User talk:clpo13
| This is Clpo13's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31Auto-archiving period: 14 days  |
| This is Clpo13's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
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
- Sites with a
wikimedia.orgaddress were by mistake redirected to the Wikimedia Foundation wiki on 26 January. This included Meta and Wikimedia Commons. The mistake was fixed after an hour. [1] - Some users had problems logging in and out around 22 January. Bots also had problems and edit previews did not work properly. This was because of problems related to the new component SessionManager. It was undone on 23 January. [2][3]
- Because of new problems with SessionManager the latest version of MediaWiki was removed from the Wikimedia wikis again on 31 January. The new version this week will be without SessionManager. [4]
Changes this week
- The page history will get a help link. This will go to Help:Page history on Meta. Wikis can exchange it for a link to their local pages. [5]
- Notifications will only show part of a page name if it is very long. You will also have another way to mark notifications as read. [6][7]
- The Universal Language Selector input methods are now available with the visual editor. This means many who write in non-Latin scripts can now use the visual editor. [8]
- The visual editor will now give you more tools to edit tables. You can move rows and columns in a table and copy parts of tables to make new ones. You can also copy and paste more than one cell at the same time. [9][10][11]
- The visual editor has a new warning message when you leave a page you are editing without saving. Non-English wikis might need to translate it. [12][13]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 2 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 3 February. It will be on all wikis from 4 February (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 2 February at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is expiring watch list entries. The meeting will be on 3 February at 22:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- The
rest.wikimedia.orgdomain will be shut down. This is planned to happen in March. You should use/api/rest_v1/at each individual project domain instead. [14]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
read the damn article
what I've added is exactly what the article says. what you/the other guys put there is unsupported even by the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.22.111 (talk) 11:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
- Well it's freaking obvious that the reference doesn't support the statement. It's also quite obvious that the reference is incorrect. I did try removing it, then rewording it, and in my last edit there were no personal opinions of mine whatsoever. And then your hurried friend reverted and protected the article. :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.22.111 (talk) 11:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yay, improving. So far you're the best wikipedian from the last three. Not multiple "theories" though, it's all just that article being repeated in various more menacing forms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.22.111 (talk) 11:45, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting my RfA
|
Brianhe RfA Appreciation award |
| Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe (talk) 02:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks for your support
|
Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award |
| Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
Nope
You think "anyone can fix bias, OR, copyright, and other issues"? Nope. There is OR all over my watchlist. It is happenings across numerous article for many years. QuackGuru (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- WP:SOFIXIT. What, you think some rouge admin is going to swoop in and laugh maniacally while reinstating the problems? clpo13(talk) 20:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- Also, rude. No wonder your essay was userfied. clpo13(talk) 20:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- WP:SOFIXIT? I am not allowed to fix it. Consensus obviously overrides OR. You can check the sources yourself on the articles I am editing. We go by CON not V or other rules. QuackGuru (talk) 20:26, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- It sounds to me that you think admins ignore content issues only because they aren't taking your side (also, I count one admin in this discussion; way to generalize admin behavior based on one guy). Might I suggest WP:DRN? clpo13(talk) 20:34, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- I tried WP:DRN before on an article. The volunteer ignored my comments and the problems. Volunteers at DRN also do not take sides with the content. They take sides only with WP:CON. Two other admins are aware of the dispute at paleo. One of them told me the same thing you told me. Try DRN. Should I repeat past mistakes when they don't work? I removed the OR. I also added a 2015 review to the article and that was deleted. I went to the editor's talk page and told the editors about it. The respond was "Stop posting to my talk page". QuackGuru (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- It sounds to me that you think admins ignore content issues only because they aren't taking your side (also, I count one admin in this discussion; way to generalize admin behavior based on one guy). Might I suggest WP:DRN? clpo13(talk) 20:34, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- WP:SOFIXIT? I am not allowed to fix it. Consensus obviously overrides OR. You can check the sources yourself on the articles I am editing. We go by CON not V or other rules. QuackGuru (talk) 20:26, 6 February 2016 (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
- Syntax highlighting support is now available for 53 more computer languages. [15]
- When you get a notification that an edit has been reverted, the notification now quotes part of the edit summary. [16]
