User talk:AmandaNP: Difference between revisions
→Tech News: 2020-16: new section Tag: |
→Tobby72: another spot |
||
Line 568: | Line 568: | ||
:::https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timur&action=history |
:::https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timur&action=history |
||
:::I'm really confident he is connected to WorldCreaterFighter and that someone mistakenly closed my TOBBY72 investigation because they overlooked it when it was attached to another investigation of a different sock of the same sockmaster, which was closed. Please allow me to open a WorldCreaterFighter investigation for this suspected sockpuppet.. - [[User:Hunan201p|Hunan201p]] ([[User talk:Hunan201p|talk]]) 13:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC) |
:::I'm really confident he is connected to WorldCreaterFighter and that someone mistakenly closed my TOBBY72 investigation because they overlooked it when it was attached to another investigation of a different sock of the same sockmaster, which was closed. Please allow me to open a WorldCreaterFighter investigation for this suspected sockpuppet.. - [[User:Hunan201p|Hunan201p]] ([[User talk:Hunan201p|talk]]) 13:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
::::Replied [[User talk:TonyBallioni#Another_problem|here]]. -- [[User talk:DeltaQuad|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b></span>]] <small>[[User:DeltaQuad|(aka DQ)]]</small> 17:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC) |
|||
== [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Tech/News/2020/16|Tech News: 2020-16]] == |
== [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Tech/News/2020/16|Tech News: 2020-16]] == |
Revision as of 17:59, 13 April 2020
Wikipedia:Babel | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Search user languages |
User:DeltaQuad/Templates/Off and On WikiBreak
Contact information
|
---|
|
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the TheSandDoctor Talk 17:18, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Retired?
I am both shocked and saddened to see your notice and the corresponding request to hand in your various tool sets. Please take whatever time off you need and come back. Your long term departure from the project would be a hard blow. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:50, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed, please come back. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:20, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
I am too. Are you sure you;re not overreacting? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- I am sorry to see you go, Amanda. Best wishes, and I hope after some time off you'll find yourself wanting to come back. --valereee (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- I and many others will miss you. Thank you for all your service. Drmies (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- I do hope to return to the project some day (though that is not a promise). I'm going to be around, my bots are staying and I'm still working globally, just not on enwiki at this time. I took 5 days to consider stepping back alone, so it wasn't a spur of the moment decision. I'm glad that I've created good ideas of me, and that you want to keep me around. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 06:12, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Your greater experience in some areas has been very helpful to me during the period we were both on arbcom. I want in particular to note this because we did not always agree; but without you I would have found it much more difficult to understand the issues. I remain grateful, and hope to work with you again whenever. DGG ( talk ) 06:25, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Despite my deep disappointment with the current Arbcom, I recall you being a wise voice in the past and regret that you find it necessary to retire. I hope it won't be for long. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:44, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry to see you go. You have always been a pleasure to work with. Good travels to you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:10, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- I only just noticed this now, and also want to say thank you for the many significant contributions you've made to this movement, to wish you well in your retirement, and also to hope we see you again when the time is right. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:32, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Just saw the news, sad but enjoy the break my friend! Thehelpfulone 21:21, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
- Well, that news hit me like a sack of bricks to the head this morning. I will be very sorry to see you go, Amanda; your skills and experience have not only been invaluable to the project but inspirational to me (and, I suspect, many others). I strongly hope you'll make a return to en-wiki soon; you will be much missed. Yunshui 雲水 08:16, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
- I should have posted earlier. As others have said, you're missed. I hope you find it possible to come back sometime. I enjoyed working with you on ArbCom. Doug Weller talk 09:24, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
- Just saw this and it is a great disappointment. You have been a sensitive, reasonable and skillful contributor and "official". I know nothing about what may have caused this but I am sure you are not doing this lightly. I hope you just need some time for other activities, projects and rest, and will return. Best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 04:28, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
- Amanda, I've said this to you what must be a million times, but I'm repeating it now: You are a Star. Do whatever you need to do to ensure you're healthy and happy, and know that your wiki family will be here waiting for you when you're ready to return, my friend.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:11, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Cup of tea
Mint tea | |
I'm vaguely aware of current issues and haven't looked into excatly what happened, but I thought that I'd say hello. I felt that you were friendly when we've talked on a few occasions. I support people taking breaks, and I hope that you're able to relax. Best wishes, ↠Pine (✉) 03:26, 27 October 2019 (UTC) |
Twelveth anniversary on en-wp
Happy First Edit Day!
