redlinks shouldn't be automatically delinked simply for being red, per WP:Redlink. Redlinks should only be delinked if there's no chance a subject could be notable. Redlinks can help other editors see when an article about a subject that might be notable is missing from the encyclopedia. --valereee (talk) 16:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Call for submissions for the Community Growth space at Wikimania 2019[edit]

Welcome to a special newsletter from the Growth team! This special newsletter is not about Wikimedia Foundation Growth team projects. Instead, it is a call for submissions for the Community Growth space at Wikimania 2019. We think that many people who receive this newsletter may have something valuable to contribute to this space at Wikimania. We haven't translated the newsletter, because Wikimania's language is English.

Please see below for the message from the organizers of the Community Growth space at Wikimania.

---

Wikimania 2019 is organized into 19 “spaces”, which are all accepting proposals for sessions. This message comes from the team organizing the Community Growth space.

Since you are interested b Growth team projects, and potentially involved in welcoming newcomers initiatives on your wiki, we would like to invite you to submit a proposal to the Community Growth space because of the actions you’ve done around newcomers on wikis. The deadline for submission is June 1. See below for Community Growth submission topics and session formats. Topics and sessions have to be in English.

In the Community Growth space, we will come together for discussions, presentations, and workshops that address these questions:

  • What is and is not working around attracting and retaining newcomers?
  • How should Wikimedia activities evolve to help communities grow and flourish?
  • How should our technology and culture evolve to help new populations to come online, participate and become community members?

Recommended topics: please see this link for the list for the list of recommended topics. If you do not plan to submit a proposal, you can also suggest additional topics here. If your topic does not fit into our space, remember that there are 18 other spaces that could welcome you sharing your knowledge and perspective.

Types of session. We prefer sessions that are participatory, interactive, promote conversations, and give a voice to parts of our movement that are heard less often. Please see this link for the list of recommended session formats.

Poster submissions. Posters are also a good way to introduce a topic, or show some results of an action. Please consider submitting one!

More information about the Community Growth space, topics, and submission formats is available on the proposal page.

Please submit your proposal. The reviews will happen at the beginning of June.

If you have questions about Wikimania in general, please ask them on the Wikimania wiki.

On behalf of the Community Growth leadership team, Trizek (WMF), 11:44, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Historic newspapers[edit]

Someone recently posted a link to online historic Indian newspapers. Was it you? Do you know what the link is? - Sitush (talk) 07:40, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can't tell for certain. Some of the links, that I know are:-
  • Better than nothing! Thanks a lot. - Sitush (talk) 09:18, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:Dhwalin[edit]

Hi Winged Blades of Godric. Your report of User:Dhwalin at AIV was declined ([72]), but I believe that he should be reported to ANI. Would you be interested in starting a report there? Regards, Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 09:18, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I lack the motivation to file over ANI. Will ask some other sysop. ∯WBGconverse 11:07, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 24 – 17 May 2019[edit]

Facto Post – Issue 24 – 17 May 2019
Text mining display of noun phrases from the US Presidential Election 2012
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Semantic Web and TDM – a ContentMine view

Two dozen issues, and this may be the last, a valediction at least for a while.

It's time for a two-year summation of ContentMine projects involving TDM (text and data mining).

Wikidata and now Structured Data on Commons represent the overlap of Wikimedia with the Semantic Web. This common ground is helping to convert an engineering concept into a movement. TDM generally has little enough connection with the Semantic Web, being instead in the orbit of machine learning which is no respecter of the semantic. Don't break a taboo by asking bots "and what do you mean by that?"

The ScienceSource project innovates in TDM, by storing its text mining results in a Wikibase site. It strives for compliance of its fact mining, on drug treatments of diseases, with an automated form of the relevant Wikipedia referencing guideline MEDRS. Where WikiFactMine set up an API for reuse of its results, ScienceSource has a SPARQL query service, with look-and-feel exactly that of Wikidata's at query.wikidata.org. It also now has a custom front end, and its content can be federated, in other words used in data mashups: it is one of over 50 sites that can federate with Wikidata.

The human factor comes to bear through the front end, which combines a link to the HTML version of a paper, text mining results organised in drug and disease columns, and a SPARQL display of nearby drug and disease terms. Much software to develop and explain, so little time! Rather than telling the tale, Facto Post brings you ScienceSource links, starting from the how-to video, lower right.

ScienceSourceReview, introductory video: but you need run it from the original upload file on Commons
Links for participation

The review tool requires a log in on sciencesource.wmflabs.org, and an OAuth permission (bottom of a review page) to operate. It can be used in simple and more advanced workflows. Examples of queries for the latter are at d:Wikidata_talk:ScienceSource project/Queries#SS_disease_list and d:Wikidata_talk:ScienceSource_project/Queries#NDF-RT issue.

Please be aware that this is a research project in development, and may have outages for planned maintenance. That will apply for the next few days, at least. The ScienceSource wiki main page carries information on practical matters. Email is not enabled on the wiki: use site mail here to Charles Matthews in case of difficulty, or if you need support. Further explanatory videos will be put into commons:Category:ContentMine videos.