- RESTBase is now using
scrub_wikitextinstead ofscrubWikitext. [17]
Changes this week
- Wikidata will have a new data type called "math". It will be used for formulas. [18][19]
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 9 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 10 February. It will be on all wikis from 11 February (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 9 February at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
- You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is per-language URLs for pages of multilingual wikis. The meeting will be on 10 February at 22:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Other sites will be able to tell when visitors come from links on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia sites. They used to be able to do this until we started using forced HTTPS in June 2015. This is planned to happen on 15 February. [20][21]
- Wikidata will have a new data type called "external-id". It will be used for references to external resources. It will be enabled on February 16. Some properties will be changed to the new data type. [22][23][24]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 03 February 2016
- From the editors: Help wanted
- Special report: Board chair and new trustee speak with the Signpost
- Arbitration report: Catching up on arbitration
- Traffic report: Bowled
- Featured content: This week's featured content
This isn't fair. I removed an unsourced piece of trivia about the show and then the other guy came in and kept putting it back and getting rid of every other change I made to the page. He should be banned for it instead of locking the whole page.--2601:140:8200:DE:9C92:58A1:E43E:3B98 (talk) 09:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
You came within a hair's breadth of being blocked for edit warring on this article, as the edits are not obvious vandalism and therefore you violated WP:3RR yourself. Seriously, it's only that the semi-protection was placed that I believe you will not continue reverting, making a block superfluous. Please read What is not vandalism carefully. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Removal of sourced, encyclopedic content without explanation looks like vandalism to me. clpo13(talk) 11:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- No it isn't. Read the policy carefully. If I removed "In 2006, Putin was accused of child abuse" with a citation to the Daily Mail from Vladimir Putin, for example, that would be a correct adherence to the biographies of living persons policy and not vandalism. In this instance, a user does not believe the source given is sufficient to verify a living person's age, and removing it is good practice per the BLP policy. You may not agree with their view (I have no opinion one way or another on the issue), but if a reasonable person cannot conclude an edit is clearly and blatantly making the encyclopedia worse, it is not vandalism. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- The page in question has a serious problem with certain editors believing that the only valid source for longevity is the Gerontology Research Group. Discussion on the talk page has led to the consensus that any reliable source is sufficient. The IP was removing information that was sourced accordingly and was included on the basis of talk page discussion. They gave no explanation, did not chime in on the talk page, and ignored several warnings. This isn't a matter of disagreement. There's a long history of disruption on pages like this one. clpo13(talk) 11:31, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with anything that you just said, but the way to solve disruptive editing is not to be disruptive yourself! Administrators are required by policy not to take sides in a dispute and will sanction editors on both sides if they have to. If you have "previous" with this IP, you should have gone straight to RPP without reverting, supplying diffs to prove why protection was necessary. Like Caesar's wife, you must be above suspicion. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- The page in question has a serious problem with certain editors believing that the only valid source for longevity is the Gerontology Research Group. Discussion on the talk page has led to the consensus that any reliable source is sufficient. The IP was removing information that was sourced accordingly and was included on the basis of talk page discussion. They gave no explanation, did not chime in on the talk page, and ignored several warnings. This isn't a matter of disagreement. There's a long history of disruption on pages like this one. clpo13(talk) 11:31, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- No it isn't. Read the policy carefully. If I removed "In 2006, Putin was accused of child abuse" with a citation to the Daily Mail from Vladimir Putin, for example, that would be a correct adherence to the biographies of living persons policy and not vandalism. In this instance, a user does not believe the source given is sufficient to verify a living person's age, and removing it is good practice per the BLP policy. You may not agree with their view (I have no opinion one way or another on the issue), but if a reasonable person cannot conclude an edit is clearly and blatantly making the encyclopedia worse, it is not vandalism. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
RM Thank you
...for moving the draft Cuban League template. It took 51 minutes for me to create the draft, have it moved, and stick it on all of the team pages. As an IP, y'all at RM are invaluable, so thanks and stuff. Rgrds. --64.85.217.93 (talk) 16:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- You're quite welcome.
clpo13(talk) 17:00, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Do not make unwanted edits to my talk page
Disruptive edits will be reported.Trinacrialucente (talk) 09:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)