User talk:Mdann52

to-do

Ongoing jobs: Keep WP:SPER backlog down Monitor Special:PendingChanges Case Created Last volunteer edit Last modified Title Status User Time User Time User Time Robert (doll) Closed Gabriellemcnell (t) 2 days, 23 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Undetectable.ai Closed Sesame119 (t) 2 days, 20 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Ibn Battuta Closed Jihanysta (t) 2 days, 18 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Eurovision Song Contest 2024 - Israel Closed PicturePerfect666 (t) 2 days, 18 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 12 hours Aidi Closed Traumnovelle (t) 2 days, Robert McClenon (t) 1 days, 16 hours Traumnovelle (t) 1 days, 12 hours Maratha Confederacy New Mohammad Umar Ali (t) 3 hours None n/a Mohammad Umar Ali (t) 3 hours If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options. Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 14:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism unit

Saw your message/course, will get back to you around Sunday/Monday. Thanks so much. :)--TerryAlex (talk) 05:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Completed, please review it for me. Thank you --TerryAlex (talk) 16:44, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Mdann52, I've been finding and reverting vandalism that I can find on Wikipedia. However, I have a question, when you said to find "at least two appropriate reports to AIV", do I have to find examples that I have to report to the admin myself? I'm still new to this, so I'm a bit hesitant on giving any editors level 3+ warning or giving them a report to the admin. Let me know :) thanks--TerryAlex (talk) 05:20, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Mdann52 I am still unsure about the "at least two appropriate reports to AIV"; however, I have reverted some vandalism and completed the questions for Task 2. Please review it for me. Thanks so much.--TerryAlex (talk) 04:45, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

@TerryAlex: Sorry, only just spotted this... If the user has received a level 2 warning, feel free to give a level 3 (and so on). If they have received a level 4 or 4im warning, feel free to report to AIV. Looking through your reverts, you seem to have very good judgement, so feel free to issue whichever warning you feel is most appropriate (admins at AIV will review the user anyway, so no good faith users will be blocked in the unlikely event you report them by accident. --Mdann52talk to me! 13:41, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

@Mdann52: Though I did not report to the AIV directly, but there were 2 occasions where I reported to an admin "Materialscientist". You can check it out on his/her talk page. First one for persistent vandalism at Magic Bullet Records by various editors. The second one for persistent vandalism by IP address 150.207.145.65. Does this count?. Thanks so much--TerryAlex (talk) 14:38, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

@TerryAlex: that will be fine :). I will be going offline shortly, so will mark these properly tomorrow. --Mdann52talk to me! 14:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-25

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Reminder

• You can subscribe to the wikitech-ambassadors mailing list to get news more quickly and to send feedback or report problems.

Recent software changes

• The latest version of MediaWiki (1.24wmf9) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on June 12. It will be added to non-Wikipedia wikis on June 17, and to all Wikipedias on June 19 (calendar).
• You can now read a summary of the Wikimedia technical report for May 2014.

VisualEditor news

• You can now easily see the target of a link or other information using the context menu. [1]
• When you edit a reference, you can now empty it and click the "use an existing reference" button to switch it to re-use another reference. [2] [3]
• You can now add and edit {{DISPLAYTITLE}} and __DISAMBIG__ in the page settings menu. [4] [5] [6] [7]
• The tool to insert special characters is now wider and simpler; the order of mathematical symbols is now correct. [8] [9] [10]

Future software changes

• Media Viewer will be enabled by default on all wikis on June 19. Feedback is welcome. [11]
• You will no longer be able to use navigation popups and Hovercards at the same time. [12]
• You will no longer see image thumbnails on search results pages on Wikibooks and Wikisource wikis. [13] [14]
• It will soon be possible to globally rename global (SUL) users. [15] [16]
• Tablet users will be redirected to the mobile view of Wikimedia wikis starting on June 17. [17]
• The special page that lists most linked-to templates will soon include pages from all namespaces; it will also be renamed to Special:MostTranscludedPages. [18]
• An IRC discussion about Phabricator will take place on June 17 at 17:30 UTC on the channel #wikimedia-office on freenode (time conversion). You can also read a blog post about the upcoming switch to Phabricator.
• You can now comment on the draft 2014-15 goals of the Wikimedia Foundation engineering department. [19]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

07:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Indian National Congress may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Indian National Congress

Hi, greetings. I am in process of developing this particular article. Left message about this on article's talk page. Article is in very bad condition and rest assured will add controversies in due time once I find sources that would depict real depth of question "Does the Indian National Congress really behind those controversies ?" Hope you are getting what I am trying to say.(It would be nice if you could reply on my talk page) Thank you. Cheers --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣ 16:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

@25 Cents FC: The controversies seem to be to do with the party as opposed to just one person, therefore I feel they belong in the article, as do other users on the articles talk page. Therefore, there is not a consensus to remove them from the article. --Mdann52talk to me! 13:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the guidance. appreciate it. --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣ 06:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Reverted your close

Examining the objections, it is clear that no valid objections to the BOT have been raised. I cannot close the RFBA myself, but I retain the hope that someone in BAG will read the arguments, discard the invalid ones, and approve the bot.—Kww(talk) 13:19, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@Kww: I fail to see what you mean by "no valid objections". Personally, I feel the objections from Rich Farmbrough and Hasteur sum up the feeling of the oppose comments in the BRFA. The RfC close also says that care should be taken over the removal of link; I can not see how the bot will meet this criteria. However, I will start to manually run through the links and replace where possible; I have a lot of time on my hands at the moment. --Mdann52talk to me! 13:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

When I say "there have been no valid objections", I mean precisely that. You are not a BAG member, and you do not have any authority to force a close. I reverted your close awaiting an actual BAG member. I am reverting it again awaiting an actual BAG member. If you want to reclose it, please go through the process to become a BAG member before you do so.—Kww(talk) 13:39, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

No, I am not a BAG member, but I have already addressed that in the closure message (WP:NOTBURO). As I said, there have been perfectly valid issues raised, and reverting a close (including the closure message) will likely achieve little in the long run. --Mdann52talk to me! 13:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Maybe not, but slender hope is better than no hope. The objections you point at run counter to the RFC close. In fact, your opinion runs counter to the RFC close, which was to remove all links. Keeping track of which have been removed and posting the links on a central list and on the article talk page is quite sufficient to allow anyone that chooses to restore links to have the necessary data. Remember, as you run through the links and "replace where possible", the RFC consensus is to remove when it is not possible to restore, not to keep them lingering around forever.—Kww(talk) 13:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but looking through so far, most of the archive.is links I have found are still live, so it is simple enough to run it though WebCite or the Wayback machine and get a new one generated. I have previously tried to get a similar bot running that would add archive links, but the code I found and tried to fix was patchy to say the least (!) --Mdann52talk to me! 13:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Autoarchiving isn't possible to do reliably with bots. That's why keeping the external lists to allow people to manually process them is necessary. Keeping the links inline isn't necessary, and that's what people seem to be arguing when they argue that deleting the links would lose data.—Kww(talk) 13:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Another mirror

Since you are now my go-to expert on mirrors, I think potiori may be one.

Example:

• Panther Hollow--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick:  Confirmed mirror, however this one acknowledges Wikipedia as a source (albeit in German!) While I am pursuing the other to follow suit, this one requires no further action. --Mdann52talk to me! 14:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Oops, my bad for not scrolling to the bottom. Will you add it to the list, or should I?--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I shall; I am currently doing a bit more digging to tell if it is a "live" mirror or not. --Mdann52talk to me! 15:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Suzannah Lipscomb

Hi Mdann52. There's an IP-hopping SPA who has been disrupting the article considerably today. The range 82.132... (which resolves to Telefonica O2 UK and is all probably the same person with respect to this article) has a long record of adding and re-adding information to this article which has been objected to, e.g. [20] and [21]. Their latest ploy was to use this as a ref for her having attended Epsom College which contains the married name. I suspect this was quite deliberate. I've replaced it with a different ref, but Lord knows how long it will last, as the IP is quite determined to edit war. As you're the one who handled the OTRS for this article, I'm leaving it up to you what to do next. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