If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.18[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

  • Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
  • Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.
Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News
Discussions of interest

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from QueerEcofeminist[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bole India Jai Bhim.
Message added 08:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have pinged you there for two reasons, one is you were part of Dixit afd and you can give your opinion/vote on Indian subjects as you work on those themes. thanks QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 08:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done GazalWorld can be of more help in these areas, though:-) ∯WBGconverse 14:48, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Katzer[edit]

Yes, the photo is obviosly of Georg Katzer. If you want to have it without caption, which I'd understand, use a different image format, please. It was an infobox, see history and discussion on the talk, - with no caption, because - exactly as you say ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rashmi Ranjan Parida[edit]

What do you think is the specific issue here? General notability? I'd say the coverage isn't particularly deep but sufficient... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

??[edit]

I don't understand your edit to User:Sphilbrick/New page feed review. What was wrong with the link?--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sphilbrick: Links to the article (and creator) of both 3 and 6 were same. ∯WBGconverse 19:40, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

General questions about article flow[edit]

I think you are active in the review of new pages and/or AFC. I'm concerned about backlogs; I have some thoughts but realized I need more information on existing processes before I spend too much time thinking about my proposal.

My understanding is that new editors are encouraged to start new articles in draft space and then request a review. If they are very new, that might be their only option.

I presume that if such an editor starts a draft, it will not show up in Category:Pending AfC submissions until such time as they add the submit template. Is that correct?

Will the draft they create show up in Special:NewPagesFeed? If so, I assume it shows up immediately upon creation. Is that correct?

Are there editors who spend much of the time reviewing the new page feed?

I believe you have to meet certain qualifications to review the submitted drafts. What are the qualifications if any, for monitoring the entries in the new page feed?

I'm trying to get clear in my head the general timeline for new articles. One of my particular areas of interest is when those new articles would be flagged for Copy Patrol, but I'm also interested in the general overall timeline.

My apologies for what probably sound like basic questions but while I've been very active in many aspects of Wikipedia, I've had little involvement in the new page and new edit reviews.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, as I'm seeing this: the New Pages Feed does not cover drafts, only article space and, if specifically switched over, user space. The main customer of the feed is probably NPP, and we will only get to see draft material once it enters article space and shows up in the feed; which, if the material comes through AfC, happens once an AfC reviewer moves the draft to mainspace. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:57, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Elmidae, What am I missing? When I look at this:
Special:NewPagesFeed
I see Drafts. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sphilbrick - sorry, I just realized that you were looking at this with the "Articles for Creation" button selected, while mine is set to "New Pages Patrol". Naturally the former gets draft, whereas the latter gets accepted drafts. I'd never even switched that over before. So, disregard anything I've said - it was clearly NPP-specific :P --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:44, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Elmidae, Phew. FWIW, I only saw the AFC, until someone pointed out the option to see the other. Together, we'll make a team :) S Philbrick(Talk) 16:07, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Elmidae, I've now looked at several of the drafts and notice that everyone I've looked at so far has been submitted for review within minutes of the original creation, even though some are not remotely ready for review. I'm just wondering if we ought to give them better advice. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tonmoy0013[edit]

I had to warn Tonmoy0013 about their edits to Datta High School, and see that you too had to clean up after them at National Institute of Textile Engineering and Research. Their editing interests and behaviour are very like Tonmoypaul.71 in September-October 2017. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Winged_Blades_of_Godric reported by User:Jaydayal (Result: ). Thank you. Jaydayal (talk) 10:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-21[edit]

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

Recent changes

Problems

  • File descriptions for files from Commons were not shown properly on other Wikimedia wikis for a few days. For example the image descriptions and license information were missing. This has now been fixed. [73][74]
  • Some diffs show an error message when you try to see them. The developers are working on fixing it. It could be because of some edit comments. [75][76]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 21 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 22 May. It will be on all wikis from 23 May (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 22 May at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • The content translation tool on Wikipedia can use machine translations. There is a system to stop translations where the editors do not fix machine translation mistakes. This warns or stops them if they seem to just copy what the machine translation gives them. If this system is too strict or not strict enough you can tell the language team. [77]
  • Advanced item The Wikidata wbeditentity API endpoint will remove all aliases if the request includes an empty alias. This is how it supposed to work. It has not been working this way because of a bug. This will start on 12 June. [78]


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

13:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Uh, what "fringe science and pseudoscience" did I show interest in?[edit]

Uh, what "fringe science and pseudoscience" did I show interest in? Molar heat capacity? Earth's inner core? Carbon nanotube? Etruscan alphabet? Chasers pitch? Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes, Issue 33[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sonder (company)[edit]

Hi, I notice you tagged this draft as "under review" two days ago. I suppose you forgot to finish the review, or is there a reaon to suspend it from the queue? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's certain off-wiki stuff, that led me to take it out of the queue. ∯WBGconverse 07:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Editor's Barnstar
For excellent work in DYK and for initiating a damascene conversion. scope_creepTalk 19:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Narutolovehinata5[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Birjis Qadr.
Message added 02:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Are you still planning on continuing your review? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was working on the article as late as yesterday:-) ∯WBGconverse 06:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my comment on another user's Talk page?[edit]

What are you doing deleting material from Cabayi's Talk page?

diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACabayi&type=revision&diff=899040746&oldid=899038345

I posted my query there per these instructions to "...pose any questions or concerns either on Cabayi's Talk page or on this page...".

