Jump to content

User talk:Bilby/Archive 15

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17→Archive 19

New message from Captain Assassin!

Hello, Bilby. You have new messages at Captain Assassin!'s talk page.
Message added 09:46, 28 December 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 09:46, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Please talk to me at my talk page, and assist me there. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 09:49, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
  • Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

LOL

I clear my talk page at the start of every year, and the month isn't even over yet, but so far I have 65 notifications this year for PROD/AFD on my talk page. :) The significant majority of them are for articles created several years ago, while the rest were mostly created within the last few months. I'm popular. ;) I've only contested maybe half of those, and that percentage decreases while I am in self-imposed exile from AFD. BOZ (talk) 04:48, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
  • The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

  • Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
  • When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]

Arbitration

  • Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: January 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 1 • January 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issue

Hounding

As you didn't answer me at COIN, I thought I'd ask again -

Now that the dust is settled at COIN, have you moved on? I note some pro-fringe edits of yours on my watchlist, should I look at your contributions, or will you continue your hounding of the Gorrillaz? Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 09:30, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Roxy! I thought I did respond. That said, I don't really appreciate threats, especially when they are based around false accusations such as making pro-fringe edits. If you feel like dropping the threats and accusations and keeping things civil I'm sure that we can have a discussion. - Bilby (talk) 09:44, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Thinking about it, I don't think you'll take my word for anything I might say, so how about we just wait and see if I edit in a manner that you approve? - Bilby (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Yes, you responded at COIN, you just didn't answer. Perhaps I am mistaken, and your editing is not pro fringe, but anti Gorrillaz? To be hionest, it probably makes no difference, as the effect appears the same. You really need to back off. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 13:57, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
It's better for me if I take a few steps back from this, and you will get no further comment from me. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 21:25, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Skeptics Dictionary and Skeptoid

I noticed you removed a lot of links to Quackwatch because you said it was a self-published source. What do you think about the Skeptic's Dictionary website that is used on living biographies? [2], the website was maintained and owned by Robert Todd Carroll and the Skeptoid website is maintained by Brian Dunning. So by your logic shouldn't those sources be removed from many articles, because they are self-published as well? Why was Quackwatch singled out? What about the others? Should we create a discussion about this somewhere? Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I haven't removed skepdic because I haven't looked into it. If it is self published, and used incorrectly, then yes, it should be removed. If you belive that this is the case, and it is being used inappropriately, then perhaps you should tackle the problem? However, I don't know the situation with that one. - Bilby (talk)
Where do you think the correct place should be to open a discussion about this? I would open one up. Is there a board dedicated to discussing self-published sources? Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:14, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
I presume you mean [{WP:RSN]]? - Bilby (talk) 23:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Ok thanks, that was it [3]. I will open a big discussion there tomorrow, and then we will see what will happen Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:36, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
[4] Psychologist Guy (talk) 01:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: February 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 1 • February 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe
In This Issue

CCI update

Money emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 12:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Adelaide Meetup 22 – Friday 6 March 2020

Riverside Precinct Adelaide Meetup
Next: 6 March 2020
Last: 19 May 2018

WikiProject Adelaide Meetup 22 has been hastily arranged, spread the word!

DATE: Friday 6 March 2020

TIME: 5.00–6.30 pm

VENUE: Cafe Amore, 162-170 Pulteney St, Adelaide

Celebrate the long weekend with a meet-up and discuss what you'd like to see in the world of Wikimedia in 2020. Sign-up and RSVP here.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide at 22:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC). You received this message because your user page is in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia. If you do not wish to receive future notifications, please advise Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Adelaide.

I need your help. ASAP.

