User talk:Awesome Aasim/Archive 27
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page (new section).
Archive navigation: 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 |
 | Press Ctrl+F (Windows) or ⌘ Command+F (Mac) to find a discussion on this page. |
The Signpost: 14 August 2024
[edit]- In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse
- In focus: Twitter marks the spot
- News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded.
- Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?
- Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing
- Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird
- Humour: I'm proud to be a template
Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service
[edit]
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2024
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which
applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past
. - A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
Arbitration
- Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
- Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
- The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.
Miscellaneous
- Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
The Signpost: 4 September 2024
[edit]- News and notes: WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked
- In the media: AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready?
- News from the WMF: Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election
- Wikimania: A month after Wikimania 2024
- Serendipity: What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year
- Traffic report: After the gold rush
Generating pings from past discussions
[edit]Re this comment, I know of (and I think helped prompt the creation of) User:Rummskartoffel/generate pings, but that only works for categories. Generating pings for all editors who participated in a previous discussion would be useful, and I think is ripe for a script creation. Sdkb talk 02:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Sdkb! I managed to get a module working for this: Module:Discussion ping. I did use a little bit of guidance from ChatGPT to get the regular expression, as the traditional "iterate through everything" seems to break down for big pages. See if there are any changes you would like to make. Awesome Aasim 14:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
[edit]You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
ARBPIA4
[edit]Based on my very brief research I'm unable to find any policy to support that non-extended confirmed users may not participate in talk page discussions or make edit requests, assuming they are non-disruptive. Perhaps I missed something, but just removing talk page comments Special:Diff/1246968388 in the manner you are may not be supported by policy. Kcmastrpc (talk) 03:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... from my understanding of WP:ARBECR (which is what A-I is subject to),
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive
. I think that means that unfortunately a non-extended-confirmed user is excluded from that topic area entirely. I have no objection if those comments are put back, though. They did appear to be good faith comments nonetheless, at least from what I have seen so far; but the page just got off of protection, and because this is a very recent topic, it would be better to let this cool off a little bit. Last thing I remember in this topic area was a WP:Administrator action review or WP:ARCA over revoking editor's extended confirmed status for "gaming" to get the role just to partake in a contentious topic area, I don't remember how that turned out but that user who complained got the role back. Hmm.... Awesome Aasim 03:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)- I presumed such restrictions would be more explicitly declared in a talk page header; but I digress. This topic area has a lot of red tape and I want to make sure I hadn’t missing anything. I noticed SFR has imposed sanctions on this page in particular so perhaps they can shed some light on whether or not I’m missing something. (which I probably am =D) @ScottishFinnishRadish courtesy ping. Cheers! Kcmastrpc (talk) 03:24, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- The entire topic area is covered by WP:ECR, even on pages that don't have an edit notice. The only contributions that non-ec editors can make in the topic area are constructive edit requests. They cannot take part in any discussion that relates to the topic area on any page. Talk page discussion used to be allowed, but not contributing to RFCs, but after October 7th that became disruptive as well. Arbcom adjusted ECR by motion in, I think, December. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks SFR, and thank you for keeping an eye on the discussion @Awesome Aasim! Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- The entire topic area is covered by WP:ECR, even on pages that don't have an edit notice. The only contributions that non-ec editors can make in the topic area are constructive edit requests. They cannot take part in any discussion that relates to the topic area on any page. Talk page discussion used to be allowed, but not contributing to RFCs, but after October 7th that became disruptive as well. Arbcom adjusted ECR by motion in, I think, December. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- I presumed such restrictions would be more explicitly declared in a talk page header; but I digress. This topic area has a lot of red tape and I want to make sure I hadn’t missing anything. I noticed SFR has imposed sanctions on this page in particular so perhaps they can shed some light on whether or not I’m missing something. (which I probably am =D) @ScottishFinnishRadish courtesy ping. Cheers! Kcmastrpc (talk) 03:24, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Pager explosions
[edit]I just want to thank you for removing that entirely inappropriate comment at Talk:2024 Lebanon Pager Explosions, including the ensuing discussion. I count it as a small victory for sanity at Wikipedia. All the best. DaringDonna (talk) 15:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's nothing. There definitely needs to be more administrators moderating that and related discussions. Awesome Aasim 15:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)