But you immediately deleted it. Why? NCdave (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NCdave: -- You don't need to post the same query at multiple places. More importantly, drop the stick and move on lest it boomerangs. When several longstanding editors are opposing you, it's not that they are socks of one another or in a CABAL. ∯WBGconverse 14:57, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Winged_Blades_of_Godric, I followed the instructions (auto-generated by the template which Cabayi used), about where to "pose any questions or concerns." So where do you think I should have posted my query, if not here? You archived the freshly-closed SPI case, and I think that's the only other place. Or are the instructions wrong?
Cabayi clearly should not have closed the SPI, because Tsumikiria is definitely a sock of Jorm. if you read the evidence I posted, it is indisputable.
And why did YOU delete content from Cabayi's user talk page? What is your connection to him and/or to Jorm/Tsumikiria? NCdave (talk) 18:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would like a retraction and an apology for this accusation. -Jorm (talk) 18:33, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


NCdave, I can't believe I'm having to give such basic explanations to someone with a 14 year pedigree and over 3200 edits to their credit. Nonetheless, here goes...

is (or was) the default setting.
  • Learn about page histories: Help:Page history
  • Check the page histories of Patriot Prayer and my talk page. Wow! Jorm and Tsumikiria both edited it long before you turned up. Do you think it's possible that they had the page on their watchlists? And guess what? Winged Blades of Godric has edited my talk page. Do you think it's possible he's watching my talk page (and I'm grateful he does).
On the left hand side of all pages there's a link named "Page information". If you used it you'd see that Patriot Prayer has 78 watchers and my talk page has 93. Is it unreasonable that people see your edits and react?
Do you still maintain that it's a conspiracy or sockpuppetry or are you now ready to apologise to Jorm, Tsumikiria, and Winged Blades of Godric for your uncivil comments and your failure to assume good faith?
I hope you choose to walk back your comments rather than walk over the cliff-edge, but it's your choice. Cabayi (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-22[edit]

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

Changes later this week

  • Advanced item Big changes to the replica database will happen on 3 June. Some tools on Cloud Services will stop working if the maintainers do not update them to use the new schema. This probably affects tools that query for revisions or log entries made by a user. [79][80]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 28 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 29 May. It will be on all wikis from 30 May (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 29 May at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

15:33, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Just asking[edit]

Are you an atheist like me? I just saw the quotation on your user page. Masum Reza📞 18:10, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 May 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Decision Comment[edit]

Hi WBG, just a reminder that per the notice at the top of the talk page "all editors must create a section for their statement and comment only in their own section." as such I've moved your comment from Leaky's section to your own. Regards, --Cameron11598 (Talk) 21:41, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Stifle[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
Message added 09:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Stifle (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-23[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • You can now write all special letters in all African Wikipedia languages. This works in the desktop version. [81]
  • There is now a field called depicts on Commons. This is a way to show what is in a picture with the help of Wikidata. It is still in development. [82]
  • Some tools on Toolforge may break on or after 3 June because of database changes. Maintainers should update their tools to use the new schema. [83][84]

Problems

  • You will be able to read but not to edit Wikimedia Commons for 30 minutes on 19 June at 05:00 (UTC). This is to fix a hardware problem. [85]

Changes later this week

  • Some wikis have one tab for the visual editor and one tab for a wikitext editor. Others wikis just have one tab. If your wiki has two tabs, clicking a link to create a new page has always opened a wikitext editor. It will now open the editor you used the last time you edited. [86]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 4 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 5 May. It will be on all wikis from 6 May (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 5 May at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

15:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Media coverage of 2019 India–Pakistan standoff.
Message added 02:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Are you still willing to continue this review? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Following up[edit]

I saw and read with interest the comment you left, and then self-reverted, at my user talk. Even though you self-reverted, I think you raised a reasonable point and that I ought to reply to you. As I said at the discussion, I really didn't mean to direct what I said there at you, despite the indenting. I actually share your reaction that it was apparently nonsensical on the face of it. I initially did a double-take when I first read it. But my point was that it is possible to account for what happened without there having been any intentional misconduct – as indeed SilkTork subsequently explained. Yes, it was a bit strange, and yes, arbs should be able to account for their choices. No argument from me about that. But (partly inspired by what BURob said when he stepped down), I'm trying to push back against claims that ArbCom are engaged in deliberate bad faith, claims that were being made more by some other editors than by you. In other words, yes it was strange to report the votes that way, but it doesn't mean that there was intentional chicanery. And yes Courcelles should be able to explain his views to the community, but the fact that he didn't do so immediately doesn't mean that he was intentionally evading responsibility. That's what I was trying to get at, and I think I owe it to you to clarify it. By the way, I think you do a lot of good work around here, and I've been noticing it. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:34, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

