User talk:Jpgordon: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:27, 21 October 2021

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

For older history, check [1] as well as the archives.

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Administrator changes

Blablubbs

Alvestrand • Black Falcon • Deathphoenix • Dppowell • Mark Arsten • JGHowes (deceased)

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Mkdw

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.

Technical news

DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

Arbitration

A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kudarathwatte

Hi, How are you doing? I see that you have blocked User:Kudarathwatte for sockpuppeting. I filed an SPI on monday here. Would you be able to leave a comment there? so someone could close the case. Cheers--Chanaka L (talk) 06:10, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's back again

Hi Josh. Hate to trouble you but could you do your thing here once again please. Cheers! Rob van vee 19:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yawn --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:24, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Rob van vee 04:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Potential LTA

Hello again, I recently noticed that you have blocked Albertbelgium as well as the oldest known (to me at least) account, Magnoffiq (and you surely remember of the SPI). I was wondering if you were familiar with this editor before the Magnoffiq account? In any case, since per WP:BE sock contributions would be reverted, I looked a bit and didn't bother too much as most are now buried under others, at the same time noticing some apparently decent contributions like Special:Diff/1045363922. So far it seems to be some LTA who doesn't care, resets their IP address and creates a new account, perhaps since a long time. Like in this case, since they're not immediately discovered and that in the batch some contributions are good (and not citing disinformation sources as sometimes happens with this user), it's likely that a number of past accounts were also not reverted (you didn't seem to apply BE reverts either or to tag them so they can easily be grouped). So I wondered if other than DENY, if it was because it's a very old familiar LTA that I'm only recently familiar with? If so, do you think it'd be worth writing an TLA entry (and would you remember what one of the oldest accounts was)? Thanks, —Paleo Neonate – 23:57, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly a mix of DENY and laziness. Probably more of the latter. "It's a goddamn sock, I don't care whose, kill it, next?" --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 00:52, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-war

The editor you reverted at Breakfast at Tiffany's (film) has started an edit war over his changes. When I reported him at AIV, action was declined with the comment that the editor is already partially blocked. However, that's only from one article and his two years of disruptive behaviour with constant warnings is being overlooked. Is there some way the decision not to block the editor fully can be reviewed? Sweetpool50 (talk) 12:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's been done. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And the nominee for most irritating sock goes to...

This relentless tosser who is up to their usual disruption. Pretty soon I'll be able to report them using only emojis! Rob van vee 06:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

do it --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...goes to Darwinbish! darwin bish 14:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]

@@ Line 101: / Line 101: @@
 [[User:Don Omar Leyenda|This relentless tosser]] who is up to their usual disruption. Pretty soon I'll be able to report them using only emojis! <b>[[User:Robvanvee|<span style="color:red">Rob</span>]][[User talk:Robvanvee|<span style="color:orange">van</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Robvanvee|<span style="color:green">vee</span>]]</b> 06:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 :do it [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107;]]</small></sup> 14:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
+::...goes to Darwinbish! [[User:Darwinbish|<b style="color:#22F;">darwin</b>]]&thinsp;[[User talk:Darwinbish|<span style="display:inline-block;transform:rotate(-20deg);position:relative;bottom:0.4em;color:#909;">bish</span>]] 14:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC).