User talk:Swarm: Difference between revisions
→Autopatroll for Thepharoah17: new section |
Thepharoah17 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 211: | Line 211: | ||
I have seen that you gave [[User:Thepharoah17]] an autopatrolled tag. I would like to question this decision, as I sometimes actually copy edit his pages like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amanda_Figueras&diff=982278818&oldid=982274235&diffmode=source Amanda Figueras]which he created on the 7 October, just 10 days before you granted him autopatrolled rights. This article was mainly a copy paste of a biography of hers which I also wrote in the edit summary of the edit. I guess ThePharoah17 could wait a bit for being granted this rights.[[User:Paradise Chronicle|Paradise Chronicle]] ([[User talk:Paradise Chronicle|talk]]) 10:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC) |
I have seen that you gave [[User:Thepharoah17]] an autopatrolled tag. I would like to question this decision, as I sometimes actually copy edit his pages like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amanda_Figueras&diff=982278818&oldid=982274235&diffmode=source Amanda Figueras]which he created on the 7 October, just 10 days before you granted him autopatrolled rights. This article was mainly a copy paste of a biography of hers which I also wrote in the edit summary of the edit. I guess ThePharoah17 could wait a bit for being granted this rights.[[User:Paradise Chronicle|Paradise Chronicle]] ([[User talk:Paradise Chronicle|talk]]) 10:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC) |
||
FYI, this is coming from somebody who accused me [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FEdit_warring&type=revision&diff=989145983&oldid=989134031 here] of being an "ISIS sympathizer" just because I said there is no difference between them and the PKK [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=988287419&oldid=988286221&diffmode=source here]. And by the way America does not even support the YPG. They just used them to defeat ISIS and once ISIS was defeated, America abandoned them as it did last year when Turkey invaded northeastern Syria since they are in fact no different from the PKK. [[User:Thepharoah17|Thepharoah17]] ([[User talk:Thepharoah17|talk]]) 13:26, 26 November 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:26, 26 November 2020
Archives
|
/Archive 1 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This is Swarm's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Swarm
Home —— Talk —— Email —— Contribs —— Awards —— Dash
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mail call
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 {{
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).
- Ajpolino • LuK3
- Jackmcbarn
- Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
- There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime
- A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely
1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created
.
- A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely
- The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).
- The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
- Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.
- The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
- Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.
FYI about Aroniel2
Hey! You dealt with Aroniel2 a little while ago back in 2018. They were unblocked, but seem to be off at it all again. Just wanted to give you a heads up that I've just brought it back up on the ANI after they're back here POV pushing. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 04:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
REQUEST FOR ADOPTION
Hi Swam,
I bumped into your profile at the adopt-user page, I sure like the good works you've been doing hence my choice of making myself your adoptee...
I actively became a user about last week ago, It dawned on me that choosing to be self-taught in this space will be a nightmare, hence my request to have you adopt me as your adoptee...
I intend to learn how to create notable and publication- worthy articles through your tutelage. I'm open to learn whatever pleases you to teach .
I hope and will be glad if my request is considered...
Thank you...
- Felixeshiet (talk) 21:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection
any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet
, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.
- Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection
- Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
- Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
- Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.
- The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
- The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.
- A reminder that
standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people.
(American Politics 2 Arbitration case).