A year ago ...
"So, let's drown ourselves
in the sea of change."
... you were recipient
no. 1946 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019[edit]

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

Administrator changes

removed Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

removed Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Narutolovehinata5[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Ehud Arye Laniado.
Message added 09:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gandhi Behind the Mask of Divinity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westport (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-24[edit]

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

Recent changes

  • When you create a PDF from a page on the wiki this is now done by Proton. Before this we used Electron. It should look the same but work better. Both use Chromium. This is a different system from when you collect several articles into a book and make a PDF from them. [87][88]
  • The Flagged Revisions extension now uses the standard OOUI icons. There will be additional minor fixes for positioning in the next deployment. [89]
  • Advanced item Bots and other scripts that do not set an identifiable User-Agent may find their requests strictly rate-limited until they identify themselves properly. [90]

Problems

  • Please check if the Flagged Revisions configuration on your wiki is as you expect (or as it was a few weeks ago). If not, please report it. [91]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 12 June at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

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

17:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

GOCE requests[edit]

Out of fairness to other requesters, an editor is allowed a maximum of two requests on WP:GOCE/REQ at a time; please remove your extra requests until the first two are done. Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 21:01, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above, I have removed the latter two of your requests. You may swap them out with the others if you wish. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:20, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflicts[edit]

Hi, if you're edit conflicting, please do check your edit didn't accidentally ended up removing others comments. Thanks -- KTC (public) (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WMF action[edit]

I have come here rather than reply to you at the community response page which is too noisy for me. No, I do not want to post (or email) further clarification. I can see other people being very guarded in what they are saying and I think that is wise. Indeed, from one of your comments I thought you had also discovered the situation so I was puzzled that you were still so strongly against the WMF ban. In my view all this is happening highly prematurely so that we may be hunting the witch when we should be chasing the fox (or vice versa). And, of course, I don't know the full story (or even part of the full story) anyway. Best wishes. Thincat (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

are you undoing everything or just the one?[edit]

You reverted one of the sections I tried to move to the subpage but not another, so I don't know what to make of it. Wnt (talk) 12:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC) -- In the end I moved all the others to Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram/Proposals about WMF Office anyway. We have to get the page split somehow. I'm not going to move the section you reverted, but I left a note there. Wnt (talk) 13:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Growth team updates #8[edit]

Welcome to the eighth newsletter from the Growth team!

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

May was a busy month, and we apologize for a slightly late newsletter.

General news[edit]

  • The Growth team will begin to work with the Arabic Wikipedia community as a new target wiki. This is in addition to Korean, Czech, and Vietnamese Wikipedias.
  • Several members of the Growth team attended Wikimedia Hackathon. To see what we worked on and learned, read this update (in English).
  • Wikimania 2019 is coming up in August. The conference will include a "Community Growth" space, for sessions about how our communities expand through software and programs.

Early results from newcomer homepage release[edit]

A newcomer homepage on Czech Wikipedia (displayed in English language)
  • The newcomer homepage was deployed in Czech and Korean Wikipedias on May 6 for desktop users. It is deployed in an A/B test, so that half of newcomers have access to the homepage and half do not. They access it by clicking on their username in their personal tools along the top of the window.
  • After about a month of usage, we see a few interesting trends. We think that the usage is going well so far, as we continue to work on the feature
    • About half of users who visit the homepage click on a link or button.
    • About half of users visit the homepage more than once, with about a fifth of users visiting on multiple days.
    • Users are interacting with all the different modules on the page -- there is no clear favorite.
    • Users have been asking questions to their mentors -- but not on the help desk.

Next steps for homepage[edit]

Mockup of mobile newcomer homepage
  • Because we are seeing good reactions to the homepage from the first users, we are prioritizing work that helps more users find their homepage:
    • Mobile homepage: the team is currently building the mobile version of the homepage. We tested this design with five users, giving us confidence that the design is strong.
    • Features to aid discovery: only a minority of newcomers who have a homepage will find their homepage on their own. The team is designing features that help newcomers learn where to find their homepage. The most important feature will point to the homepage link using a GuidedTour.
  • User tests showed that the most important thing to add to the homepage are clear task recommendations to help newcomers get started with editing right away. This is the module that we will be working on next.