See also this. Voceditenore (talk) 17:21, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Also pinging Callanecc who had previously applied semi-protection to the page (expired 26 May 2014). Voceditenore (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: yes, I saw they popped up again. While nothing here in interests me in an OTRS sense, I have issued the IP with an edit warring warning (even if they don't pass 3RR, they can still be blocked for it). --Mdann52talk to me! 17:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

What does the OTRS action allow to be permitted or not permitted on the article? Unless details are given of what is permitted to be posted then the situation will arise again by other users. (UTS) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.212.214 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I think that's been made pretty already, the current content and sources are fine. We can't discuss anymore in public and can't say a lot more by email. To say what the content objected to in the OTRS discussion would has exactly the opposite effect as we'd have to say it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Mdann52 and Callanecc, given the latest arrival (User:IPchange) and the continued IP disruption at Talk:Suzannah Lipscomb, I've opened an SPI here. Although given the SPI backlog it may be advisable to also take the talk page disruption to ANI if it continues. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:58, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: 1 step ahead of you.... --Mdann52talk to me! 08:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

• "which would affect up to 16384 users", how you figured the collateral damage? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @OccultZone: See Mw:Help:Range_blocks. --Mdann52talk to me! 14:06, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

What is it with this article? [22], [23]. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:25, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

ANI next step I guess? [24] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:29, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

FYI. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:46, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Neil, my take on this is that the mass RFCs being created were basically a smoke-screen for the real goal of getting around the OTRS restrictions on this article/talk page and a continuation of the campaign by LW1982 and assorted socks to make the private information as public as possible. It was the second one started and goes into a mass of intricate detail, complete with links to sources and even arcane diffs like this one. Note that all the other "RFCs" were very generic, general controversies, long settled, and do not go into a 10th of the detail and effort that went into the Lipscomb one. And guess who returns multiple times to restore it? The hopping 82.132... editor. As another administrator commented "doesn't anyone else find it curious that this IP editor suddenly shows up to start "RFCs" on several controversial topics all at the same time? 18 RFCs in 11 minutes, several asking questions likely to result in arguments.". I suspect the talk page is going to need much longer term semi-protection, and it's probably worthwhile to keep an eye on "what links here" for both the article and the talk page in case the restoration of the material surfaces elsewhere in the guise of a "discussion". Voceditenore (talk) 20:05, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: I had an inkling that was the case but given I was yelled at for biting newbies, didn't want to press it further. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:14, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Neil, I know where you're coming from. That's why I also refrained from commenting at ANI, but if that's a newbie I'll eat my proverbial hat. That's why I don't think the saga is over with this article yet. It's amazing the lengths people will go to once they get the bit between their teeth. And for what? Sigh... Voceditenore (talk) 20:30, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Maybe people are not prepared to accept the whitewash that the wiki admins and OTRS people are trying to impose. Why not have a discussion about what exactly is allowed on the page? When a subject is quite happy to give interviews to the national press discussing their life for publicity they can't then demand complete privacy. (82.132.237.170 (talk) 22:51, 24 June 2014 (UTC))

@82.132.237.170:"why not have a discussion about what exactly is allowed on the page" There have been discussions about certain features being included or excluded from the page. If you have a serious issue with my edits to this article, per WP:OTRS, you are free to bring it up against ARBCOM. However, mindlessly reverting OTRS actions without a very good reason is not the way to go about it. At the end of the day drop the stick and find somewhere else to edit constructively. --Mdann52talk to me! 06:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you drop it with the ridiculous OTRS action enforcement? No action should ever have been taken in the first place. (82.132.239.192 (talk) 09:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC))

