User talk:Zero0000/2019
Hi
[edit]You got mail, Huldra (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Same problem, again, Huldra (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).
- There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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}}.
- The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
- Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.
- 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:
- At least 8 characters in length
- Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
- 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.
- Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, SilkTork.
- 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.
Administrators' newsletter – February 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).
Interface administrator changes
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
1RR
[edit]Please note that 09:44, 6 February 2019 and 13:57, 5 February 2019 would seem to be in contravention of WP:ARBPIA#General 1RR restriction. Icewhiz (talk) 09:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you, I can't count. Zerotalk 09:53, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Need of your assistance in changing a title of an article
[edit]User:Zero0000, shalom. While trying to change the title of an article that I created (Promontory of Tyre to "Ladder of Tyre"), this last name being the new name ("Ladder of Tyre") since it is the more common of the two names, I received a message that the page cannot be moved, since a title (redirect) already exists by that name, and that I should consult an administrator. So, here I am. If you can please help me change this article's title to "Ladder of Tyre," I would be greatly appreciative of your assistance. Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
- I see that it has already been done. Thanks again.Davidbena (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm about to tell one non-ECP editor to stay away from this page, and I don't want to get involved in what seems to be an edit war, but the article now describes Lehi as a terrorist group but Lehi's article calls it paramilitary. Doug Weller talk 15:54, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, could you revoke their talk page access? —RainFall 09:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- @RainFall: Done and revdelled. Zerotalk 10:15, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
- Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.
- A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.
- 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-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
- checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.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.
- 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).
- Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.
1920 Paulet–Newcombe map?
[edit]I have moved the thread to Talk:Paulet–Newcombe Agreement as better to have it there for posterity. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.
- The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.
- 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.
te and iw
[edit]Do you remember any of the articles where IW made classic tendentious arguments? Im thinking of wholesale removal of text as "off-topic", making opposing arguments based off POV and such things. I got Rouzan al-Najjar already, combing through others but you may have a better memory than I do. nableezy - 16:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- this is what I have compiled so far. nableezy - 17:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Don't forget BOOMERANGS are possible, as always in this place. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- User:Nableezy, see this: Talk:Elie_Wiesel/Archive_2#Molestation_allegations (*one* woman had accused EW of molestation, reported in RS): Icewhiz argues against including it in his bio.
- Then, a month later, see Talk:Linda_Sarsour/Archive_10#Asmi_Fathelbab_allegations: a woman alleges that Linda Sarsour did nothing when she was allegedly molested by a coworker (Sarsour was their boss): : Icewhiz argues for including it in her bio. (Haaretz just repeated my claim about hypocrisy or double standards, but didn't say why I had called it that,) Huldra (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Think thats outside of ARBPIA. Yes ARBBLP, but not ARBPIA. nableezy - 20:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Administrators will take action if it can be simply shown that an editor's behaviour is disruptive. They will not want to be asked to make judgements about whether an individual's line of argumentation is consistently tendentious. Unless it shows that an editor's approach is wildly outside the norm for a contentious subject area, I suspect that putting together a complex case runs the risk of looking like victimisation, harassment or a vendetta and itself being seen as problematic. Sorry if I expressed that patronisingly, but I thought it was worth saying. Having said the above, I think it might be useful to have a conversation which clarifies what the problems are. ← ZScarpia 11:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
- Interesting stuff: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. ← ZScarpia 12:29, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Netanyahu’s “water” overture, June 2018
[edit]I have reversed your removal of well-sourced material relevant to Iran-Israel relations, and dispute the notion that because a poliician makes an overture that some subjective viewers might judge to be a cynical—an offer the recipient is not expected to take up—it is somehow unnewsworthy or irrelevant to the article at hand. I would think such offers to be relevant regardless of their effectiveness. Please have a look at the YouTube video created by Netanyahu himself. Perhaps it deserves to be mentioned in a different place in the article? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Vesuvius Dogg: This is the sort of stuff that happens every other day. It is just propaganda noise and had no significance at the time and will have no significance in the future. Also, presenting this as a genuine offer amounts to accepting a claim from one side and thus is an NPOV violation. Netanyahu is not stupid enough to really think that Iran and Israel will cooperate on water conservation. It would be much better to cover public relations at a higher level from independent analysts. This is what I mean, though I'm not saying that is a good source. Zerotalk 02:28, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
- Agree. It would be worthy if it was in an article like Iran Watar problems or something like that. Propaganda made by a politician is not worth to be in article like Iran-Israel relationship or we would be adding a lot of propoganda made by Iranian/Israeli politicians in this article. Also Vesuvius Dogg why did you revert with no edit summary and tagged your revert as minor edit? Did you do that accidentally??--SharabSalam (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
You reverted my edits
[edit]Hello, please explain why you reverted both of my edits. Thanks IsraeliIdan (talk) 11:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Zvikorn: Because you were editing against a hard-won consensus and we don't need to go around the same circle yet again. "Occupied" is the word used by the great majority of reliable sources, so we use it. Zerotalk 11:48, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- Okay. Then I am at least adding the part that it was captured from the Jordanians. Leaving occupied.