Future of team in the next year[edit]

  • The Growth team has been working since September 2018, and we're now planning for the work we'll be doing for the next fiscal year, which begins in July.
  • Though we have not yet developed a feature that clearly increases growth in our target wikis, we believe that the features we have been developing have high potential to increase growth if we continue to work on them.
  • Therefore, the team will continue to work on the features we have started, and we will develop related features that improve the overall newcomer experience. These features may include:
    • Improvements to how newcomers can build their user pages and develop their on-wiki identity. See initial notes here.
    • Improvements to how newcomers receive notifications on-wiki and through email, so that they quickly find out if other users are contacting them.
    • Processes that help newcomers get awards or recognition for good work.
    • Ways for newcomers to see the activity on the wiki and find others who share their interests.
  • We will start discussions with communities to help us define these ideas before we work on them.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

09:02, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Well described[edit]

I saw your comments on Fram's technique of "railroading incompetent/quasi-competent editors", which I thought was a clearheaded and useful description. Unfortunately, we don't have a lot of good options for dealing with those editors, and that detached-but-punctilious approach may be the most prosocial one. Having seen a prolific but socially incompetent editor (the one you were addressing, sadly) wreak a tremendous amount of havoc through Bartleby-level refusal to acknowledge community standards, I'm not terribly impressed by the other options. "It's little stuff, just fix it yourself or ignore it" breaks down when the questionably-competent editor is reasonably prolific; the constant stream of small errors is tremendously demoralizing to other editors in the same area, and the effect it had was to make a number of normally well-balanced editors either walk away from the area in frustration or completely lose their tempers. "Rage at the editor until he feels hurt and goes away" or "goad him into doing something angry and sanctionable" have also been employed; the problems are obvious. The bottom line seems to be that when an editor is bumbling along in good faith but damaging the feelings of those around them, we, the community (though we might officially adjure it) generally do want to make that person feel unhappy and unwelcome for so doing.

I lost my temper at that editor the last time he came to AN/I. I'm ashamed of it now, and I can't say I was proud of it as I was doing it--both of losing my temper, and because I took part in making someone feel miserable and unwanted over actions he took in good faith. But I also saw the damage he did to other editors in his habitual area of interest over the years, even if he didn't do it by dramatically calling them "fucking assholes" or whatever. When a person has demonstrated that being bullied is the only thing that will make them comply with their obligation to the community...well. I wish we had a better approach, but I don't know what it would look like. Choess (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you:-) I will reply, at some length, over tomorrow. ∯WBGconverse 17:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Media coverage of 2019 India–Pakistan standoff[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, there was a failed attempt to ping you from this nomination (since the ping wasn't signed, the ping would have been inoperable). If you could please stop by anyway, it would be much appreciated. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination has been marked for closure by a reviewer. If you wish to pursue it, you will need to respond now, before it closes. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:18, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Word of warning[edit]

From this edit [92] it appears you are being impersonated by someone calling themselves Winged Blades of Gothic. Cunning indeed. EEng 02:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

:-)

It's not spam[edit]

Its not spam Dmf2310 (talk) 07:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment[edit]

Yes, offensive as well as inappropriate. And in the end, what did you want me to see in the mirror. Did you mistake the meaning of my post? "They have to deal with s**t people here don't know about." Not s**t people, but s**t that people don't know about. Comments like yours are central to why I've mostly withdrawn from this site. Tony (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

what did you want me to see in the mirror--Yourself, obviously. ∯WBGconverse 05:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That might be reasonable, if we could know the purpose of your post—or what prompted it. Any idea? Tony (talk) 08:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Keep up the good work, Blades. ——SerialNumber54129 14:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-25[edit]

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

Problems

  • You will be able to read but not to edit Wikimedia Commons for 30 minutes on 19 June at 05:00 (UTC). This is to fix a hardware problem. [93]

Changes later this week

  • MIDI files can soon be played without the Score extension. You can then add them with [[File:Filename.midi]]. Later override_midi and override_audio will stop working. Instead you will need to add the MIDI file below the music score. [94]
  • A new video player will soon replace the old one. You will be able to enable it as a beta feature in your preferences. It will later be enabled for everyone if there are no big problems. [95]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 18 June. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 19 June. It will be on all wikis from 20 June (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 19 June at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Advanced item Some gadgets and user scripts still use the old wgEnableAPI and wgEnableWriteAPI values. These values are always true. They will soon be removed. This might break the gadgets and scripts. You should fix your gadgets to not use these values. [96]

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

20:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

No disrespect[edit]

I want you to understand that I’m not trying to be argumentative, nor to reject your interpretation of the WMF action here. I simply want the truth. If the ToU enforcement was a subjective interpretation of harassment? Fine. I don’t care. Truly. But I just wish to know whether the “abuse and harassment” clause was enforced by the letter of the law, or the spirit of the law. ~Swarm~ {sting} 11:55, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think this question will help dissolve the community backlash. ~Swarm~ {sting} 11:56, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Transparent Media Portal[edit]

