User talk:The Wordsmith

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 9 as User talk:The Wordsmith/Archive 8 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

WIKIPEDIA FOREVER

This user has been on Wikipedia for 19 years, 6 months and 10 days.

Status: Busy.

“ In light of the following considerations:

• That the core principles of the policy on biographies of living people—in particular, neutrality and verifiability—have been set forth by the Wikimedia Foundation as a mandate for all projects;

• That the policy on biographies of living people, and this Committee's ruling in the Badlydrawnjeff case, call for the removal of poorly sourced and controversial content, and places the burden of demonstrating compliance on those who wish to see the content included;

• That unsourced biographies of living people may contain seemingly innocuous statements which are actually damaging, but there is no way to determine whether they do without providing sources;

• That Wikipedia, through the founding principle of "Ignore All Rules", has traditionally given administrators wide discretion to enforce policies and principles using their own best judgment; and

• That administrators have been instructed to aggressively enforce the policy on biographies of living people.

The Committee has determined that:

• The deletions carried out by Rdm2376, Scott MacDonald, and various other administrators are a reasonable exercise of administrative discretion to enforce the policy on biographies of living people.

• The administrators who carried out these actions are commended for their efforts to enforce policy and uphold the quality of the encyclopedia, but are urged to conduct future activities in a less chaotic manner.

• The administrators who interfered with these actions are reminded that the enforcement of the policy on biographies of living people takes precedence over mere procedural concerns.

”

Heads up

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Gamergate_draft#Request_for_comment Rhoark (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@Rhoark: Consider me notified. I'll keep an eye out for bad behavior, but I decline to offer an opinion on the proposal. In addition, your mention of TRPOD at the top is a borderline personal attack, and as such I strongly suggest you remove mention of his username. You don't want civility issues distracting from the substance of the RFC. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 14:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I would not have expected you to comment. The mention of TRPoD is simply an accurate reporting of the sanction that implemented 30/500, but I removed the name per request. Rhoark (talk) 14:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 15:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for The Right Stuff (blog)

On 19 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Right Stuff (blog), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that alt-right media hub The Right Stuff has a core principle of ethnic nationalism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Right Stuff (blog). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Right Stuff (blog)), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Crash Override Network

• Crash Override Network (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is clearly a page related to Gamergate. What would you think of applying Template:pp-30-500, as a DS? I am concerned that rather new users are constantly advocating for the claim that some of the original Gamergate victims joined in doxing of Gamergate supporters, based on what are claimed to be chat logs. If such a claim is to be accepted, it is better if it is judged valid by experienced editors. For example, check this edit summary by a person restoring the doxing charge who has 19 edits. The page was fully protected by User:MastCell between Sept 14 and 21. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:05, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I'd be willing to apply it to the article page (not the talkpage), but first I need to look into the history and issues surrounding the article. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 22:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: After checking out the recent history and monitoring edits, I see only the single diff you posted that the semiprotection did not prevent. We don't apply 500/30 unless semiprotection is clearly insufficient, so I'm not going to do that here just yet. If it becomes a bigger problem, I'd be willing to revisit that idea. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 17:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this. EdJohnston (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Sean.hoyland

Hello, as you may have expected, I am not satisfied with the close of the AE filing against Sean.hoyland. I am not sure what the appeal procedure is. Where can I appeal this decision? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 15:47, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

There are a number of possible appeals. The first is usually asking the imposing administrator (me, in this case) on their talkpage to reconsider, explaining why you think I made the wrong call. I'm open to a reasonable argument, as long as it is concise and well explained. Decisions may also be appealed to (in order from easiest to most difficult) WP:AE where overturning requires a consensus of uninvolved administrators, WP:ANI which requires consensus of uninvolved editors, or to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 16:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

The main reasons I would appeal the close is because it does not address the issues for which I made the filing, namely a deliberate 1RR violation, unexplained reverts, and outright refusal to discuss said reverts. Each one of these is a very serious issue on its own, and together they are not only very problematic, but go against the very principles Wikipedia is supposedly built on. Please reconsider your close and let me know what your decision is. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 17:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that there were indeed two reverts, that much is clear. However, enforcing administrators have the prerogative to use discretion in deciding how to enforce things like that when there are mitigating circumstances. The consensus of administrators in this case is that the BLP grounds (shaky but not 100% wrong) and the obstructionism by ES is sufficient to justify not sanctioning for 1RR this time. If it happens again, this request will certainly be used to establish a pattern. Regarding the refusal to discuss, it could potentially be problematic indeed and indicative of a problem. However, as a non-administrator and regular editor, Sean is not under any obligation to explain his actions to anyone who questions them. He explained his motivation at Arbitration Enforcement, and most admins found his explanation not worthy of sanction.