Date sort problem in SPI case list
At User:DeltaQuad/SPI case list, which is transcluded into Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, the date format of the "timestamp" columns is non-standard, and (understandably) cannot be made to sort correctly (I tried the three relevant values of data-sort-type
). How about switching to a standard format, like "2019-11-09T23:39Z", which will sort correctly?
|
→ |
|
—[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
- I see that this is currently used only as a backup, and the normally-used list does not exhibit the problem. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:37, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
- @AlanM1 and Dreamy Jazz: I have fixed this issue so it sorts correctly. If your interested how, drop a look at the source. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 09:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Happy Holidays
Happy Holidays! |
--Cameron11598 (Talk) 21:15, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Christmas, Amanda!!
Hello DeltaQuad: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, TheSandDoctor Talk 08:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
- From my family to yours, I hope that you have a wonderful Christmas holiday and a Happy New Year! --TheSandDoctor Talk 08:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Belated holiday greetings
↠Pine (✉) 16:43, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted Article
This article Abdullahi Sadiq was deleted by you under a ban policy after I was blocked for socking but I wasnt a banned user, can it be restored? Magherbin (talk) 05:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Magherbin: DeltaQuad has been inactive for a while, and i think they are not going to be active soon. It would be a good idea to consult some other admin. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
welcome back
I hope you are back to the enwiki. Also, welcome back to the admin corps. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
- Dear Amanda, I'm delighted to hear you are back. ϢereSpielChequers 07:41, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome back DQ, I'm really pleased to see you have had the time you needed. Nthep (talk) 16:02, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- Chiming in a bit late but it's great to see you back. Doug Weller talk 20:41, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
DeltaQuad CheckUser and Oversight permissions restored
Following a request to the committee, the CheckUser and Oversight permissions of DeltaQuad (talk · contribs) are restored.
Support: AGK, Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, GorillaWarfare, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Mkdw, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno
Oppose: None
Not voting: David Fuchs, DGG, Joe Roe
For the Arbitration Committee,
Katietalk 14:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#DeltaQuad CheckUser and Oversight permissions restored
- Welcome back, friend! :-) Katietalk 14:47, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There is a new version of the Wikimedia Commons app for Android. It should fix the failed uploads problem. [1]
Problems
- There was a problem with the new MediaWiki version last week. It deleted some messages by accident. The new version was late because it was stopped to fix things. [2]
Changes later this week
- The MediaWiki action API is used by various tools like bots and gadgets. Some error codes will change. Some parameter values that do not follow the standard will no longer work. [3]
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 11 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 12 February. It will be on all wikis from 13 February (calendar).
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
19:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Minecrafter0271
Hi DeltaQuad (and TonyBallioni, since you were in the discussion right before the block) - wanted drop you a note about Minecrafter0271. My impression of the user was more "overeager" and "possibly younger," not troll. The "cite a source" thing about 1000 million -> 1 billion in particular I saw as misreading the request (as a request to change the value rather than correct it). I know you've both got a lot more experience than me, but I feel like blocking them as a troll seems a bit excessive to me. creffpublic a creffett franchise (talk to the boss) 19:03, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
- I blocked them for being not here to contribute to the encyclopedia, not being a troll. If you look right back through their contributions, it's clear they are someone's sockpuppet, they aren't even close to new editing in a WP:ARBAP2 area. Couple that with in the first few edits 2 FAC nominations, a complete lack of understanding of GA criteria and throwing WP:OWN around, nominating Pornhub for deletion, said they would stop GAN reviews - then starts another one and passes it in minutes. Later down the road they have more crappy deletion nominations, dumped a section of an article to "update" it, denies a specific ER update for not being specific, suggests an ER request template for a 2017 edit. and tries to pad their edits to get 500/30 with WP:TWA, a common sock move. That's not including the more recent behavior. Shall I go on about how they need to be blocked? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:47, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
- DeltaQuad, nope, your point is made. Opinion retracted. creffpublic a creffett franchise (talk to the boss) 19:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
In case this would interest you
User talk:Doug Weller § More Roys —PaleoNeonate – 21:14, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
- There isn't really any evidence given here, and I'd prefer not to go dumpster diving. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
SPI
Hi DeltaQuad:
I mentioned user:Opaque nociceptive neurons "Familiar to the edits from User:Envisaging tier and user:It's gonna be awesome". I think he know what what edited.