Hi - I've seen (and respect) the notice on your userpage, so I understand if you're not able to look into this at the moment. If you felt able to offer an opinion though, as an experienced editor with a good knowledge of Indian subjects, I'd be grateful for your thoughts on this article. It's been written by someone who openly admits to being here to promote the subject (see the loooooong discussion on the talk page), and so far all of their sources are promotional; if there is any actual coverage that would establish notability though, I'd be content for the promo to be pruned and the article survive. Are you aware of this, and would you be able to point us at any RS? Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:55, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit:-This is stuff from a promo-farm and I have nominated some very-similar shit for AfD, about a year back. Looking right now, ∯WBGconverse 13:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth Summit:-See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transparent Complaint Procedure and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mineral Royalties for Citizens and Military. There were other similar AfDs but not in the spirits to conduct a detailed search. ∯WBGconverse 13:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks - I'll put a note at the AfD, pointing to those old AfDs. Appreciate the help, and know what you mean about the spirits - I haven't commented on the page, as I don't think my view would carry any weight, but I appreciate what you and a few other experienced editors have been doing to stand up for transparency and fairness. The idea that it's just a few vocal people on that page who have a problem with what WMF have done is completely wrong. GirthSummit (blether) 13:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, fighting text walls with text-walls is an extraordinarily bad idea. Be concise. The NDP applies only for staff or contractors, for a starter; you are neither. None of you raised that fundamental point. ∯WBGconverse 14:08, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're right - I realise that I'm not good at concise, it's something I'm trying to improve but I didn't do a good job of it here. I didn't look into the discrimination stuff because I thought it was a distraction, but that link is helpful, thanks. GirthSummit (blether) 14:13, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering[edit]

WGB - have you read Office actions? Atsme Talk 📧 16:17, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Atsme: - Obviously, why? ∯WBGconverse 16:35, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well...it's policy, and from what I read, T&S followed it appropriately or am I not seeing something? Atsme Talk 📧 16:40, 20 June 2019 (UTC) Adding: Jimbo's reference to "constitutional order". 16:46, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Atsme: - This is a straw-man argument, to be mild. Nobody disputes that the WMF has complete control over its assets and can boot whoever they like. The discussion is almost entirely about the ethical issues of their interventions. As you ought to know, the legal and ethical lines are often distant from one-another. And, we, the community have every every right to raise noise around the ethical issues. Somebody has said this, far better than me, over that mess of a discussion. ∯WBGconverse 16:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Well, that thought didn't enter my mind - I guess I'm too much of a pragmatist. But don't our admins have the same "boot power" except for it being appealable? I'll add that I've seen situations where appeals are simply turned down, year after year, and eventually the editor just gives up. Atsme Talk 📧 17:06, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) The difference is that when an admin indefblocks someone, they'll explain why, either at the time or when anyone questions them about it, (other than a very, very few cases of legacy bans from before SuSA took over legal-issues blocks) allowing other people to examine the same evidence and decide whether the admin got it right or not. Here, the WMF have unilaterally banned someone for no obvious reason; by now I'd imagine at least 50 people have examined Fram's entire recent history, and nobody's managed to point to anything remotely problematic other than the single "fuck arbcom" comment. ‑ Iridescent 17:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another (talk page watcher) Well, since the "saga" began, there have been quite a few people, both on and off wiki, who've said that they find Fram's entire style of editing and tone during discussions to be uncivil, likely to frighten people off the wiki, and generally in breach of the terms-of-use section titled "4. Refraining from Certain Activities". I'm not saying I agree with that assessment, and I would personally like to see Fram back, but it is certainly a body of opinion that is out there. It seems fairly clear to me, from the limited information we have, that it is Fram's entire demeanour that has caused the office to act this way, not any particular edits.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's true enough except that most of the folks who have (publicly) complained about him, believes that he significantly improved over the last one year. ∯WBGconverse 07:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What Iri says. FWIW, I don't buy that the locus of ethics didn't enter your mind. Also, I (amusingly) note your over-eagerness to get the involved admins sanctioned -- some stuff about common enemy comes to my mind. Ta, ∯WBGconverse 07:46, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a moment[edit]

Sunil Khandbahale is filled with promotional crap. I'm going to attempt some cleanup later, but I may not be online for the resulting fallout. The wider activities of the contributors to that page may also need some attention that I cannot give. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanamonde93: - Interestingly, I see that an admin (!!!) merged a large part of the garbage writeup; Anne Delong, care to explain your edit? ∯WBGconverse 07:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did notice that; I assumed it was another harried AFC regular trying to make the best of a bad job. Still crappy prose, though, and I'm concerned that the fluff will creep in again when I'm not watching (I'm frequently offline at the moment). Vanamonde (Talk) 14:51, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
AfDed.∯WBGconverse 06:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've been away from the internet for a few days, so I just saw this. To respond to your criticism, please note in the history of the original draft here that I removed a large amount of promotional material from the draft before moving what I considered to be factual and mostly well-referenced sentences into an article with a different title about the same person. Checking today, I see that I neglected to delete two closely connected references before the merge, but they've since been removed by another editor. At that point a bot was nominating hundreds of drafts for deletion every day, so I had neither the time nor the inclination to beautify the prose; it's not an AFC reviewer's responsibility to do that before putting content in mainspace.—Anne Delong (talk) 04:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of those mentioned in the media[edit]