Question
[edit]How is an "Interaction Ban" meant to be applied? Does this mean a prohibition from engaging in discussions with another editor, or does it mean where one editor has edited a Wikipedia page, the banned editor cannot edit there at all? Please explain.Davidbena (talk) 00:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- It doesn't prevent you editing the same pages, but it prevents you from interfering in any way with the other editor's edits on that page, such as reverting them, changing text they inserted, etc.. See WP:IBAN for the official definition. Zerotalk 02:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. Do you think such a ban will be helpful between me and Huldra?Davidbena (talk) 02:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- To be honest, I don't believe it would. Articles would suffer. Zerotalk 02:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. Do you think such a ban will be helpful between me and Huldra?Davidbena (talk) 02:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 special circular
[edit]Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:35, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
[edit]ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
- A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
- Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.
- 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.
- 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 sowill 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.
- 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,
- A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
- A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.
Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society
[edit]Dear Zero0000/2019,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.
Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
About your arbcom statement
[edit]I just wanted to correct you on "The real question is of how to assign relative weights to two undeniable historical facts. One is that a large number of Polish civilians died during WWII, and the other is that some Poles collaborated with the Nazis in the genocide of the Jews." This dispute has nothing to do with the fact a, i.e. that " a large number of Polish civilians died during WWII", nobody is disputing that. The issue is how to weight the fact that some Poles helped the Jews while others collaborated and even killed them themselves. Obviously, this controversial (and not just in Poland, variations of this are true in all European countries that were under Nazi influence); the point is that some people in Poland try to exaggerate the rescue and whitewash the collaboration - but also, some others do the reverse, try to exaggerate the collaboration (and related vices like antisemitism) and minimize the rescue. Which leads to the two camps I describe, and various levels of compromise in between, with the major issue that on both extremes we have scholars (media aside) who don't acknowledge there could be a middle ground and that they themselves can be exaggerating/whitewashing something, because they are very much on a crusade to right the wrongs, with the wrongs being either the "cover-up/ignorance about the extent of Polish collaboration", or the "exaggeration of said collaboration and ignorance of the rescue efforts". Hope that helps a bit, and you may want to refactor your statement a bit. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
- Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický
- 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.
- 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.
- The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
- The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.
Notice of arbitration
[edit]You recently offered a statement in 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/Antisemitism in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 15:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs page: a "call to arms"
[edit]Hi! Please do take a look at this [[1]]. If you think of it like I do, maybe you can help mobilise "the usual suspects". This screams for a reaction. Thanks and have a great day, Arminden (talk) 07:58, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Suggested Edit
[edit]@Zero0000:, as you know, I am currently serving a topic ban, and wish to update an article that has been remotely construed with the I/P area of conflict. The edit, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with that conflict, so I was wondering if you would be so kind as to add the following edit to the article Jaba', Haifa Subdistrict. The natural place for this edit seems to me to be in the sub-section "Classic era," simply continuing where the last editor left off. The suggested edit is as follows:
- Archaeologist Benjamin Mazar, disputing this opinion, thought that Gaba of the Horsemen (Geba) (mentioned by Josephus in The Jewish War 3.3.1) ought to be identified with the ruin Ḫirbet el-Ḥârithîye (now Sha'ar HaAmakim), since in relation to Simonias, it better fits Josephus' description of Gaba / Gibea (Greek: Γάβα) in Vita § 24 being distant from Simonias 60 stadia (about 11 km.), in addition to the fact that, in relation to Besara (Beit Shearim), Gaba / Gibea (Ḫirbet el-Ḥârithîye) stood at a distance of only 20 stadia (about 4 km.) from Besara, also in agreement with Josephus.[1][2] Victor Guérin thought that Sheikh Abreik was to be identified with Gaba of the Horsemen.
Feel free to improve its style, making it easier to comprehend. As always, I appreciate your assistance, and especially your work to further enhance the accuracy of this noble project.
References
- ^ Mazar (Maisler), B. (1957). Beth She'arim - Report on the Excavations during 1936–40 (in Hebrew). Vol. 1 (The Catacombs I–IV). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. p. 19.; HUCA xxiv (1952/3), pp. 75–81; Avi-Yonah, M. (1940). Map of Roman Palestine. London: Oxford University Press. p. 38.