I deleted several edits in North–South divide in Taiwan on 9 Feb. I delete those edits because they comes from previous sockpuppet user:Envisaging tier. And user:Opaque nociceptive neurons found that and listed a lot of edit I did about their contribution.
This information is not secret. It is open in the article history and user contribution. However, I think it is not easy for a "new wikipedian". As a result, I think user:Opaque nociceptive neurons is familiar to the edits.
--Wolfch (talk) 04:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Wolfch: While Bbb23 might be able to pick that up within a heartbeat because they have ran just about every single check on that master, people who are looking at the report for the first time can't immediately know what you mean by "Familar to the edits". Depending on the sock, it can take up to 30 minutes to confirm what you say by individually going through the contributions. With the amount of SPI reports we have, I could spend all day doing that. That is why we ask for additional diffs and it will allow your request to get processed faster and without issues. That's why I asked for them. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for reminding the information I need to provide. Have a nice day. --Wolfch (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- Pages on Wikidata and Commons now load faster. You can read more about page load performance. [4][5]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 18 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 19 February. It will be on all wikis from 20 February (calendar).
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
16:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Bureaucrat chat for RFA - Money emoji
I've opened a bureaucrat chat for the current RfA. Your input would be most appreciated at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Money emoji/Bureaucrat chat. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 15:01, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Using multiple IP's to evade block
I'm not very familiar with the protocol, but an IP editor you recently blocked is back with a different IP address. The original is 100.6.97.221 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and the new one is 100.6.117.80 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I'm not sure what to do, but you probably are. Cheers --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 00:37, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- I expanded it to 100.6.0.0/17. If that doesn't work, we'll do page protection. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 05:56, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I just blocked User:Vauxford for restoring the same edits that several other Alex Neman socks recently edited, though Vauxford has been around for awhile. Would you be able to check to see if Vauxford is a long-term sleeper/alternative account? OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:38, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- I've unblocked the user for now, as there is a decent chance it's a false positive. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:15, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- They are 3 years old with 5.5k edits. I haven't looked at their contribs in detail, but I think if they were, is would have been reported to an SPI by now. Also without any direct evidence other than restoring edits (which is allowable as I reverted a whole bunch under G5), I can't really run a check. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 03:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 25 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 26 February. It will be on all wikis from 27 February (calendar).
Future changes
- There will be a reply button after each post on a talk page if you want one. This will soon be a beta feature on the Arabic, French, Dutch and Hungarian Wikipedias. You will have to turn it on if you want to use it. It will come to more wikis later. You can test the reply button. It was briefly shown earlier than planned by mistake on the four first wikis last week.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
20:59, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Sock puppetry
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
Best, ミラP 01:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Rather than send me an e-mail, I recommend leaving me a message at my UTP if possible. ミラP 01:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Miraclepine: I'd rather we go this route than that one. If you wish for me to expand, let me know it's ok to disclose the contents. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 04:22, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
After-block procedures
Since apparently opening a new discussion in the talk page and reverting page contents to its stable version is not an acceptable behaviour in WP, I'd like you to tell me what do you expect me to do after the block you imposed on me for page pupusa expires. Thank you. --Jotamar (talk) 14:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- There is no stable version when it comes to an edit war - that is just continuing the edit war. Instructions on how to handle edit wars are on the policy page for edit warring under the section WP:AVOIDEDITWAR. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- 2 weeks have gone by, and the other editor does not give any explanation in the new discussion opened by me for the deletions in pupusa, even after being notified in the personal talk page. Can you at least manage to engage user:Editor1377 in the discussion? --Jotamar (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- It looks like you got them on their TP already. If not, there is WP:3O. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 13:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
- 2 weeks have gone by, and the other editor does not give any explanation in the new discussion opened by me for the deletions in pupusa, even after being notified in the personal talk page. Can you at least manage to engage user:Editor1377 in the discussion? --Jotamar (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
AWB
I request that you restore my access to AWB. Regarding the issue with Dan Lam, this primarily started with an issue with an inappropriate infobox image, for which I did start this discussion which was continued on the article talk page where Sulfurboy provided a third opinion that I was correct in judging the image to be inappropriate for the infobox. Sulfurboy then removed the image. At that point, I thought the issue was resolved and did some other cleanup on the article.