I'm not sure that opening an AFD on Ambrose is the best course of action - my assumption is that there's an aspect to this I'm ignorant about. But I won't ask again in a similar discussion about someone else. Ambrose and Phelps are very similar - neither seem to be notable for their primary function (a soldier, and a scientist ... though Phelps seems closer), but both have a greater claim to notability through the attention they received in the media. I'm just trying to understand what pushes Ambrose across the line, but not Phelps. I get the impression that the reason that Ambrose is notable is obvious to some ... but it's going over my head. Can you tell me what I'm missing here? Sorry, I thought it was a pretty simple question, that had been bugging me since I saw that page pop up a few weeks ago. I'd hoped some would have said "but look at WP:THISREASON". If you don't want to answer, I'll ask at ... gosh, what's the best place WT:Notability (people)? Nfitz (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know damn nothing about Ambrose and can't be bothered enough to spend my time on him. If you feel that he fails WP:N, please open an AfD. ∯WBGconverse 07:31, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your assistance. I think that would be rather WP:POINTy as thousands if not tens of thousands of other editors had eyes on that page recently, with no one else than me having qualms but me - which suggests it's my comprehension of WP:N that is at fault. One day I'll have to enquire somewhere appropriate. Feels odd to be on the other side of the debate - normally I'm arguing for inclusion ... and yet I see why Phelps is excluded, but not this one. 16:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't think that it would be a pointy action, at all. ∯WBGconverse 06:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vivek Agnihotri[edit]

May I know exact reason why the contents on Vivek Agnihotri got undo? There were citation, there were no promotional contents. Just to learn for which reasons contents can get deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhwalin (talk • contribs) 06:17, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will reply soon. ∯WBGconverse 07:48, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Elaboration plz[edit]

Hey, would you please elaborate on your last comment in my talk page? Thanks again for the concern. --Mhhossein talk 07:14, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arain[edit]

Hi The admin posted something on Sitush's page which I replied to. But But ill paste this here for you to also have a look since you were the one to change my edits in the end, btw I fully appreciate it if your trying to clean things up:

Hi Im one the guys who added the several kb of content.:) But I'm ever so slightly annoyed at its removal. All the gotra (sub-castes) I added were taken from either H.A.Rose or Noor Arain and Ishtiaq Ahmed. Its not my own conjecture on the issue. I'm wasn't sure if Arain are Rajput or Arab and to that extent I represented both sides of the coin and I also created the infobox currently on the page reflecting both opinions (although someone has recently changed that too). As of recently I have shifted more towards the view that Arain are Suryvanshi Rajput -as Ishtiaq Ahmed mentions this as one of the oldest theories, based on the genetics work of the Harrapa Project which I've reflected on the Arain (delhi) page its also due to this genetics work that I wrote down the Raja Bhutta oral tradition (which is also present in the works of H.A.Rose and not my own conjecture] since it would seem to have the most evidence behind it (but i still added the fact that they had higher amounts of baloch genetics than other punjabi castes in an effort to be as impartial as possible). I also added Arain to the suryavanshi page and put their infobox caste as suryavanshi.

I also think that its crucial to have the "Sutlej vs ghaggar vs hissar arain section". Because previous users seem to be very confused about the status of Arain as either zamindar or market gardening or Malis and i think that the heading is essential to explain the sutlej arain as a landowning caste and all other arain to be occupational appropriations as mentioned by H.A.Rose. Again this isnt my own conjecture. Indeed it makes little sense to declare arain as not being landowning (as the version before me did) when they owned 33% Jalandhar (see gazetteer). I understand other users adding the market gardening reference and compering Arain to Malis but its poor research on their behalf when this only applies to Hissar Arain and Arain of non-sutlej areas as H.A.Rose describes.

Another thing that annoys me is that my addition of Arain being "to a man mohammedan and orthodox" is for some reason always removed even though I've taken it directly from H.A.Rose. But i think that its an important point as it helps differentiate arain from Hindu Sainis and Kamboj to whom they are often compared (although the genetic testing has shown arain to be distinct from them)

Anyway It took me a lot of effort to write down that content and would appreciate if it was kept there, especially due to the fact that most if not all is backed up by sources. If there are indeed legitimate bones of contention then i dont mind seeing it removed but otherwise I find it annoying to see it removed for no legitimate reason whatsoever.

I welcome the block on the page as necessary but its also locked me out too so i can't revert the edition to my own.

Anyway thank you for your time -flyingsimurgh — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlyingSimurgh (talk • contribs) 17:07, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@FlyingSimurgh:--See User:Sitush/CasteSources. The sources used by you and contents derived thereof, are unreliable and thus non-suitable for inclusion. ∯WBGconverse 18:45, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I took a look at Sitush's page for caste sources. Its a fair point. But I think an exception should be made for the Arain caste. There aren't many pre-colonial sources and in most cases the brits were the first to record the oral traditions, so we only have either native Arain writing about their own caste or Colonialists. If I do ignore the colonial sources I get a very biased representation where almost all native work on the Arain caste heavily backs Arab genealogy. Restricting colonial sources leaves a very lopsided view, probably more biased than the colonial ones and certainly there aren't many other sources that one can rely on.