- A reminder that
Thanks
Thanks Swarm for your honest comment. -Darouet (talk) 03:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Guidance for improving chances as to being granted template editor rights
Hello Swarm (talk), I just thought I would take you up on your offer to ask questions on your talk page about my recent application to be granted template editor rights. I read through what you had posted in denying my request. You make a lot of salient points. I get it now. Specifically, my right to WP:TPE was revoked because what I did wrong was that I failed to engage other editors in a discussion about the Denver Broncos color scheme over at WT:NFL (that discussion is here). I get it. I know now that what I should have done differently is that I should have engaged other editors in that discussion and should not have unilaterally made changes at Module:Gridiron color/data without first engaging in a discussion that should have resulted in a WP:CONSENSUS all interested editors could live with. If I were to submit another request to be granted WP:TPE rights, what I would & should do differently is to not unilaterally edit protected templates that go against the WP:CONSENSUS. I also know better that I definitely should not constantly revert myself repeatedly over protected templates. OK, on to your next point. Let me specifically explain my current understanding of the rules. I understand that the template editor right is a right reserved for highly technically competent editors. It's reserved for editors who are experienced in dispute resolution and for editors who are highly competent with coding. As you said, it is a high stakes user right. I understand that changes to protected modules (unless they are fixes of obvious markup errors, for example) should only be made after substantial discussion, and should conform to the agreed upon WP:CONSENSUS, per WP:TPECON. I also understand that I need to know WP:TPECON front and back. That part I get. The last thing I want to say is this: I need guidance as to how to improve and become more competent in the Template space, and to understand the rules and conditions of the Template editor user right. Could you please help? Also, have I addressed some of your concerns? If not, how can I address them better? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 01:42, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Another twist
Following up from AE, it looks like nobody has objected to the topic ban, but I noticed something else when I went to log my removal of the Consensus Required sanction: the Consensus Required sanction had never been logged in the first place. JzG only logged a 1RR restriction. (Not sure if it was a one-off mistake or their real intent, but the next month they correctly logged this one as Consensus Required.) In any case I'm not sure what to do with this now. I'd feel weird enforcing the sanction down to the "letter of the law" while ignoring the other "letter of the law" stating that for a sanction to be valid it must be properly logged. ~Awilley (talk) 20:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Nevermind. After closely reading the page at AC/CS I didn't find anything that explicitly says that the mis-logging makes the sanction invalid. And Thucydides411's latest comment (showing SPECIFICO correctly explaining the sanction to other users when it was to their advantage) convinced me that this is a clear case of gaming. ~Awilley (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
- Is there some reason why you would not have this discussion in view of the participants at AE? If you'll take a close look at the AE and my many other comments on the subject of "longstanding" and "consensus" on talk pages and Admin talk page threads, you'll note I said "longstanding consensus", not "longstanding text." I have emphasized that in my view, age alone is not implicit consensus and that any text that actually has consensus will have been discussed on talk or can easily be confirmed to have current consensus. That is not the case here, as shown in the talk page thread. Anyway, I think it's clear from the AE thread that at least @JzG: does not appear to think a sanction is in order and that others, who enabled Awilley to deprecate the Consenus Required sanction, cannot implicitly be taken to favor a restriction that was removed for cause. Main point is just that I don't think side discussions on an open matter are the best approach. I just happened to see this by chance, and others may not have. SPECIFICO talk 16:41, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Happy adminship day!
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
- Happy adminship anniversary!!!! --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Adoption
Kia ora I'm hoping you will adopt me to get my page up and running. I'm a complete novice who has been given the job of creating a page for The PumpHouse Theatre Takapuna in NZ. I will possibly need a lot of hand holding :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by PumpHouse1 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I really appreciate your hard works and efforts! Keep it up! ArriehM (talk) 11:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC) |
Autopatroll for Thepharoah17
I have seen that you gave User:Thepharoah17 an autopatrolled tag. I would like to question this decision, as I sometimes actually copy edit his pages like the Amanda Figueraswhich he created on the 7 October, just 10 days before you granted him autopatrolled rights. This article was mainly a copy paste of a biography of hers which I also wrote in the edit summary of the edit. I guess ThePharoah17 could wait a bit for being granted this rights.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
FYI, this is coming from somebody who accused me here of being an "ISIS sympathizer" just because I said there is no difference between them and the PKK here. And by the way America does not even support the YPG. They just used them to defeat ISIS and once ISIS was defeated, America abandoned them as it did last year when Turkey invaded northeastern Syria since they are in fact no different from the PKK. Thepharoah17 (talk) 13:26, 26 November 2020 (UTC)