Five hours later, I ran AWB on all the articles I edited that day to find my own typos/mistakes as well as any others that may exist. It was this run which re-added the orphan tag that triggered Sulferboy to make the ANI report to which you responded. As far as this goes, it is very important to note that the article was and still is an orphan. Your analysis on this is wrong. The report you linked found one instance of "Dan" being found in one person's name and "Lam" being found in the successors name in The Bund (TV series). It also found "Dan Lan" in Friday the 13th: Killer Puzzle, but there it is not a wikilink (and I am not even sure this is the same Dan Lam), so the article is indeed an orphan as evidenced by this search.
Iridescent first added the orphan tag on a AWB run they did on 2/20, and I restored it several more times through my normal AWB processing - and eventually left the user a message about this on their talk page to try to get them to address the problem instead of removing the tag again. I have made over 40k AWB edits and been thanked for these edits probably hundreds of times. I think this demonstrates responsible and beneficial use of this tool and respectfully request you reconsider. MB 19:45, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- Regardless of you using it 40k times, breaking the rules § 3, to break one of wikipedia's strongest policies is abuse. I will not restore access to someone who does not understand that edit warring especially with an automated tool is inappropriate. Especially when this is not the first time. I should have issued a block, but decided to be lenient and just pull access. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 20:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- I certainly do understand edit-warring is inappropriate. The first incident you mentioned was a matter of applying the orphan tag to an article that was not an orphan. I corrected this setting immediately and don't believe there was any edit-warring involved, either manually or with the tool. The second case was where I was doing large runs one weekend on different lists of articles and didn't know that I had run AWB multiple times on the same article, nor that in the interim, the valid tag had been removed. When I was notified of this, I immediately looked into the problem, reverted myself, and de-orphaned the article myself to prevent any possible reocurrence. With the recent article, I should have started the talk page discussion earlier. You used the words "For now, your AWB access is revoked". I'm not that clear on what I can do on this point. MB 20:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- Responding to ping. This article is clearly an orphan even by the strictest "no incoming links from article-space at all" definition and is probably un-de-orphanable as I can't think of any article from which they could be validly linked (I'm sure you don't seriously believe that this artist is the same person as the Dan Lam who's designing Canadian videogames so I'm not sure why you bothered linking that report), and as such is going to continue to be (correctly) re-tagged any time anyone patrols any of the categories in which it appears, whether that patrolling be manually or using AWB.
- It's easy to accidentally edit-war with AWB because it has no "skip pages I've already edited recently" function (such a function would probably be forbidden by the WMF even if someone coded it, owing to server load), and it's entirely plausible that assuming User:MB is cleaning up categories that they'd patrol (for instance) Category:Arizona State University alumni followed by Category:University of North Texas alumni etc and if an error were restored between the two passes, make the same correction twice. When I do AWB runs, I intentionally generate deduplicated lists of 100,000+ pages at a time to work from precisely to ensure it will take a long time before there's any possibility of repeating a page, but there's nothing in the instructions anywhere to even suggest let alone compel that so I won't hold it against anyone for not doing it.