I have created a page called Perumaan. The film stars Arjun Das. User:Brutalgraph] keeps undoing my edits on both the Arjun Das and the Perumaan page. Can you kindly help me? --DragoMynaa

This Month in Education: March 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 3 • March 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issue

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Not technically a surgeon

The page for Rashid A. Buttar is locked. So it has a section where it says he was a surgeon for the US Army. He was not a surgeon. He was an intern. The source referenced is his own website, where he can write anything he wants. Please clarify the claim and find an outside reputabld source as proof. Tessx (talk) 23:13, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #1 – Discussion tools

Read this in another language • Subscription list

Screenshot showing what the Reply tool looks like
This early version of the Reply tool automatically signs and indents comments.

The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. The goal of the talk pages project is to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. This project is the result of the Talk pages consultation 2019.

Reply tool improved with edit tool buttons
In a future update, the team plans to test a tool for easily linking to another user's name, a rich-text editing option, and other tools.

The team is building a new tool for replying to comments now. This early version can sign and indent comments automatically. Please test the new Reply tool.

  • On 31 March 2020, the new reply tool was offered as a Beta Feature editors at four Wikipedias: Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian. If your community also wants early access to the new tool, contact User:Whatamidoing (WMF).
  • The team is planning some upcoming changes. Please review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page. The team will test features such as:
    • an easy way to mention another editor ("pinging"),
    • a rich-text visual editing option, and
    • other features identified through user testing or recommended by editors.

To hear more about Editing Team updates, please add your name to the "Get involved" section of the project page. You can also watch these pages: the main project page, Updates, Replying, and User testing.

– PPelberg (WMF) (talk) & Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations

...on ratcheting up the enforcement of SPS to exclude valid public criticisms of antivaxers and other charlatans by recognised experts on platforms with editorial review. You must be so proud. Guy (help!) 09:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

That would be entertaining if true, but no, that isn't what happened - because the criticism is still there. if it isn't self published I'm happy to see the source returned, but currently she is listed as a Forbes contributor, and under WP:RSP "Forbes.com contributor articles should never be used for third-party claims about living persons". - Bilby (talk) 09:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Bilby, you are the most powerful advocate that these fuckers have on Wikipedia, and I think you probably know it. Guy (help!) 09:27, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
If you can point out where in Robert Sears (physician) I removed a negative claim about the subject, you might have a point. But not a single statement was removed. I made sure that any negative claims about Sears where either already adequately sourced or I found a BLP compliant source to use. - Bilby (talk) 09:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: April 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 4 • April 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issue

Nothing but trouble

The 22nd photo is me.😏 Jayden is rad (talk) 05:17, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

2nd Jayden is rad (talk) 05:17, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi Bilby, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Seven Years of Adminship

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:17, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: May 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 5 • May 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

User:Elprime is using Wikipedia for creating personal attacks on Santrex, he is uploading email screenshots (File:Alexander Freeman Threatened Brian Krebs .png), google links (File:HostSailor TrendMicro.png), adding spam links https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hosting_environment&oldid=961794660 and disrupting Wikipedia pages. Adding spam on pages https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crime_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates&oldid=961874445. Can you look into this? 71.195.54.223 (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #2 – Quick updates

Read this in another language • Subscription list

Mockup of the new reply feature, showing new editing tools
The new features include a toolbar. What do you think should be in the toolbar?

This edition of the Editing newsletter includes information the Wikipedia:Talk pages project, an effort to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. The central project page is on MediaWiki.org.

– Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

At MLM

You missed 963501165 and the revision after. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:28, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

That was the only one that looked ok. :) I'll check it again, though, just in case. - Bilby (talk) 00:32, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
They still contain the earlier text (starting "The fatwa of the Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta in Saudi Arabia..."), which was only removed by Beauty School Dropout here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:38, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Oh well, I was hoping to keep it to retain attribution, but we always tend to have to revdel more than we'd like with copyvio anyway. Thanks! - Bilby (talk) 00:43, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: June 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 6 • June 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

The Signpost: 28 June 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #3

On 16 March 2020, the 50 millionth edit was made using the visual editor on desktop.

