Hello my name is John and I live in the great state of Ohio United States of America I know you have been an editor for over 10 years and I am trying to create or add to existing information on this wonderful platform. I know you are the editor that deleted my Amish portal idea where would be the correct location to add information about Amish social settlements? -- [🇺🇸 COACH Z | #USNavy ⚓] 10:40, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
FYI it was decided to leave "extended confirmed" in place on admin accounts, just for ease of use during desysops. (Noticed you'd removed a few as redundant) –xenotalk 12:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- Where was it decided? (It isn't in the original proposal that I had initiated.) Desysops are sufficiently rare to not be worth bothering about (and it's easy to readd the group, along with the other usual ones), while presently it makes the total count of extended confirmed users inaccurate (which is not terrible in itself, but still :). Cenarium (talk) 13:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- I guess it wasn't so much 'decided' as suggested by Xaosflux to leave it in place: Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive 34#Extended confirmed. –xenotalk 17:35, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- I really don't care one way or the other :D I think at least one of the sysops was removing it as redundant from other sysops andI noted in Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Removal_of_permissions that if that group had ever been removed, we should restore it (if not already there) during a de-sysop. If they never had it, it should auto-promote. — xaosflux Talk 18:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
@Xaosflux:, @Xeno:, another reason for removing them is that it makes gathering statistics much easier, for example in the queries I ran for this discussion if admins had extendedconfirmed we would have to handle duplicates... Cenarium (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Cenarium: I'm okay with it. –xenotalk 19:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or firstname.lastname@example.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
About new page
I was submitting an article called Edit King on my other account (Edit King2 and it said it was not facebook and I was wondering what that means.Lol😈😈😈😈😈😈😈 03:06, 8 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin the editor (talk • contribs)
Padma Shri Awards
Template:Padma Shri Awards is being discussed. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Hi! Does stabilization in deferred changes work in same way as in FlaggedRevs, and does it leave mark on article history, or in log that article has been stabilized. I'm asking this because in fiwiki we have planned to use bot to stabilize article, when possibly damaging edit has made. And the only problem what we have faced is, that rollback cannot be used to revert vandalism, that has been made before bot has stabilized the article. Do you know any solution how this could be fixed? --4shadoww (talk) 15:19, 22 June 2017 (UTC)