-flyingsimurgh — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlyingSimurgh (talk • contribs) 16:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@FlyingSimurgh:-Colonial sources can't be used. Period and there is no compromise. Also, I am not sure about what do you mean by Arab genealogy. If it predates ~1970 and/or were published in any non-peer-reviewed medium, we can't use them. ∯WBGconverse 16:35, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By arab genealogy I mean to say that post 1911, the native sources after the islamic reformist movement generally say that arain are descendants of arab invaders. Before that when the brits noted the oral traditions the Arain claimed Rajput lineage. Eventually though, the british by 1930 started to write Arain history to be of arab genealogy rather than rajput.

Anyway, I didn't know about the sources restriction (of only posting post 1970 material) if that the case then I guess there is no other option then to delete my edit, but on a side note, why is ain-e-akbari used all over wikipedia when it comes to the mughal empire. Being neither post-1970 nor peer-reviewed. Ive seen it a few times in the references to mughal personalities. Not that I personally object to its use. -Flyingsimurgh — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlyingSimurgh (talk • contribs) 16:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rathindranath Tagore[edit]

In progress. ∯WBGconverse 09:47, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the update. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 07:09, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-26[edit]

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

Problems

  • The new version of MediaWiki for last week was not fully released due to issues. It was removed from most wikis on Tuesday and from test wikis on Thursday. [97]
  • Most wikis were slow and then briefly read-only last week due to one of the database servers having a problem. It is now replaced. [98]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 25 June. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 26 June. It will be on all wikis from 27 June (calendar).

Meetings

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

17:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is "MY COMPETE INCOMPETENCE", or something like that..
Message added 05:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

——SerialNumber54129 05:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129:-Err? There's nothing in my inbox from you, after 15 June. And, certainly nothing with the above title! Can you kindly resend? FWIW, I have mailed you twice in the meanwhile. ∯WBGconverse 07:22, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that wasn't actually the title; but sent Thu 20/06/2019 19:51. ——SerialNumber54129 07:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Received the new forward. Replying soon. ∯WBGconverse 08:11, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The PDF file[edit]

Hey, WBG - the JSTOR .pdf file never arrived. Atsme Talk 📧 00:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC) Adding - Thank you, WBG - it was exactly what I needed. 01:29, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflicts[edit]

Hey, please be careful not to remove others comments when you encounter an edit conflict. Cheers! stwalkerster (sock | talk) 15:08, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This failure of 2 Column E/C detector seem to be increasingly happening, of late and there's a ticket somewhere in Phab, that documents this. At any case, apologies for the inadvertent removal:-(
While you are here, any opinion on this thread? Do you wish to try blocking the two sysops and then seeing, if they have a definite understanding of the relevant concerns? Does their actions merit any warning? Also, Floq commented over Jimbo's t/p:- Is it true that users with Twitter profiles "Trust & Safety @Wikimedia/@Wikipedia" and "Community & Audience Engagement Associate" both liked your CEO's tweet? Do you see any problems? Over WP:FRAM, nother admin EspressoAddict mentions:- One of the likes is from "Joe Sutherland@jrbsu Trust & Safety @Wikimedia/@Wikipedia." to whom Floq asks, as to whether he is Joe and then, links his staff-account user-page. Any problems, as to their actions? Another ex-arbitrator said something around this very locus. Any concerns? All of these evaded you? Hypocrisy much? ∯WBGconverse 15:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No worries on the conflict, I thought I'd just bring it to your attention in case you weren't aware that it occasionally happens. If you have the Phab ticket to hand, I'd appreciate a link. Floq beat me to restoring my comment, but then I also noticed that someone else hit the same issue as you so I fixed that one instead.
I'm not going to review that thread right now due to time constraints, so I'll leave commentary on that until later. stwalkerster (sock | talk) 15:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Let me dig that Phab ticket, wait:-) I appreciate your desire to leave commentary, unlike Tony. A review won't take more than a few minutes, though. ∯WBGconverse 16:04, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A slip[edit]

I'm sure it was a slip, perhaps an edit conflict, here you removed another editor's comment. DuncanHill (talk) 15:08, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Something went wrong with this edit, removing my own, its happened to me when I used a reply tool. cygnis insignis 15:10, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

merged, thanks Duncan cygnis insignis 15:11, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DuncanHill: the user did not reply, or restore, and seemed to ignore the request. I'll leave it at that, thanks for trying. cygnis insignis 16:13, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, did you not restore it, already? It was certainly an undetected edit confict. AGF, please. And, apologies. ∯WBGconverse 16:22, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What did you assume was the point of posting here? AGF has nothing to do with this, I don't know what you are thinking with your actions and silence. I didn't ask for an apology, or expect one from you. cygnis insignis 17:39, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I asked you to assume good faith, because your reply to DHill was a directed snipe about my inaction. There happens numerous undetected edit-conflicts across the software and this has (of-late) spiked with use of some particular scripts and 2 column E/C detector. Rather than create a long thread and whine about it, the way out is to boldly self-restore the deleted edits.∯WBGconverse 17:50, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Winged_Blades_of_Godric/Archive_Unsorted&oldid=1145683970"