User talk:Dennis Brown

Barnstars given to me since 2012

Reporting poorly-made RfC discussions

Is there any method for formally making a complaint or a report about an unhelpful or unwarranted RfC discussion? I was opposed to the RfC discussion (at Talk:Donetsk People's Republic) for a number of reasons, including (1) its non-urgency, (2) its poorly arranged options and layout, and (3) the disruptive behaviour of the person who originally made the RfC, as well as that of one of the other commenters. The problem with the RfC is that the two users were trying to present it as the be all and end all, i.e. "we get our way if the vote goes in our favour!". But given that the vote was, for lack of a better term, rigged, and given that there was no real consensus even despite one option being slightly ahead, I was opposed to the interpretation that it should be the be all and end all. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 00:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)s.

• You can politely bring it up a WP:AN and ask an admin to look it. I strongly suggest avoiding dramatics, opinions, hyperbole and such when you do. Even though that isn't exactly an admin function, if there is a policy issue, and admin can act. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Advice about an RM

Hello, sorry to bother you again - you've recently given me some advice about my quarrels with User:My very best wishes. I'm contacting you again for the following reason. In August I filed an RM at Talk:Russian separatist forces in Donbas, which has been recently closed with "no consensus" by a non-involved editor. It was a tough call and a long discussion, with many editors (I think 14 out of 21) !voting in support of the RM and 7 opposing it. I'm not fully convinced about the lack of consensus, and I've started a conversation with the closer. They've been kind and ready to explain and give advice, but I feel that that conversation is not going anywhere and I'm wondering whether asking for a review of the closure would be appropriate here. Note that I've never opened an RM before and I've participated in very few ones, so I lack experience and might well be completely wrong about what a consensus is within the frame of an RM. However.... I think there's a consensus to move, and if there's not, I think the discussion is not over yet and should be re-opened. I'd appreciate if you could have a look at this and give me some advice as to how to proceed, or not to proceed, on the matter. The relevant discussions are the following ones:

• Talk:Russian_separatist_forces_in_Donbas#Requested_move_from_Russian_separatist_forces_in_Donbas_→_Pro-Russian_separatist_forces_in_Donbas
• Talk:Russian_separatist_forces_in_Donbas#Requested_move_13_August_2022
• User_talk:Paine_Ellsworth#Closure_of_Talk:Russian_separatist_forces_in_Donbas#Requested_move_13_August_2022.

I know it's lots of stuff! Please if you don't have time or interest, don't worry and just tell me - I won't be upset. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

• I'm tight on time, but I did take a cursory look, and the close seem reasonable. One mistake you made is when you started the RM under WP:COMMONNAME you didn't really provide a half dozen links to top shelf sources using that term. It isn't required, but it bolsters your argument. The supports had more "votes", but this isn't a vote. The opposers seemed to have stronger arguments (again, I'm just breezing through the discussion). I would recommend leaving it alone and try again in 3 months, as there isn't any fatal flaw in the close. Honestly, I think Paine Ellsworth handled the discussion on his talk page in a very professional manner, and gave you good reasoning and advice for a future attempt. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you for having found the time to review this. I will follow your advice (which is also the closer's advice) and I will try again in 3 months. Ironically, in the next 3 months the denomination "Russian separatists" might well become entirely appropriate, as DPR and LPR are now in the process of being annexed to Russia (the title, however, will not be appropriate for the period March 2014-February 2022, when the war in Donbass was also a non-international armed conflict between the Ukrainian government and the pro-Russia separatists). I will also follow your advice of providing an extensive review of RS. Note that in some way I had already provided the half dozen links to top shelf sources you mentioned: see here, in the discussion "Requested move from Russian separatist forces in Donbas → Pro-Russian separatist forces in Donbas", which immediately precedes the "official" RM. However, I've been lazy and I haven’t repeated that survey of RS in the proper RM - too bad. Thank you again, bye. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 14:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

More possible socks of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lokeshwaran V R

Hi Dennis

I hope you're well.

I've noticed three new accounts making edits and undiscussed page moves on similar Indian transport articles to the last two:

• Lokeshwaran Vela
• Padmavathy Rajan
• Padmavathy R

Obviously the first has the same sort of username as before. Not so sure about the second and third, but they're both newish accounts editing and moving in this area, and also warned by Liz for making excessive page moves. Plus they are probably socks of each other anyway... Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 16:15, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

• Amakuru: A very quick looks seems to show the first looks like a ringer, didn't go further (real world busy today), but you really need to file an SPI case and ask a CU to do a sleeper check. They can dig a lot deeper and find connections that I can't alone. Ping me once you have, and I will try to find the time to dig a little deeper into the contribs and make a behavioral connection. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 17:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

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

Administrator changes

ScottishFinnishRadish

Staxringold

Ahoerstemeier (deceased) • Ched

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678

CheckUser changes

GorillaWarfare

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Thoughts?

