Jump to content

User talk:Amorymeltzer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Costco bear
Slap!
Since 2009
Since 2018
Since 2018
Bot operator top icon
Alternate account: Amory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pumkin Ding (talk | contribs) at 02:30, 7 March 2019 (→‎Deletion review for itel Mobile). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I use the Modern skin — if anything doesn't look right to you, upgrade!
Amory prefers to receive notifications. Please use {{ping}} or {{reply to}} when you reply to this user on other pages. No talkback messages are needed.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Greek versions of names

For what it's worth, I looked at closing it, didn't think there was enough consensus either way, and decided to stick my opinion into the debate instead. I'm pretty sure Ad Orientem did the same. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:09, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Thanks for the note, both of you. Am I right in reading this as in response to my "Editor's note" and not as disagreeing with my close? I thought it'd be too self-serving to go into detail on my timeline there, but to clarify a bit, upon review this morning (before your comment, Ritchie) I was pretty sure I saw a consensus, but sat on it a bit before doing a full close (also having tea and reading through my watchlist). I saw your comment when I returned, and continued forward with my close. Right before closing, I refreshed and saw the two additional comments, which did not change my read of the consensus but prompted the note about potentially cutting off ongoing participation. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:25, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree with your close, but of course I voted to Delete. That said, I think the keep arguments were pretty anemic. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm the same as AO. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:05, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-09

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

Changes later this week

  • When you look at your watchlist or the recent changes page you can use the new filters for edit review. There you can choose tags to filter different edits. Empty tags will no longer be shown. [2]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 February. It will be on all wikis from 28 February (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

  • The Wikipedia app for Android will invite users to add Wikidata descriptions to Wikidata objects that have Wikipedia articles but no Wikidata descriptions. It will only invite users who have added a number of Wikidata descriptions in the app without being reverted. This is to avoid spam and bad edits. You can read more and leave feedback.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

RFA

Hi Amory, can you please nominate Robert McClenon for adminship as he is a very experienced editor and will be one of our best admins ever. 2402:3A80:A7C:1BD7:0:5E:A6B:FF01 (talk) 03:19, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Amorymeltzer - I don't know who this editor is or why they think that I will unblock them. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:47, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If an editor with a known record wants to explain that the times or the sentiments of the community have changed, I will consider that. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:47, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Robert McClenon I am not blocked and I haven't told you to unblock me.2402:3A80:A7C:1BD7:0:5E:A6B:FF01 (talk) 07:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wat ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:12, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Amorymeltzer: I don't understand what you are talking about. Will you nominate Robert for adminship.2402:3A80:A7C:1BD7:0:5E:A6B:FF01 (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaaaand blocked. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, well. When an IP acts like an experienced editor, some of us assume that they are an experienced disruptive editor. It also appears that you don't know who they are, but that they were being a disruptive IP editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't be likely to pay attention to knowledgeable unregistered editors if I were an admin anyway, because I assume that they are experienced disruptive editors who are blocked. I wouldn't be the sort to unblock them. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dahir Insaat

Greetings, could you please move this deleted.article to my draft space? I am finding additional coverage since the close. Thank you. FloridaArmy (talk) 11:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
For your contributions to Twinkle, including doing the majority of code reviews and going through that endless backlog of issues. For years it was fairly quiet over there on GitHub. All of a sudden PRs are coming in left and right (many from yourself), and there was no way I could keep up. I'm very grateful we have you as a maintainer!

Also for your many other technical contributions, and just being an awesome admin in general. And for granting me rollback and PCR years ago :) — MusikAnimal talk 02:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias! And thanks for bringing me on board, it's been fun, albeit a bit distracting. 😀 I dunno about "awesome admin" (although Amory appreciates alliteration) but I can at least say that I showed excellent judgment lo those many years ago. You've done Herculean work yourself! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:41, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, Amorymeltzer. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 08:07, 1 March 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

DannyS712 (talk) 08:07, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Read, reacted, and responded. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RB Issues

Hi,

Check this: [3]- this is not a vandalism. He just ignore my massage. Xain36 {talk} 20:07, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Amorymeltzer:, about a month ago, you provided me temporary permission as a Rollbacker here. I acted according to the policies of Wikipedia and used Rollback only in clear-cut vandalism cases, and I assure you that I will do the same in future. I expect that you have now enough trust on me to grant me the Rollback permission. SouravDas1998t@lk to me? 12:16, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Souravdas1998: I granted February 2nd and you used it a bit then and the 3rd, but you've basically not edited for the entire month, as far as I can see. I'll grant you another one-month period, but you've got to use it for me to see evidence. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:46, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Amorymeltzer: for giving me another chance. It is true that from the last few days I have been very much busy (due to my extra physics practical classes). Now, I will try my best to squeeze out some time for contributing to Wikipedia. I hope that I will meet your expectations. SouravDas1998t@lk to me? 16:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for itel Mobile