- Theoretically MB has edit-warred as even though all their edits were correct the repeated removal of the tag constituted "disruption" rather than "vandalism" and as such wasn't exempt from 3RR. To penalise MB for it seems extremely harsh and appears to be a massive overreaction to a good-faith technical crossing of a line. User:MB, if you're willing to give an "In future I'll only run AWB on long lists with duplicates removed, to ensure there's no possibility of my hitting the same page twice in the same week or so" undertaking, then I'll restore your AWB access myself. (DQ,
I should have issued a block
is ridiculous and you know as well as I do that there's no way a block in these circumstances would have stood. Making empty threats like this in an apparent attempt to intimidate the other party in a discussion is beneath you; you only need to look at the current Arbcom case to see that the community has lost whatever patience it had for admins who try to pull the "I'm more important than you, if you don't do whatever I command I'll block you" routine.) ‑ Iridescent 08:00, 27 February 2020 (UTC)- Right, I forgot everyone is here for the good of the project and I'm just being an asshole. Thanks for the second opinion. Apologies, MB. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 08:26, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
- I certainly do understand edit-warring is inappropriate. The first incident you mentioned was a matter of applying the orphan tag to an article that was not an orphan. I corrected this setting immediately and don't believe there was any edit-warring involved, either manually or with the tool. The second case was where I was doing large runs one weekend on different lists of articles and didn't know that I had run AWB multiple times on the same article, nor that in the interim, the valid tag had been removed. When I was notified of this, I immediately looked into the problem, reverted myself, and de-orphaned the article myself to prevent any possible reocurrence. With the recent article, I should have started the talk page discussion earlier. You used the words "For now, your AWB access is revoked". I'm not that clear on what I can do on this point. MB 20:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Do you intend to come back as an ArbCom clerk?
Just wondering. For The Signpost.
Smallbones(smalltalk) 20:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
- My Arbitration report will show that you have not responded to this question. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
- (watching) I believe it is none of either of yours business, and while you may feel "the people have a right to know", the implication that you, Bri, have a right to answers to your questions suggests you have lost sight of what you and each of us all are. It's a poor comment, and will reflect as such on Signpost. ——SN54129 18:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
- If it wasn't clear already, I don't comment for the signpost. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 10:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Two years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).
|
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
must not
undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather thanshould not
. - A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
- Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.
- Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
- The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
- Readers who were not logged in briefly saw the interface in a language decided by their browser. It should normally be in the language of the wiki. This happened for a short period of time last week. This was because of a bug. [6]
Changes later this week
- If you forget your password you can ask for a new one to be sent to your email address. You need to know your email address or your username. You will now be able to choose that you need to enter both your email address and your username. This will be a preference. This is to get fewer password reset emails someone else asked for. [7]
- When you asked for a new password you could see if the username didn't exist on Special:PasswordReset. Now the page will show the username you entered and tell you an email has been sent if the username exists. This is for better security. [8]
- On Special:WhatLinksHere you can see what other pages link to a page. You can see if the link is from a redirect. You can now see which section the redirect links to. [9]
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 3 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 4 March. It will be on all wikis from 5 March (calendar).
Future changes
- The developers are working on a new interface to solve edit conflicts on talk pages. You can give feedback. [10]
- There is a vote on the creation of a new user group called abuse filter manager. The vote runs from March 1 to March 31 on Meta.
-
wgMFSpecialCaseMainPage
was used for the mobile site. It was deprecated in 2017. It will stop working in April. Wikis should see if they use it. If they do they should fix it. You can read more and ask for help. This affects 183 wikis. There is a list. [11]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
00:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There is a new search word called
articletopic
. You can use it to search for articles on a specific topic. It is available on the Arabic, Czech, English and Vietnamese Wikipedias. It will come to more Wikipedias soon. [12][13][14]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 10 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 11 March. It will be on all wikis from 12 March (calendar).
Future changes
- There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.
- The Wikipedia Android app will do push notifications if users want them. This could help you see for example when someone wrote on your talk page or your edit was reverted. This will come later this year. [15]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:14, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
Why?