- ^ Cf. Josephus, Vita § 24
Davidbena (talk) 00:44, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
You've got mail
[edit]It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the Doug Weller talk 17:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).
- 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
- 1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
- 2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
|
|
- A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.
- In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.
- The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
- The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
- A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.
- In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.
Administrators' newsletter – August 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
- A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.
- Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.
- Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
- The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).
- Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
- Floquenbeam • Lectonar
- DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana
- Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime
- Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
- The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
- A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.
RE: "some moron"
[edit]Probably best to refrain from name calling even when —or rather especially whenever— frustration is high. Regards, El_C 16:31, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I just saw your revert as I was looking at the editor, and noticed that whoever had added the DS talk page notice hadn't added ECP, so I've done that. But I think the editor needs a warning, not just a revert. Hard to sanction someone who hasn't been warned. Thanks. Damn, wrote this hours ago, didn't get saved! Doug Weller talk 18:28, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Temple of Solomon
[edit]Please take a look at the current situation on the article. And the edits made by a user.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
- Is this valid? I dont know User_talk:Mr.User200#Inappropriate_CanvassingMr.User200 (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Mr.User200: Generally it is not allowed to solicit support just from people you consider might take your side in a dispute. If you want to leave messages like that on personal talk pages, do it for everyone who has edited the article or its talk page recently. Alternatively, you can write to the article talk page adding a ping for each recent editor. If you want to solicit input from a wider group of editors, you can post to a project, such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology or others. Zerotalk 13:30, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Is this valid? I dont know User_talk:Mr.User200#Inappropriate_CanvassingMr.User200 (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the information.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – October 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories
.
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
- As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
- The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
- The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC
focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future
, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.
- The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case commencing
[edit]In August 2019, the Arbitration Committee resolved to open the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case as a suspended case due to workload considerations. The Committee is now un-suspending and commencing the case.
- The primary scope of the case is: Evaluating the clarity and effectiveness of current remedies in the ARBPIA area. More information can be found here.
- Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 4/Evidence. The evidence phase will be open until 18 October 2019 (subject to change).
- You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 4/Workshop. The workshop phase will be open until 25 October 2019 (subject to change).
- For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.
- If you do not wish to receive case updates, please remove your name from the notification list.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Question
[edit]Hi, User:Zero0000. I wanted to ask you, in your capacity as an administrator, what is the proper procedure for an ordinary editor, such as myself, to suggest an edit on one of the Wikipedia guidelines, such as manual of style, or on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew)? --Davidbena (talk) 17:24, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Davidbena: Except for trivial things like typos, it would be a good idea to write suggestions on the talk page first. Check if the issue has been discussed before. You can expect resistance if there is already an agreement or if you propose a change that will invalidate a lot of existing practice. I see some poor writing:
"The letter he at the ends of words is not pronounced in Hebrew (in modern Hebrew, even with a mapik), and will be omitted in most cases."
This is about how to write a word in English letters, so of course ה is omitted. The sentence should be"The letter he at the ends of words is not pronounced as "h" in Hebrew (in modern Hebrew, even with a mapik), so a final "h" will be omitted in most cases."
Cheers. Zerotalk 22:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)- Thanks, Zero0000. That was helpful. I'll formulate my suggestions and then add them to the relevant Talk-Pages.Davidbena (talk) 23:51, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
Palestine-Israel articles 4: workshop extended
[edit]The workshop phase of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case will be extended to November 1, 2019. All interested editors are invited to submit comments and workshop proposals regarding and arising from the clarity and effectiveness of current remedies in the ARBPIA area. To unsubscribe from future case updates, please remove your name from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.
- The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
- A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.
- Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.
JIDF
[edit]I saw your comment on the talk page. The article also clearly fails WP:SUSTAINED and has for years. The deletion rationale from 2016 was right about that. Basically all RS coverage was from a brief period in 2008. Oh well. ♟♙ (talk) 00:16, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit]You've got mail
[edit]It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the DannyS712 (talk) 12:19, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
ARCA Archived
[edit]Hi Zero, I wanted to let you know that I have archived your ARCA request here. SQLQuery me! 23:08, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – December 2019
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
- EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
- Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂
Interface administrator changes
- An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
- Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.
- Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)
- Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive
.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
Palestine-Israel articles 4: workshop reopened
[edit]Because of the nature of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case and the importance of the exact wording of remedies, the Arbitration Committee would like to invite public comment and workshopping on the proposed decision, which will be posted soon. Accordingly, the workshop in this case is re-opened and will remain open until Friday, December 13. To opt out of further announcements, please remove yourself from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)