Hi Dennis,
I noticed this online link[1]. This might result in more disruption in the cesspool known as WP:AA2 and WP:KURDS.
Google translate: ""The first spark was ignited in order to correct and organize the unfounded claims we have seen on Wikipedia recently. r/turkviki was established. Let's get organized from there."

Another link:[2]
Google translate:[3] "Friends, this subreddit was founded on the termination of unfounded claims made on Wikipedia. Our aim is to put an end to the unfounded allegations made on Wikipedia, the propaganda activities targeting our country and nation, to express the truth and correct the mistakes."
Google translate of one of the comments:[4] "we need a larger audience, salaried employees of wikipedia, and I don't know how effective we can be against the current Turkish hatred"
- LouisAragon (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

• For the next few weeks (or more), I am not able to really spend time on Wikipedia. I try to check messages, but I really can't get into an issue right now. Maybe a talk page stalker can. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 02:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @LouisAragon. I'm not sure what if anything can be done proactively. But I think this might be worth posting at WP:AN perhaps under the heading of an FYI sort of thing. If there are any wiki-projects that are specific to this topic area, an FYI note on the talk page might also be warranted. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

IBANs and AfDs

Hey Dennis Brown,

In your understanding, is the policy interpretation presented here on voting in an AfD when under an IBAN still in force?

Best regards,

François Robere (talk) 08:20, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

• That was 10 years ago, many things have changed. I would recommend you ask the admin that put the iban in place, or who closed the discussion that put the iban in place if it is ok. I personally think it is ok if you don't interact, or try to counter their arguments, but I am just one person and I"m not sure what the concensus is 10 years later. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
  • Okay. Thanks! François Robere (talk) 13:50, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions review: proposed decision and community review

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process. The Proposed Decision phase of the discretionary sanctions review process has now opened. A five-day public review period for the proposed decision, before arbitrators cast votes on the proposed decision, is open through November 18. Any interested editors are invited to comment on the proposed decision talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022

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

Administrator changes

• Eddie891
• Euryalus
• TheresNoTime

• Alex.muller
• Excirial
• RedWordSmith
• Ron Ritzman
• TheresNoTime
• Stephen

Interface administrator changes

TheresNoTime

TheresNoTime

CheckUser changes

TheresNoTime

Oversight changes

TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure adopted

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process.

The Arbitration Committee has concluded the 2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

The above proposals that are supported by an absolute majority of unrecused active arbitrators are hereby enacted. The drafting arbitrators (CaptainEek, L235, and Wugapodes) are directed to take the actions necessary to bring the proposals enacted by this motion into effect, including by amending the procedures at WP:AC/P and WP:AC/DS. The authority granted to the drafting arbitrators by this motion expires one month after enactment.

The Arbitration Committee thanks all those who have participated in the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process and all who have helped bring it to a successful conclusion. This motion concludes the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process.

This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the update list.

For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure adopted

Article - Dr. James Wright

He was the uncle of Mark "Chopper" Read, which is referenced, (i don't add false information) if you don't believe me, maybe Google it, before calling someone a vandal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.15.135 (talk) 19:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

• You've already been reverted again, for both adding trivia that isn't references properly and breaking the wikicode. If you continue, you will be blocked for edit warring. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 19:59, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Ike Awgu for deletion

User Earl Andrew has proven to have a conflict of interest in the article Ike Awgu, even lying about attending the same college. It should be re-nominated for deletion. It obviously does not meet notability inclusion criteria for Wikipedia. I am confident ANY neutral, non-involved party can see this. 50.237.197.242 (talk) 20:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps a new editor for the article should be in order. 50.237.197.242 (talk) 15:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Dennis, because the IP had opened their thread (without signing it) at the top of Talk:Ike Awgu instead of the bottom, your reply was misplaced. The IP commented there without pinging you. PamD 20:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

• I finally got the time to look at it, and I would agree that a 15 year old AFD doesn't really prove an ongoing consensus, so I put it up for AFD myself. Pretty thin claims for notability. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:43, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy Kalends of January

		Happy New Year!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:44, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

Hello Dennis Brown,

New Page Review queue December 2022

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.