Hello DeltaQuad! I am Thatstinkyguy, an editor here. I wanted to contact you about not so much user Dr. Blofeld, but his thing against infoboxes on particular biographical articles. Maybe this isn't the place to do so, and if it's not, please tell me who I can forward this who (besides Dr. Blofeld).
Anyway, I wrote out the following message for over an hour on Dr. Blofeld's talk page before getting deleted. I archived it via my 3rd sandbox here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thatstinkyguy/sandbox_3.
But then when I went back to see if he had read, he reverted back to a previous version, and didn't seem to read more than the message name: Your thing with infoboxes... Looking back, that probably wasn't the best name. I say that because here was his summary for reverting:
I don't have a "thing" about infoboxes and support them in most cases where there is data not easily presented in prose.
- Dr. Blofeld @ 07:08, 11 March 2020
What kind of pisses me off is that he didn't seem to read it aside from the name, like I said. I wish he had taken the time to read it at the very least. I was reaching out to have a calm, civil discussion like two adults, but he obviously didn't want that. Quite childish really.
Basing on this comment and some of the archived discussion pages for Cary Grant and Stanley Kubrick, he does in fact seem to be against them if there's detailed enough information within the article on the subject. I find this whole ordeal with bowing down to these wishes unreasonable. Especially since Dr. Blofeld is not in a position of power on Wikipedia. There is no harm AT ALL with infoboxes on notable celebrities. In fact, most if not all have one. My stance: infoboxes should be added, because they can help provide basic info, it's up to standard with other notable celebrity articles, and they do not deteriorate the value of the article itself.
Thanks for your time.
- Thatstinkyguy (talk) 12:49, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Thatstinkyguy
- (talk page stalker) Nobody is in a "position of power" here, we are all volunteers and although some may think they are the all singing and all dancing, they are not. What you find unreasonable, permit me to suggest, is that someone has displayed a differing opinion to you and you don't like it. May I politely suggest that if this is a report on someone's behaviour, then in the interests of transparency, you take it to ANI. But do expect the report to be expeditiously filed away. In the meantime, and away from fetishising over infoboxes, feel free to review any one of the many articles we currently have at WP:GAN. That would be a more sound use of your time. CassiantoTalk 15:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't know enough about infoboxes to weigh in on this. I'm not sure why you selected me. It's been subject to two ArbCom cases already, first & second. So it's a bit of a muddy area. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 13:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Happy Bureaucratship Anniversary!
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There is a new API module for changing the content model of existing pages. Use
action=changecontentmodel
to specify the new model. You can read the documentation on mediawiki.org. [16]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 17 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 18 March. It will be on all wikis from 19 March (calendar).
Future changes
- If you edit a page at the same time as someone else you can get an edit conflict. There is a new two-column interface to make it easier to solve this. It will soon be active by default on the German, Arabic, and Farsi Wikipedias. It will be on by default on more wikis within the next months. You will be able to opt out of the new interface. [17][18]
- You can see a proposed design for replying to comments in an easier way.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
21:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Hotstar's screenshot earlier revisions
Hello there! Irrespective of my trepidations in reaching-out to owing to your WP:UAL hierarchy and my not-so-pleasant experiences thus far, I'm tryna to "play it cool" and ask rather succinctly[ contrary to my 'very terrible' habit]: Why have 'you' deprecated the earlier revision of Hotstar®'s screenshots?
Yeah, I know it's non-free and uploaded under the anxiety dubbed "fair-dealing" o/b/o Wikimedia® Foundation given it's a proprietary web-app but still..