Oh, so you have access to information on this case I don't then? No, it is the other way around. Considering consensus seems to be in support of my actions, if you wish to complain, feel free to go to ARBCOM. Otherwise, unless you have something meaningful to say, you are no longer welcome on my talk page until your block expires, and you log back in to your account. As it happens, by coming here you are violating WP:SOCK. --Mdann52talk to me! 09:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

You seem to have an issue with people questioning you. You are not running a dictatorship, people can challenge you. (82.132.237.233 (talk) 09:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC))

New Institution Logo

Hi Mdann52,

Appreciate the help with this:

Title is :St Mary's University, Twickenham

Link to new logo is http://www.smuc.ac.uk/images/sm-logo-crest-2014-rgb.jpg

StMarysMarketing (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

@StMarysMarketing:  Done. --Mdann52talk to me! 16:35, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Have a great weekend.

StMarysMarketing (talk) 16:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-26

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent software changes

• The latest version of MediaWiki (1.24wmf10) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on June 19. It will be added to non-Wikipedia wikis on June 24, and to all Wikipedias on June 26 (calendar).

VisualEditor news

• You can now drag-and-drop selections of content, not just files and templates. [25] [26]
• When dragging an item, you will now see a line that helps you to drop it. [27] [28]
• You can now only move an image to the start of a paragraph, not to the middle of it, so you don't accidentally split it. [29] [30]
• You will now be warned if you add wikitext to file captions and references. [31] [32]

Future software changes

• You will no longer be able to upload files on wikis that do not have any copyright tags. [33] [34]
• CirrusSearch will be enabled as the primary search method on additional 70 new wikis, including Meta-Wiki and Wikimedia Incubator, during the next week. [35]
• CirrusSearch results will soon take into account categories, the first paragraph and the wikitext of a page. You will also be able to use regular expressions to search the wikitext. It will take a few days for the changes to be enabled on all wikis. [36]
• You will soon be able to watch translations for e-mail notifications without receiving an e-mail when they are reviewed by another translator. [37] [38]
• An IRC meeting to organize old high priority MediaWiki bug reports will take place on June 24 at 17:00 UTC on the channel #wikimedia-office on freenode (time conversion). [39]

Problems

• On June 19, all wikis were broken for about 15 minutes due to a high server load.
• Between June 13 and June 15 there were problems with the scaling of video files due to a configuration error. [40]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

07:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Bangladesh Premier League Elections

Dear Wikiproject Bangladesh Premier League member. I hope you are having a great time. As you know, it was agreed at the time of the advent of the project that there shall be an election to elect Coordinator and Vice Coordinator every six months. Since the time has arrived now, we hope to conduct an election to elect the new Coordinator and Vice Coordinator. All the people hoping to contest to the posts can leave a message in the project talkpage. The election will end by 01 July 2014 00:00 (UTC) starting from 24 June 2014 00:00 (UTC). We sincerely hope you participate in the elections and thereby help improve the quality of Wikiproject Bangladesh Premier League and it's organisation. Cheers --Pratyya ^(Hello!) and ƬheStrikeΣagle 15:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Nicole Renée

Take a look at #2014062310009321. For some reason I couldn't find a merge target, but I'm assuming there's one. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: It is in the -q queue, so I can't touch it either to merge it. I'm assuming you are aware of the ticket it related to (?). --Mdann52talk to me! 19:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't notice you mentioned it in your summary. I've moved it to courtesy and merged. It's not actionable from a verification standpoint, but that's what they were told to do in their talk page. In any case we don't need them to verify their identity if they are OK with the changes made to the article. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Counter vandalism

Could you become my trainer at the counter vandalism unit? Pablothepenguin (talk) 22:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

He's still following me around reverting my contributions

Dan56 is still reverting me mindlessly. I tried to avoid him at jazz articles, but now its the same thing at heavy metal articles. Please advise! Harmelodix (talk) 00:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Now he's edit warring too. Harmelodix (talk) 01:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any edit warring there. I would also note that Dan56 has been editing the article since last year at least. However, may I suggest you two take a voluntary WP:IBAN to prevent future issues coming up? --Mdann52talk to me! 06:59, 25 June 2014 (UTC)