Hi Amory, please help to review proposed new content for the page itel Mobile (now in my sandbox: here) which you have protected. And I also invite you to participant in the deletion review of this article. I think it could be published, thank you so much. Pumkin Ding (talk) 13:29, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the DRV is indeed the place to discuss this, thank you for the note. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:47, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Amorymeltzer: Greeting！ Have you reviewed the proposed new content for this page? Waiting for your comments and hope this draft could be removed from protection, thanks a lot. Pumkin Ding (talk) 03:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no thoughts to add, but the DRV isn't really about the draft page at the moment; I'll see what happens there first. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Amorymeltzer: "I have no thoughts to add" do you mean you think the proposed new content is enough to be drafted? But you still need to waiting for more comments given from other admins on DRV, and then you can make the decision? Thank you for your reply. Pumkin Ding (talk) 09:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry for being unclear, I meant I don't really have any particular thoughts or involvement with the subject. Once a discussion on something, like an XfD or DRV, is open, I think it's generally best to wait until the discussion has completed before acting unilaterally; it's not particularly up to me to decide whether the userspace draft should be in mainspace or not, that's for the community of editors to think about. Nothing is urgent, and it's usually disruptive to change things while a broader conversation is ongoing; I know I usually find it confusing when something is deleted/undeleted/moved! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Amorymeltzer:Thank you for your clarify. I keep waiting for admins to participant in my deletion review, but I am sad nobody giving any comments and opinions on my draft. What can I do about that situation? Pumkin Ding (talk) 02:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2019-10

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

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 March. It will be on all wikis from 7 March (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 6 March at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • You can give feedback on the future of talk pages.
  • The mobile website will use the standard fonts on your computer or phone instead of a generic font. This will make it easier to read text in many scripts. [4][5]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

0.99 = 1 et al

Thank you for the good closing summary you've left with these RfDs. Although I disagree there was no consensus on all of them, they're still around to provide utility for those that use them and your closing summaries should hopefully discourage anyone from a quick renomination, which would almost certainly be a waste of time. Thryduulf (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! May I ask which you might take issue with? As noted, I considered closing one of them as keep, but I think taking the whole series of discussions into consideration, no consensus seemed the better reflection of the participants' arguments. Somewhat relatedly, I've lately found myself considering the law of diminishing returns a lot. Not applying it, per se, but it's something that has been coming to mind when I evaluate some discussions or when weighing arguments and their implications toward policy. No consensus closes always make me think too much about my thought process! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:35, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REFUND request

Hello AM: please restore all the Portal subpages you deleted via WP:CSD G6. Since there are now assessments in process as to whether the single-page or multi-page versions are better for the encyclopedia, the only way these assessments can proceed is if the subpages are restored. Thanks in advance, UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPP

So up until now I've had technical problems with getting onto Wikipedia, but I finally got a new computer, so that should solve the problem. That said, I've been doing more on Wikipedia lately, and considering the backlog of the New Pages feed, and the fact that I've been working at AfC, I'd like to request back New Page Reviewer rights. Thanks, PrussianOwl (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Make sure to read over all the material again, and happy editing! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, much appreciated! PrussianOwl (talk) 00:56, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Userinfo Script

Hi. Is User:Amorymeltzer/userinfo.js supposed to show if a user is a bureaucrat? I was just looking at User:X!, and it only showed edit filter manager and administrator. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weird! I'm not sure why, but now that I look, it says I'm not a bureaucrat either. Not sure how to fix that...
@DannyS712: Humor aside, the script is working fine as User:X! isn't a 'crat. That was removed for inactivity in 2016. Maybe you were looking at the former bureaucrat list? Try User:Xaosflux, you'll see it works fine. Might I also recommend User:Amorymeltzer/crathighlighter.js? It colors bureaucrats as well as CU, OS, IA, stewards, and ArbCom members. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:49, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, I forgot that bureaucrat removal is done from meta; I was looking through the logs and didn't see any hint it was removed. It works for Xaosflux, so nevermind. As for the first point, this should help. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 15:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for imformation about deleted templates

Hello! I’m Pythoncoder, the maintainer of the vote symbols script you use. I was just wondering if you could link me the images used in the following templates, as I believe they may have images that I have not added to my script yet: 

   Template:Vote remove
   Template:Strongly support
   Template:Strongly oppose
   Template:Vote info
   Template:Vote wait
   Template:Vote rename
   Template:Vote love

Thanks! Please ping when replying — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 22:46, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing pythoncoder:
~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:16, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I guess I do have all of them after all. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 23:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amorymeltzer&oldid=886566199"