Shouldn't your User:DeltaQuadBot perform optical-evaluations of the "latest" screenshot with older ones? Which in this case, was easier because the source exists within the WWW. Or is it like gazillion other bots which can only display half of its "smart" utilities before "automagically" deleting older-revisions? Now I can't upload back the older-version to the very same file( I archived it in my downloads, given my life-experience in the inevitability of such 'wikidramas', vandalism aside), even though your bot has deleted all[ but one( but that's stretching the point)]. –Mohd.maaz864 (talk) 11:03, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
P.S. I will hold my patience for upto ~24 hours since publishing this message( "text"), following which: If there's[ not-so-surprisingly] zero response, then I'll try overriding the current choppy-revision uploaded by fellow-senior User:DatGuy's User:DatBot falls under WP:CRYSTAL — I'll try overriding it by re-uploading that older revision or perhaps, if within a reach of an internet-connected PC: Taking a fresh screenshot. No harm, no foul — cool? –Mohd.maaz864 (talk) 11:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC) Edit Note: Fixed the bot's username. –Mohd.maaz864 (talk) 11:16, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, first, please realize that this is a volunteer website with no deadline. My user rights also don't exempt me from following the rules or being nice to people. So looking through your situation, you don't list any specific file in which my bot has dealt with, so I'm left guessing which file you are referring to. Nonetheless, I looked into what I could and found my bot edited these three files:
- I assume you refer to the last one. Either way, my bot does not preform "optical-evaluations", though I'm unsure of what that even means. If you mean the resolution is reduced, yes it is, and that decision is made by User:DatBot, not my bot. My bot is only authorized to look at certain things before it considers deletion - as the community requested. Either way, the screenshot image (the third image) is in violation of WP:NFCC#8 and I have nominated it for discussion. Quick note: I restored the original Hotstar logo file as it was incorrectly tagged as fair use. It should have been {{pd-logo}}. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 14:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Okeydoke. Unnecessary personal-disclosures about myself aside: I do feel like I've heard from other senior "Wikipedian" referring to this, I re-read this a-gain and yeah: Pretty interesting read. Not-so-surprisingly to me, I'm stuck somewhat middle in that and hence, subscribe that deadlines may or may not be necessary. So if you felt offended by my straightforward notification of my impending action which which I've already rationalised and needles to add: Gazillion Wikipedians, mostly( and not just ‘some’) IP editors without even an inkling of idea over why they're obligated to explain their random-edits properly, let alone what the […] a "talk-page" is. Then it's still a bit of a surprise to me that Wikipedians, or particularly senior Wikipedians: Aren't used to that much of a transparency. I'm willing to tender my apologies.
- However, that doesn't mean I'm in the lapse because based on myriad of factors such as my prior-dealings with senior Wikipedians, first and foremost and my own non-Wikipedia® affairs: I can't be expected to wait till eternity before expecting a due-answer from the other side, particularly if that side is exhibiting signs of apathy. If you think that's somehow a negative, then as reflected in the diversity of that essay: That's a matter of Philosophy. And need I specify that I do have some shortlist of some quite a number of badly-maintained Wiki-English articles that so much progress has been made without even a single talk-page discussion, and ambiguously-worded Wikipedia® policies are randomly applied on such articles not on the watchlist of any senior Wikipedian( to be honest, "senior" doesn't guarantee quality — it just means that the predisposition of a "senior"[ in interpreting any such policy] will carry far more weight simply based on user-privileges granted) whatsoever.
- Anyhoo.. I can go on but getting involved into such an off-topic argument is as counterproductive as it could get. But right before that.. Your point about "being obligated to act nice to people and not playing fast-and-loose with the guidelines"( paraphrased): I hear ya.. But as you must've noticed that I've already stated it enough number of times about how that's practically not the case with me. And believe me, my mind runs fast enough when it's spared to have a ton of introspection. But what I did find was nothing intentional or deliberately-"trespassing" from my end. And now.. I'm seeing some other junior Wikipedians keep running into similar 'Clashes of Hierarchy', as well. Assuming you're being radically-honest, that you're a Legal Positivist who believes in Rule of Law.
- Finally, to the point: Woohoo! You're right! Primarily. It's clearly the 3rd-one, . And by “optical-evaluations [sic]”, what I simply wanted to convey was "OCR-scanning" — is it clear now? So no.. While you might've noticed I explicitly mentioned "DG" in my post-script, this has nothing to do with the still-standing revision by that other "hardware" bot, aka a "robot". At last: Glad for your courtesy in restoring the old logo! Even though it might be a regular courtesy. I was originally tempted to but then decided to start a talk-page discussion over there for that given there was a max 1-week cap as well.. And see: Deadlines are managed by Wikipedia® when it hypothetically serves Wikimedia® Foundation's interests. Awaiting.. –Mohd.maaz864 (talk) 20:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC) Edit Note: Re-arranged the line-spacing in last-para[graph] and 'fixed' the letter-casing of few hyperlinked Wiki-articles. –Mohd.maaz864 (talk) 20:24, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
File:Hotstar screenshot.png
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
- Some development will be slower than planned. This is because of the current pandemic. You can see the new deployment guidelines. This is to avoid risks when some persons could be unavailable.