Seven years ago this week, the Editing team made the visual editor available by default to all logged-in editors using the desktop site at the English Wikipedia. Here's what happened since its introduction:

  • The 50 millionth edit using the visual editor on desktop was made this year. More than 10 million edits have been made here at the English Wikipedia.
  • More than 2 million new articles have been created in the visual editor. More than 600,000 of these new articles were created during 2019.
  • Almost 5 million edits on the mobile site have been made with the visual editor. Most of these edits have been made since the Editing team started improving the mobile visual editor in 2018.
  • The proportion of all edits made using the visual editor has been increasing every year.
  • Editors have made more than 7 million edits in the 2017 wikitext editor, including starting 600,000 new articles in it. The 2017 wikitext editor is VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode. You can enable it in your preferences.
  • On 17 November 2019, the first edit from outer space was made in the mobile visual editor.
  • In 2019, 35% of the edits by newcomers, and half of their first edits, were made using the visual editor. This percentage has been increasing every year since the tool became available.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Barkaat Ahmad sockfarm

I guess we have some enough evidence to link this sockfarm to Elmakkan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Please check your inbox for details. GSS 💬 06:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Please see ....

User:Smallbones/Proposed commercial editing policy

Smallbones(smalltalk) 02:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded Euryalus • SQL
removed Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: July 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 7 • July 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

HGO Trust

Hi! You placed a COI template on the article HGO Trust, but unfortunately you did not, as the template's home page suggests, "promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article" (It also adds "If you do not start a discussion, any editor will be justified in removing the tag without warning.") - So I have started the discussion on your behalf. It would be helpful I think if you could indicate and edit yourself any areas which you find to violate WP:NPOV. As you may be aware, I self-notified my interest in this page in May of this year, and my declaration is there on the talkpage. Best, --Smerus (talk) 19:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Again. I don't want to drag this out, but looking at WP:COIU it appears that it would be legitimate for me to suggest news about HGO and citations on the talk page and invite editors to add them if they wish. Would this incur your wrath? As you will see, no one but you or I has contributed to the discussion on this topic which I started on your behalf, when you placed the template on the article.

I seem to be in an absurd situation here - HGO is a charity, I derive no benefit from it of any sort. I did not write the original article. I declared my COI. What I have sought to do is to keep the article up to date by listings of its productions and of any awards it receives, in each case backed up by citations to reliable secondary sources. I do not add my own interpretations. I have maybe been premature - e.g., the company did win the NODA opera award for London, but NODA have not yet fully updated their own website. As and when they do so, this will be a fact which ought to be recorded in the article. In fact in the past I have done no more than many editors do who are fans of a particular film or music star, or sports team.--Smerus (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it is perfectly ok to suggest changes on the talk page. That's how this is meant to be handled, so all is good. It isn't absurb - it is simply that the community has decided that where people have a clear COI, such as being in charge of organistaions or writing about themselves, they should not edit the article directly. You're more than a fan because you are the Chairman, so the requirements are more stingent than they would be on a fan making the same edits. - Bilby (talk) 00:43, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Young Living August 2020

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Rhode Island Red (talk) 14:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

The problem is that you are reintroducing copyright violations. If you don't like the wording, change it, but don't copy and paste the text from the sources with almost no alteration. - Bilby (talk) 14:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: August 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 8 • August 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

The Signpost: 30 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #4

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

Reply tool

The number of comments posted with the Reply Tool from March through June 2020. People used the Reply Tool to post over 7,400 comments with the tool.

The Reply tool has been available as a Beta Feature at the Arabic, Dutch, French and Hungarian Wikipedias since 31 March 2020. The first analysis showed positive results.

