Jump to content

User talk:Nick

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac opened

[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 30, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous


Faded or drifted Pigments in scanned documents.

[edit]

A number of scanned works have been uploaded on Commons, including "Atlas of the Munsell Color System" (1912). This included a set of color charts. However, the colors in the chart may have faded compared to how the originals appeared. The Munusell system was analysed in the 1940's and a set of xyY data exists, which means it might be possible to recalibrate the charts. What I am asking about here (rather on the Refdesk) is whether there have been any Chemistry journal articles on which pigments (especially early 20th century ones) are likely to be subject to color drift, and potentially by how much. Coloimetric data is unlikely to exist for pre 20th century works however. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @ShakespeareFan00: - there are a significant number of journal articles about pigment changes, the Royal Society of Chemistry have a library, from memory, of pigments and dyes. We should be able to determine the original colours by following the original recipes though, since the colour will be a function of the chemistry, and that being the case, I'd be shocked if there's not an old Munsel colour system to Pantone conversion chart somewhere. Nick (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The pointer to the Royal Chemistry Society Library was all that was needed, you don't need to do anything else on this.
There is a conversion from Munsell into xyY space, that was published in the Journal of the American Optical Society around 1940, which someone was transcribing at Wikisource.
By comparison of the expected RGB triplets from conversion of those xyY values, ( possibly allowing for a change of illuminant), it should also be possible to compare the drift in the scan against known standards. Other considerations include potential concerns about gamut conversion truncations ( sRGB doesn't cover all 'print' colors for example.)
Atlas of the Munsell Color System: co:File:Atlas of the Munsell color system.djvu
A tristimulus specfication of this appears to have been published as : Tyler & Hardy, (1940) "Analysis of the Original Munsell Color System" in Journal of the Optical Society of America v. 30 iss. 12, pp.587-590.
Obviously, if I go further, I'll need to do a fuller literature review, so thanks for the appreciated pointers given :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ShakespeareFan00: if you're needing any literature on this that isn't digitised and online, or which isn't available through any of the Wikipedia Library avenues, you can see if the Queen's University Belfast library has a print copy https://www.qub.ac.uk/lib/ and I'll get one of our librarians to scan it for me - likewise for anything on the Royal Society of Chemistry side, I can request material from them if needed. Nick (talk) 08:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Tfm notice on Template:If both

[edit]

Could you consider using {{subst:tfm|help=off|type=disabled|1=Both}} instead of removing the whole notice? Per the TfD process, the notice should stay there. Nickps (talk) 11:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nickps: is that going to break the template again, as per the last notice you asked be placed there ? Nick (talk) 11:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't, considering that, per the documentation, it outputs nothing at all on transclusions. Nickps (talk) 11:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If even that fails, then wrap it in <noinclude></noinclude>. But not including it at all is not really an option. Nickps (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, more out of curiosity than anything, how did the template break? Nickps (talk) 11:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was causing any infobox with the {{Marriage}} template to throw up the following error <div style="display:inline-block;Expression error: Unexpected < operator">​. The alternative TfD does look to be working correctly now (having purged and checked with pages showing the error previously). Nick (talk) 12:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nickps: I'm a bit worried that you're more concerned about the TfD template than the functionality the If both template is providing and can't provide a suitable reassurance your requested edits aren't going to break the template. Again. In any case, we will give it a go and see what we can do. The TfD template doesn't really need to be there now, does it, likely nobody will comment at the TfD and it'll be closed as merge in a week anyway, as it's an uncontoversial merger. Nick (talk) 12:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me phrase it better then. I'm 100% confident that using <noinclude></noinclude> will result in absolutely no breakage. There's your suitable reassurance. I don't agree that the template doesn't need to be there since people may contest the close by arguing they didn't know about the TfD. Nickps (talk) 12:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt anybody will contest anything, because nobody cares anymore. Nick (talk) 12:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Isabelle Belato
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Izno

CheckUser changes

removed Barkeep49

Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration


Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

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

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Invitation to participate in a research

[edit]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

[edit]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]