- There was a problem when adding interwiki links. The tool you use to add interwiki links could suggest the wrong project to link to. This has now been fixed. [19][20]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 24 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 25 March. It will be on all wikis from 26 March (calendar).
Future changes
- There is a project to make editing easier for newcomers. The developers are trying to understand what initiatives different Wikipedias have to welcome newcomers. They also want to know which templates are often used for maintenance activities. You can help this project by checking if your wiki's pages are listed on Wikidata.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- The beta version of the Wikipedia app for Android can now help users add tags on Commons. These tags are called depicts. [21]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 31 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 1 April. It will be on all wikis from 2 April (calendar).
Future changes
- The video player will change to be simpler and more modern. The current beta feature will become the video player for everyone. The old player will be removed. [22]
- There is a project to make templates easier to use. The next few weeks the developers will present ideas on the project page. You can watch that page if you are interested in giving feedback. [23]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
- There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.
- There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
- The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
- There was a problem with user pages not being shown properly on desktop. This was because of a bug. It will soon be fixed. [24]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 April. It will be on all wikis from 9 April (calendar).
Future changes
- MediaWiki will use a newer version of Unicode. Some characters that did not have an upper case equivalent before do now. Titles beginning with one of these characters will be moved. A list of these titles can be seen on Phabricator. The titles will be renamed by the user
Maintenance script
. This will start on 13 April 2020. You can rename them before this if you wish and the new title can be different from the one the script would rename it to. [25]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
19:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Tobby72
Amanda, I think there has been an error regarding my WorldCreaterFighter SPI case. I was never informed of a CU or a closing based on the info I provided regarding Tobby72. Please explain how my request specifically was ever fulfilled because I don't see it in the links. I apologize if I am mistaken somehow. - Hunan201p (talk) 13:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Has Tobby72 been blocked? It doesn't appear he has been. - Hunan201p (talk) 13:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Amanda, PLEASE respond. Tobby72 is continuing to make bad faith edits such as the recent one he made to Timur:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timur&action=history
- I'm really confident he is connected to WorldCreaterFighter and that someone mistakenly closed my TOBBY72 investigation because they overlooked it when it was attached to another investigation of a different sock of the same sockmaster, which was closed. Please allow me to open a WorldCreaterFighter investigation for this suspected sockpuppet.. - Hunan201p (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Replied here. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Has Tobby72 been blocked? It doesn't appear he has been. - Hunan201p (talk) 13:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- You can now use the
articletopic
search word on all Wikipedias. It searches articles by topic. [26] - You can see wiki tools in the new Tools Gallery. [27]
- You can see edits from the Wikimedia Cloud Services in a new dashboard.
- When you use filters on a history page you sometimes don't see any edits. There is a text explaining this now. Before it was just empty. [28]
- There is a new Wikimedia Technical Blog. [29]
Problems
- There was a problem with the Wikidata database last week. Some wikis went down for twenty minutes. Wikidata and other projects showed error messages. Interwiki links were not shown, some tools did not work and other problems. Some of this was fixed quickly. The developers are working on fixing the rest. [30][31][32]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from April 14. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from April 15. It will be on all wikis from April 16 (calendar).
Future changes
- Some graphs have not worked on mobile. This will soon be fixed. [33]
- The article tab on talk pages of redirects links to the target of the redirect. It could link to the redirect page itself instead. You can leave feedback on this.
- For pages using syntax highlighting, the use of the deprecated
<source>
tag, as well as the use of the deprecatedenclose
parameter, will add tracking categories.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:30, 13 April 2020 (UTC)