  • More than 300 editors used the Reply tool at these four Wikipedias. They posted more than 7,400 replies during the study period.
  • Of the people who posted a comment with the Reply tool, about 70% of them used the tool multiple times. About 60% of them used it on multiple days.
  • Comments from Wikipedia editors are positive. One said, أعتقد أن الأداة تقدم فائدة ملحوظة؛ فهي تختصر الوقت لتقديم رد بدلًا من التنقل بالفأرة إلى وصلة تعديل القسم أو الصفحة، التي تكون بعيدة عن التعليق الأخير في الغالب، ويصل المساهم لصندوق التعديل بسرعة باستخدام الأداة. ("I think the tool has a significant impact; it saves time to reply while the classic way is to move with a mouse to the Edit link to edit the section or the page which is generally far away from the comment. And the user reaches to the edit box so quickly to use the Reply tool.")[5]

The Editing team released the Reply tool as a Beta Feature at eight other Wikipedias in early August. Those Wikipedias are in the Chinese, Czech, Georgian, Serbian, Sorani Kurdish, Swedish, Catalan, and Korean languages. If you would like to use the Reply tool at your wiki, please tell User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF).

The Reply tool is still in active development. Per request from the Dutch Wikipedia and other editors, you will be able to customize the edit summary. (The default edit summary is "Reply".) A "ping" feature is available in the Reply tool's visual editing mode. This feature searches for usernames. Per request from the Arabic Wikipedia, each wiki will be able to set its own preferred symbol for pinging editors. Per request from editors at the Japanese and Hungarian Wikipedias, each wiki can define a preferred signature prefix in the page MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix. For example, some languages omit spaces before signatures. Other communities want to add a dash or a non-breaking space.

New requirements for user signatures

  • The new requirements for custom user signatures began on 6 July 2020. If you try to create a custom signature that does not meet the requirements, you will get an error message.
  • Existing custom signatures that do not meet the new requirements will be unaffected temporarily. Eventually, all custom signatures will need to meet the new requirements. You can check your signature and see lists of active editors whose custom signatures need to be corrected. Volunteers have been contacting editors who need to change their custom signatures. If you need to change your custom signature, then please read the help page.

Next: New discussion tool

Next, the team will be working on a tool for quickly and easily starting a new discussion section to a talk page. To follow the development of this new tool, please put the New Discussion Tool project page on your watchlist.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

added Eddie891
removed Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

readded SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Missing cites in Louis Laybourne Smith

The article cites "Last 1986" and "Richardson 1986", but no such works are cited in bibliography. There are works by these authors but different year -- a typo? Can you please add/clarify? Thanks, Renata (talk) 14:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that I have the years wrong, but I have the books here so I'll try and look them up to confirm. Thanks! - Bilby (talk) 13:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

MkNbTrD0086 (talk) 10:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: September 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 9 • September 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon

I see you blocked John from Idegon. I know nothing about his personal attacks, so I won't comment on those. However, generally, he does good work; work not too many other editors do. I know him because he and I both watch articles about high schools. Me primarily California and Nevada, he I think nationwide. Those articles are prone to having a lot of overzealous editing if not vandalism, mostly by noobs, IPs and SPAs. It can be anything form innocuous additions of non-notable or wannabe notable alumni (or just "a hell of a nice guy"), insertion of grandeous or hideous claims, Barack Obama, sports heroes or mass murders in alumni, staff or administration or the like. Scandals, real or imagined getting excess publicity. I hope you get the picture. On a good day, he might revert a dozen things in my watchlist, I might fix 3 in the same span of time. I've had my disputes with him because I believe in WP:BEFORE. Some of the claims are legit and he doesn't do his research before destroying legitimate content. Too many other editors, a majority, don't do it either. For him, this might have been a full time job, for me, I don't have the time to keep up with my watchlist of only 16,000 plus articles, maybe 1,000 are about high schools. He must have been monitoring some 16,000 high school articles alone. We don't have that many others watching this stuff, just random individuals watching a few at a time. My point is, his absence is going to open the door to possibly irreparable damage across the entirety of this subject. And our prominent articles on these high schools, presenting this future un-reverted junk for extended periods of time until someone notices, will become an embarrassment to wikipedia. Trackinfo (talk) 04:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I absolutely agree, John does excellent work patrolling a difficult space, and things are going to be harder without his efforts. Not every action is perfect, but his editing on those articles has been a net positive to the project. Hopefully John will be able to gain some understanding of the issues and be able to return to editing. - Bilby (talk) 07:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
When I was sanctioned, I was simply too proud to appeal. I wonder how many we loose that way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Too many, I think. I always feel that getting blocked - especially when you really thought you were doing what was best for the project - must feel like a slap. It is one thing to deliberatly vandalise or use socks, in which case it might well be part of the game, but not when you honestly thought what you were doing was for the best, and I think most if not all established editors here are doing what they think is for the best, otherwise they wouldn't be offering the project so much of their effort. Sometimes we're in a position where we have no more options, but I will never be happy using blocks in these circumstances. - Bilby (talk) 07:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. I don't know how it feels to be blocked, because it didn't happen to me (other than range blocks). But exactly, to feel that treatment was unfair - in my case saying "battleground" when all I did was working towards more accessibility - just made me defiant. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
He's now been blocked 5 times in the past 17 months and it's always the same: incivility and edit warring, despite repeated promises to reform. At this point, it is clear that he cannot conform to community norms in that regard. Bilby, you are well-justified.  JGHowes  talk 14:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Bilby, thanks for making this difficult decision. I once appreciated John's active work at defending article quality, especially on high school pages subject to vandalism and uninformative ramblings. But lately he has become cantankerous and insulting, reverting changes with the comment "gain consensus for your edits" while refusing to engage in consensus discsussions, and accusing people of wasting his time while himself making lazy inaccurate edits. He uses outdated language and conventions regarding education, while insisting (as in your latest example) that editors have a college-level understanding of the material (I can't find such a minimal education guideline, is there one?). Overall, he has become a frightening deterrent to newer editors trying to be bold in editing, especially for high school students who are our future. I wish John well and hope he recovers from his problems, but he can't be an editor in his current condition. I'm happy to increase my watch list and help instruct newer high school page editors. I hope others will as well. novanglusva (talk) 18:52, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
I also want to tip my hat to Bilby. I had the misfortune to encounter John from Idegon both as a new and experienced user. I don't think any interaction I had with him was civil, ranging from when I was still learning about consensus and inclusion standards (John called me disruptive rather than help a newbie who was editing in obvious good faith) to normal editing (he disputed an edit I made and called me annoying when I tried to resolve the issue on his talk page) to questionable AfD behavior (musing that Boogie2988, an evidently notable subject, was not notable). Sure, he did good work with schools and other areas, but I think that made too many people willing to brush off his utter browbeating of other users, especially new users. He was a jerk, and I'm not sorry to see him go. Someone else will step up, I'm sure. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 16:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Sources for Kender

I remember working with you on the Kender article way, way back in the day. Do you know of any more sources that can be used to improve the article? BOZ (talk) 22:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Not off hand, but I'll have a look and see what has turned up since then. Sad to see articles that went through so much work deleted. - Bilby (talk) 04:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

added Ajpolino • LuK3
readded Jackmcbarn
removed Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
renamed There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

List of fatal cougar attacks in North America‎

I restored the reference SoftwareThing (talk) 01:22, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

RE: Vernon Coleman AIDS Denialsim

Dear Bilby,

I noticed you are making sweeping changes to the article concerning Vernon Coleman's AID's Denialism. Please consult the talk page of the article, as I believe that although your changes are not malicious, you are missing key pages from the reference material. MrEarlGray (talk) 22:25, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

