User talk:Just Step Sideways: Difference between revisions
m Reverted edits by 185.98.233.64 (talk) to last version by DPL bot |
|||
Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
:For the Arbitration Committee, [[User:Miniapolis|'''''<span style="color:navy">Mini</span>''''']][[User_talk:Miniapolis|'''''<span style="color:#8B4513">apolis</span>''''']] 14:51, 11 June 2018 (UTC) |
:For the Arbitration Committee, [[User:Miniapolis|'''''<span style="color:navy">Mini</span>''''']][[User_talk:Miniapolis|'''''<span style="color:#8B4513">apolis</span>''''']] 14:51, 11 June 2018 (UTC) |
||
::=(<span style="font: 12px Microsoft YaHei;text-shadow:0 1px 5px #808080">[[User:EnglishEfternamn|<span style="color:#2299FF">EnglishEfternamn</span>]][[User Talk:EnglishEfternamn|<span style="color:#7777FF"><sub>*t/c*</sub></span>]]</span> 06:17, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
==Discussion at [[User:Kudpung/What do admins do?]]== |
==Discussion at [[User:Kudpung/What do admins do?]]== |
Revision as of 06:17, 23 June 2018
No RfXs since 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online |
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg/220px-Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg.png)
As it's that time of year, I dunno how much time I'll have for anything around here for a matter of weeks or months. Anyway, quite a number of BITEy edits to Fairbanks, Alaska have shown up on my watchlist today. I walked away from that previous discussion at Butte, Alaska when he attempted to construe my observations about his editing behavior as a "personal attack" or some such thing. Looks to me like AnaSoc is an enthusiastic new contributor. Is the same thing going to happen which happened with the new editor over at the Butte article, namely that they just gave up on contributing after a while? I'm getting to the point of questioning my own continued participation even more than I already have. Basically, this dude and his predictable pattern of "I like it/I don't like it"-based editing are begging to be exposed, and he should be lucky that I don't have that kind of time right now. This behavior appears to be excused away mainly because he's adept at script editing and gaming various Wikipedian processes. Otherwise, someone would be calling it long-term abuse. What I've seen of his efforts of behalf of WP Schools is far worse. The whole Satch Carlson thing at the Bartlett High School article is a prime example, but there are far too many examples of him showing up at these articles solely to judge the contributions of others while contributing little or nothing himself. Well, two can play that game. I have a bunch of photos of and related to schools that I WILL NOT be uploading so long as this sort of nonsense continues to be tolerated by the community. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 23:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
- Can’t say I disagree, those edits weren’t perfect but just reverting them all doesn’t seem appropriate and is the sort odf thing that can discourage people. That being said, I don’t have much time today myself. I’d suggest taking this to a noticeboard for outside input. Either WP:RSN or maybe WP:ANI or at least the Fairbanks talk page. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/ANEWSicon.png/150px-ANEWSicon.png)
None
Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington
- Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
- Following an AN discussion, all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, are now under indefinite general sanctions.
- IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
- There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
- It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.
- A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.
- In early May, an unusually high level of failed login attempts was observed. The WMF has stated that this was an "external effort to gain unauthorized access to random accounts". Under Wikipedia policy, administrators are required to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.
Perspective
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Trumpeterswanlohmerlk.jpeg/220px-Trumpeterswanlohmerlk.jpeg)
Wikipedia is great, but it shouldn’t be one’s whole life, and getting into some controversy or whatever here shouldn’t rile you up all that much. It’s all just words on a page.
With that in mind, it’s June in Alaska, it’s warm and green and pleasant and the bugs aren’t too bad so I’m gonna go out in the woods and have campfires and go fishing for a couple days, maybe longer if I can manage it. If anyone needs anything before then, look elsewhere. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Andrevan case dismissed
Because Andrevan (talk · contribs) has resigned as an administrator and a bureaucrat, this case is dismissed. Andrevan may not regain either the administrator or bureaucrat permission without passing a new request for adminship and/or bureaucratship.
- Passed 12 to 0 on 14:19, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
- For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 14:51, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Discussion at User:Kudpung/What do admins do?
You are invited to join the discussion at User:Kudpung/What do admins do?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:23, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Template:Z48
RAN close
Hi! Can you take a look at your RAN close? You actually didn't archive the whole discussion (most of the !voting took place at the top), and there was a section in-between in which deleting RAN's userspace articles was being discussed, which got derailed when TonyB re-opened his initial close. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to take the article-deletion discussion out from where it is, move it to the bottom, and extend the archiving to the top of the thread, leaving the article-deletion discussion unarchived. I don't want to mess around with what could be a controversial close, but I think it would be useful to see if the article-deletion discussion (which was a post-close add-on) gets any traction. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:56, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- This is pretty much what I was going to say. Although the consensus on the block is clear, we still haven't determined what to do with his userspace articles.--Rusf10 (talk) 02:58, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I've boldly shuffled your close to the discussion section about indefinite block, which re-opens the discussion about RAN's user space articles (which is still ongoing), and closed the section on RAN's response. Feel free to revert if necessary. Alex Shih (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- oops. Thanks for the cleanup.
I meant to close it all, figuring the article discussion was trending toward case-by-case,no it wasn’t, I think I was kind of tired when I made that remark. but I have no issue with it being left open. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:39, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- oops. Thanks for the cleanup.
- (talk page stalker) I've boldly shuffled your close to the discussion section about indefinite block, which re-opens the discussion about RAN's user space articles (which is still ongoing), and closed the section on RAN's response. Feel free to revert if necessary. Alex Shih (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- This is pretty much what I was going to say. Although the consensus on the block is clear, we still haven't determined what to do with his userspace articles.--Rusf10 (talk) 02:58, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Knik Arm Bridge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Slope (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 21 June 2018 (UTC)