After taking some time to review my close, in the absence of new evidence I decline to overturn my own closure of this case. The other options for appeal that I mentioned are still available to you, should you wish to pursue them. Regards, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review. I find the idea that an editor doesn't need to discuss their reverts unless someone drags them to AE to be completely contrary to both common practice and the spirit of this project, not to mention that it was deemed disruptive in previous AE cases. That they can declare that they refuse to discuss with people they are ideologically opposed to at AE, and that elicits no response whatsoever from the admins is, well, I don't even know how to describe that. I will be appealing the close at ANI. Other than yourself, who should I notify when I do so? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 20:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for discussing the decision politely; that is a rare thing in Arbitration Enforcement and it is appreciated. I understand that you brought this request in good faith, so I wish you well at ANI. In addition to me, you are required to notify Sean.hoyland as well. It is also somewhat common, but not mandatory, to notify the other administrators and participants in the original request. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 22:19, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I also think you dealt with the request in good faith and I given the same result (which I was expecting, considering the comments the participating admins made), I would have appealed regardless of who the admin who closed the request was. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 04:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

I opened an ANI thread here. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 16:19, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for closing the AE

Thanks for closing the Sean.hoyland AE. Could you please post a note about the warning on Epson Salt's page? I'd rather it didn't just roll into the AE archives. Bishonen | talk 17:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC).

 Done The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:11, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

AE Close and Warning

Hi, I see you closed the Nishidani AE with a warning to everyone who participated. I don't think that is fair. I posted a general comment and suddenly I'm warned? If certain people are to be warned, then it ought to be explicit. I don't think it's fair to punish everyone who merely posted at an AE. 🔯 Sir Joseph ^🍸(talk) 14:01, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not punishing anybody, just sending out an advisement to all participants that further incivility will not be tolerated. The problem is deeper than just one or two users. If you're not uncivil in the PIA topic area, then it doesn't apply to you. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 14:13, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

OK, and I agree being civil is or at least should be one of the most important pillars that in my opinion is often not seen as a priority. 🔯 Sir Joseph ^🍸(talk) 14:15, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Sun October 16: CommonsLab / Open House NY Photo Contest + Hackathon

Sunday October 16, 2pm: CommonsLab / Open House NY Photo Contest + Hackathon

On Sunday, October 16, Wikimedia NYC will host a multimedia tutorial, workshop, and hackathon focused on Wikimedia Commons and the work processes for cultural multimedia wiki-projects. The CommonsLab is the concluding "upload party" to the Wikipedia @ Open House New York Weekend photo scavenger hunt, and an accompanying Wikimedia Commons multimedia hackathon. The event will take the form of a modified unconference, with sessions for photographers/creatives, editors/writers and hackers/software folks! Sunday October 16 CommonsLab / Open House NY Photo Contest + Hackathon 2:00pm - 8:00 pm at NYU ITP, Tisch School of Arts, 721 Broadway, 4th Floor Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:36, 14 October 2016 (UTC) And RSVP now for our next event after this, focusing on Latin American art and artists: WikiArte Latin American Edit-a-thon @ MoMA (Saturday October 22, 2016)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Your block/unblock of Kamel Tebast

Hi, Wordsmith. I just noticed the Kamel Tebast AE here and was a little surprised that you had closed it so quickly, after only one uninvolved admin had commented. Not that there's anything wrong with you blocking on your own admin discretion, but first blocking and then fairly promptly unblocking after an email discussion with the user[1] worries me a little. Other admins and users may have felt differently. I don't do ARBPIA myself, but I'm thinking of reopening the AE discussion, for the sake of providing space for more input from other admins and users. What do you think? Also, I'd be interested to see the e-mail discussion you mentioned. Bishonen | talk 16:23, 17 October 2016 (UTC).

Ordinarily I wouldn't have closed so quickly, but the BLP vio was clear and pretty egregious. He directly compared a former President of the United States to the Nazi Party, on his biography, using sources that were not even close to up-to-snuff. When he appealed via email, we had a discussion about his lack of understanding of policy and I genuinely believe that he accepts responsibility for his actions and that his apology was sincere. I've sent Kamel Tebaast an email asking for permission to forward the email chain, but if he declines then I won't publish without permission.

Clearly he meant to be speaking to you alone, so of course you must ask him, yes. But these things are better in public, and I hope any undertakings KT makes can be made public, perhaps in a written-for-wikipedia style, so that more eyes can see what, if anything, he's undertaking not to do again. I say this because I noticed he was just recently forgetful of the responsibility he had previously taken for his edits, compare [2]. Bishonen | talk 03:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC).

KT has declined permission to forward our correspondence, so I'm afraid that's that. I will say that he has read the relevant policies, understands why his actions were wrong, and acknowledged that he needs to earn back the community's trust before appealing the topic ban. I have a good faith belief that he was sincere in his intentions. He has also agreed to consult myself or another trusted administrator if he has questions about policy, which he has done since being unblocked. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 19:44, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Saturday October 22: WikiArte Latin American Edit-a-thon @ MoMA

Saturday October 22, 10am: WikiArte Latin American Edit-a-thon @ MoMA

Join us for a full Saturday of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to the lives and works of Latin American artists. The WikiArte (Wiki Arte y Cultura Latinoamerica) edit-a-thon is a global campaign to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Latin American arts and culture and to counter geocultural systemic bias on Wikipedia. Featuring an opening Artists' Panel at 10am, with Sol Aramendi, Sharon Lee De La Cruz, and Marisa Morán Jahn, to be moderated by Rocío Aranda-Alvarado, curator at El Museo del Barrio. The Museum of Modern Art and Fundacion Cisneros/Colección Patricia Phelps de Cisneros are uniting with international allies to focus on the lives and works of Latin American artists, architects and designers. With keystone events scheduled for October 22 in New York City and other cities throughout the month (Mexico City, Buenos Aires, Caracas, & others), the campaign aims to further similar goals to Art+Feminism. All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required. Introductory training on the basics of Wikipedia editing will be given throughout the edit-a-thon. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand. Saturday October 22 WikiArte Latin American Edit-a-thon @ MoMA (meetup) (eventbrite) 10:00am - 6:00pm at The Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at MoMA, 4 West 54th Street (between 5th and 6th Avenue) Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 23:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Request to remove topic ban

Hi The Wordsmith. You blocked me because of WP:BLP, and your subsequent unblocking of me was addressed. The unfortunate edit for which I was blocked had nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli topic, and my record in that area has been clean since my original topic ban. Therefore, I respectfully request that you remove my topic ban. Thank you. KamelTebaast 02:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate your situation, but I'm going to need more than a week and a half of good behavior before I'm willing to lift the ban. Your appeal is declined at this time. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 03:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

With all due respect, you did not address why I was topic banned. Again, considering that my block was not topic-related, at this point, it appears that your sanction is either punitive or content related. Especially considering that you did not sanction MShabazz, who most agreed violated the 1RR, and the same for Sean.holyland, who also violated the 1RR. KamelTebaast 04:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

It was explained to you exactly why you were topic banned. Your serious BLP violation was a textbook example of disrupting to prove a point as part of a content dispute in the PIA topic area, which was pointed out to you in our email exchange. You acknowledged to me that you needed to earn the community's trust back, and that takes a little longer that we've seen. My decision stands, for now. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 14:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wordsmith. Obviously, I understand the ramifications of my BLP violation, which I acknowledged. It has been one month. Can you please remove the topic ban? As you know, there are a number of safeguards in place and enough warnings against me should I violate policy. Thank you. KamelTebaast 02:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

The Wordsmith? KamelTebaast 17:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll have a look through your recent contributions, and inform you of my decision in a day or so. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:21, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. KamelTebaast 18:31, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in response, I've been busy with work. After getting a chance to check your recent contributions, I see you seem to have been contributing positively and stayed far away from BLP violations. I'm not sure if this is the best course of action, but I'm going to cautiously agree to lift the restriction, to take effect once I take care of all the red tape. However, consider yourself on notice that if I or anyone else has to reimpose sanctions (in ARBPIA, BLP or any other topic area), I will not be endorsing any appeals. Please take this as a learning experience to work collaboratively with your fellow editors (of all POVs). The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 15:58, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Saturday November 12: Women in Science Edit-a-thon @ NY Academy of Sciences (plus Sunday Indigenous People's Justice event)

Saturday November 12, 12-4pm: Women in Science Edit-a-thon @ NY Academy of Sciences

Join us for a full Saturday of social Wikipedia editing at NY Academy of Sciences (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering Women in science for their second annual edit-a-thon!. This event also coincides with the year-long celebration of the Academy's 200th Anniversary and a Women in Red online campaign. Beginning and experienced Wikipedia writers are both welcome, and there will be helpers on hand to assist those new to editing the encyclopedia. Saturday November 12: Women in Science Edit-a-thon @ NY Academy of Sciences Time: 12:00 pm - 4:00 pm (drop-in anytime!) Location: New York Academy of Sciences. 7 World Trade Center, 250 Greenwich Street (between Vesey and Barclay Streets in Manhattan), 40th Floor You must also register at the NYAS site here: www.nyas.org/WikiEdit2016 Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2016 (UTC) And RSVP now for our other event this Sunday in Brooklyn, focusing on Indigenous communities and social justice: Indigenous People's Justice @ Interference Archive Sunday November 13, 2016, 2:00- 6:00 pm (drop-in anytime!)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi The Wordsmith.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)