User:John from Idegon

I get your block and the reasons why you made it; however, I don't think it's fair to John or any other editor to let their user talk become a drama board. John's been blocked and seems to have left for good; if he wants to come back, he understands how he needs to try and do that. People debating the merits of his block on his user talk page isn't going to change any of that, and the grave dancing comment that started the latest spurt of posts is only going to get worse if not nipped in the bud asap. Perhaps, as the blocking admin, you can post something to let others know that there are other places they can post to discuss the merits of John's block if they so please. Excessive and unnecessary drama on his user talk might only led John to blank the page, but it might also lead to a response that doesn't help anyone (least not of all John) in the long run. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I did read this, but only after the page was courtesy blanked. I think that was a very good solution under the circumstances. - Bilby (talk) 12:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
I supported your RfA, and with more than just a vote, but your rare use of admin tools in blocking John from Idegon indefinitely was not, IMHO, one of your finest moments. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:29, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough, but at some point after a user has been asked repeatedly to stop making personal attacks, we need to do more than ask. Making a call as to when that time has come is always going to be hard and potentially controversial. - Bilby (talk) 02:41, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
I had many good interactions with John from Idegon over the years and believe that he was a net positive before 2020, despite occasionally losing his cool. I actually tried to visit with him when I was in eastern Oregon in 2017 but he was not available. But this year, he blew his stack with increasing regularity and his final outburst was atrocious. Accordingly, I cannot criticize your block, Bilby. I hope that John recovers his emotional stability and is able some day to return to the project. But I do not think that will be soon. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:52, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: October 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 10 • October 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

This Month in Education: November 2020

This Month in Education

Volume 9 • Issue 11 • November 2020

Contents • Headlines • Subscribe

In This Issuse

Visibility

What do you mean when you say that my answer on why the follow up is allowed for inclusion is "Grossly insulting"? If I remember the summary I did not insult Slatersteven. If you're asking about "bitches," I was simply referring to Willis and Mikovits. For Slater to later see that the reason I reverted his revert (acceptable per WP:3RR) is edit summary removed is concerning. Out of remembrance on the summary and on the thought on how the removal of my edit summary can cause assumptions of me insulting Slater or other editors when I DON'T, I view the removal of the summary unjustified. GeraldWL 11:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

It is not appropriate to describe women as "bitches". - Bilby (talk) 11:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Bilby, and are you aware of Plandemic's talk page, where other editors have openly insulted the casts of the series in a much more quantity? I used that term to not make people conspire that I am somehow supporting conspiracy theories and will give a larger burden on me. You have to understand the scary climate of the article, where editors have warred and give unsubstantial opinions simply to "combat misinformation." Thus my decision to include "bitches." Instead warn me or something: the removed summary contain information that may be vital to other editors understanding why I reverted his revert. GeraldWL 11:34, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm happy to explain to @Slatersteven: that I did not revert because of anything said about them. I am, however, unwilling to reinstate an edit summary which described women in that manner. I assumed that it was a one-off error, which is why I didn't worry about a warning - it didn't seem like language that you would normally employ.. - Bilby (talk) 11:39, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
I did not think you did. And no we should not describe women as bithces, and it does not look like an accident.Slatersteven (talk) 11:52, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Slatersteven, I think I was just scared of the many people in WP here, who have acted nonsensically in the video's peak as seeable on the talk archives. Not as a counter-argument, but editors have been insulting the article's subjects previously even more. GeraldWL 12:10, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
You were scared so you...type a sexist insult? Nor do I think "others did it as well" is a good defense.Slatersteven (talk) 12:15, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Its just dawned on me what you have just written, you included the insult in the hope and believe that by insulting them and seeming to be not supporting the makers of the video you edit would not be undone? It was done solely in the hope your edit would be seen as not possitive? I suggest you read wp:agf.Slatersteven (talk) 12:23, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Slatersteven, I know I will sound embarrassing but it is my only way to convince extreme editors that I am not a conspiracist. In my experience with such people you really have to do everything to stop them from assuming bad faith. I cannot assume good faith on editors if they assume bad faith in me; no mate that's not how I am. That's why I have a bad feeling about your revert for a short while; usually editors who assume bad faith type such summaries: "Vague information" etc. I would not talk further about this as I've learned from this incident. However I have to note that this is the first time a visibility has been changed due to "insults," and I expected a similar level of security when the article's in its peak. GeraldWL 12:27, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
No its not the only way, you can make arguments that people accept, you did not (for example) follow wp:brd and when I reverted you made an argument at talk, instead you reverted).Slatersteven (talk) 14:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Slatersteven, per WP:3RR I am allowed to make 3 reverts in 24h. I usually do so until 2 reverts and if I'm still not satisfied I'll go to Talk (you can see I did not revert Roxy's edit this time cause I gave up on that, furthermore this article is a GAN rn so I don't want it immediately disqualified cause of edit war). As I stated, I would like to end this discussion, as I've learnt not to put sexist language in summaries. I think continuing this thread will cause hostility, and I don't want hostility in collaboration. GeraldWL 14:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
That is not a right, its an upper limit "The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times." and BRD is very clear "If your bold edit was reverted, then do not re-revert to your version. If your reversion was reverted, then do not re-revert to your version. If you re-revert, then you are no longer following BRD".Slatersteven (talk) 15:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Slatersteven, as I stated, I would like for this thread be bowed down. Continuing this would just make conditions more hostile. GeraldWL 15:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I note the user is aware DS sanctions apply, one of which is "Edit warring is detrimental to the editing environment as it disrupts articles and tends to inflame content disputes rather than resolve them. Users who engage in multiple reverts of the same content but are careful not to breach the three revert rule are still edit warring.", I think a warning may be in order.Slatersteven (talk) 15:06, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Slatersteven, ah yes, I will be blocked very soon. F***. GeraldWL 15:12, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer.  :) BOZ (talk) 05:04, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Vellore Institute of Technology

Dear Bilby, i am noticing you that you are contributing to Vellore Institute of Technology by reverting the contributor of that page and blocking them even though their page contributor disclosed the contribution, if you are having personal interest to that article or did you get paid kindly disclose it conflict of interest guideline. If you have any personal vengeance Personal Attack on that article or on the contributor this is not a platform for your interest. Welcome the new user by guiding if they post any promotional or vandalism in right way do not block them.

Regards Employee of that Institution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.20.197 (talk) 14:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Aravi0811 was blocked by another administrator. Once blocked, the user of that account is not permitted to create new accounts in order to get aroud that block. - Bilby (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:24, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Majed92

Hi Bilby, thanks for the input on the talk page of User:Majed92. I was concerned that he/she may be getting monetary compensation, or some other incentive, to edit the Yinon Yahel article. Their response to your first comment seemed quite earnest and I'm curious to know, what has convinced you that he/she is getting paid for their edits? Thank you.Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 06:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Revirvlkodlaku! It wasn't a great mystery - in early January someone placed an ad asking to hire an editor to edit the Yinon Yahel article. They provided the URL, so it was clear what they wanted done. The next day they hired someone with an almost identical username to Majed92, and Majed92 started editing the article. To make things interesting, after you reverted those first edits the job was opened again, only with the added explanation that someone had reverted the original editor they hired and that they needed to hire someone else as well. My guess is that Majed92 isn't a long term paid editor - just someone who took a single job - so I want to give them a chance to follow policy. It doesn't normally work out, but I'd like to AGF and give them the chance. - Bilby (talk) 07:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Right, fair enough, thanks for explaining. Out of curiosity, how did you become aware of the ad that was placed? This whole world of paid Wikipedia editing is quite foreign to me, I've only recently become aware of the phenomenon (rather scary, I think!), so I'm puzzled how one goes about seeking this kind of editing work. Anyway, thanks again, I'm glad the article is restored to something less cluttered than what it started to look like in the past few days, although I'm sure more attempts to add all that material will follow...Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I check Upwork mostly because of the large number of banned editors who work through there. - Bilby (talk) 00:19, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Seriously! I had no idea about that. Well, I'm glad you caught it, nice work! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:34, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bilby/Archive_15&oldid=1005527527"