User talk:Floquenbeam

KIND OF HERE

Pretty busy in real life for the foreseeable future,
so I reserve the right to disappear for any length of time for any reason with no notice.
You shouldn't count on me for anything remotely time-sensitive.

Folly, thou conquerest, and I must yield! Against stupidity the very gods Themselves contend in vain. --Friedrich Schiller

NOTHERE

Based on your comments at the top of the page, I'm considering blocking you as NOTHERE, ALMOSTNOTHERE, and/or/but INCOUNTENANCE. This is your final warning (until the next warning, which may not be placed HERE).--Bbb23 (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

What's a "No There" block? --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

More than Almost No There.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

I think it may have been miswritten. It is a there is no there there block. Risker (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

I never misrite anything.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:11, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

There is no "There is No There There" Cabal cabal. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

June

Cornflowers

There's the cabal of the outcasts thanking you for your appreciation of member (by what he did, like yourself) Malik Shabazz. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Same cabal - with a new member it seems - thanking you for a clear statement about not wanting to serve a certain system. I remember the last time I debated with myself to stay or not well (2012). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:10, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

what was going on?

I just was removing vandalism and came across that was he threatening me ? my first time with that kind of situation was kind of lost with that Jack90s15 (talk) 01:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jack90s15: What was going on:

• There was an article with some pretty dubious BLP-violating information.
• An editor gutted the article with an imperfect edit summary
• I presume you thought this was vandalism and reverted (adding back dubious BLP-violating info, presumably by accident)
• They removed it again
• You reverted again and warned them on their talk page for removing sourced info (understandable, but not really appropriate in this case)
• They replied, saying that the police had been notified (presumably to track down who added the BLP-violating info in the first place) and asking you not to revert again
• I noticed this, removed the BLP violations, and left a note on their talk page that they need to be aware of our NLT policy, and noting you are probably not who they are reporting to the police.

The take-away is:

• People should clearly explain what they're doing in edit summaries
• People who are doing anti-vandal work need to pay close attention to what they're reverting. It isn't a race.
• People need to not make legal threats.

--Floquenbeam (talk) 14:05, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the rundown of what happened and the useful insight I appreciate it Jack90s15 (talk) 02:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
• An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
• An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

• The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
• Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

• The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
• The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Watch out for that bus

Regarding Wikipedia:Community response to Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram: throwing yourself under the bus is both brave and understandable, but this may not be the right bus. What happens if Fram diffuses tensions by agreeing not to edit WP until the present crisis is resolved, in exchange for an unblock? What happens if Jimbo, or the board, or someone else steps in and puts things on hold? If there are just a few casualties (such as you) and then there's a sudden lull, then maybe everything will turn out fine ... or, maybe, to make a point, the WMF will insist that the casualties stay dead. Food for thought. (Feel free to delete this message if you don't want the drama spilling over onto your talk page.) - Dank (push to talk) 14:55, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

I hesistate to make this comparison, because this is many orders of magnitude less important. I am not equating them and me, just trying to explain the general point. But I do recall many people thought that sitting at lunch counters where you weren't welcome was needlessly disruptive and provocative, and that discussion and persuasion where what was really needed. I really, really do not want to be part of a system where "the WMF [gets to] insist that the casualties stay dead". So if I'm permanently desysopped, I wouldn't want to be a sysop anyway. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Heh, I don't know if you know this, but I've lived in or near the lunch counter city for 30 years now. I'll support whatever decisions you choose to make; I just want to point out that there's a whole range of provocative actions you could take as an admin short of unblocking. (I can think of a couple but I want to stay above the fray, for now.) Your call. - Dank (push to talk) 15:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

I would like to suggest that unblocking now would deprive the WMF of the opportunity to right this themselves, and push them into a defensive stance on the issue. I think the better part of valor would be to wait 24 hours to see if Jimbo or others in the Foundation come around to this first. bd2412 T 15:47, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

I also think that rushing to action is counterproductive. We should remember that while as volunteers we can speak and act whenever we think it is right to do so, WMF employees can't always respond on the same basis. Presumably they will need to have discussions among multiple people, review of any replies, etc., and that can take some time. This is especially true if there is any sensitive information involved that requires extra scrutiny of what they say and to whom. It seems foolish that they weren't better prepared for pushback, but given that it seems they weren't, we should expect some lag in their reaction. --RL0919 (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

One of the issues I have with these arguments is what happens to Fram's reputation. Waiting for a reply allows doubt to creep in, people to think, "well maybe they were right, maybe the reason for the ban is something so egregious it warrants swift action and zero communication." I don't get the sense that's what happened here but instead that one or more people snitched to the WMF because of hurt feelings and the WMF felt the need, now, suddenly, to uphold civility issues. But we can't know until the WMF responds. In the meantime, per community norms, only the en.wp community can enact an en.wp ban and desysop. Victoria (tk) 16:41, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Wanted to make sure you saw this post in response to your question about what arbcom knew - not that there's much information in it, but of course while I was posting at ACN, Fram's comment was cross-posted to BN and everybody went to look over there.

Also, I'll be in a meeting at noon San Francisco time, and if all hell breaks loose then, it'll be really hard to get any work done! Please schedule your drama at a more convenient time, such as when I can get popcorn. (I'm kidding, but I'm also hoping we can take some time to sort out what exactly is going on without more drama, and less than two hours from now, while a lot of us are doing our day jobs, is a short deadline. I realize "I'd be sad if you got desysopped and I could have maybe done something about the situation but I had to go to a meeting about molecules" is an extremely self-centered way to think about this situation, but I haven't had time yet this morning to figure out what's going outside of my own brain. Incidentally, I did miss my bus..... Anyway, maybe give it till tomorrow, at least?) Opabinia regalis (talk) 17:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

A meeting about molecules? That's tiny matter in the scale of things ;) Sitush (talk) 17:29, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

All hell need not break loose; WMF can choose what to do next. And I imagine the meeting will be Fram-centric no matter what I do. No, I'm resolved to wait only until the time I grudgingly agreed to wait earlier. Enjoy your molecule meeting, though. I wish my real life meetings were about molecules, they'd have a much higher chance of being interesting then. Which should give you an idea about how interesting my meetings are... --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

You made me post from my phone, which I hate! Yeah, the problem is that the meeting is interesting; I wouldn't mind so much if you were distracting me from a meeting about TPS reports (oh good, I typed "TPS" and predictive text knew what I was going for). I've always been impressed with your willingness to go ahead and get shit done, in cases where I'd still be hemming and hawing. I can't say "you guys should wait because there's significant progress happening behind the scenes" but I can say "I dont think this is likely to prompt any new progress, and might actually reinforce some bad ideas some people have". Opabinia externa (talk) 19:05, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Couldn't find the whiskey, sorry. Best of luck mate, whatever happens. ——SerialNumber54129 19:02, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Just in case you'd not seen...

[1] Black Kite (talk) 19:02, 11 June 2019 (UTC)