User talk:SmokeyJoe/Archive 13
 | 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. |
Doncram
So as not to clutter MfD with an unrelated follow up to your comment. Doncram & DGG hit hard. Such a vital part of the fabric here. Part of why I'm trying to clear some of his drafts if I can get them to mainspace, inspired by a bunch hitting G13. User_talk:Doncram#List_of_drafts has the list of expired and expiring drafts should you have time/interest. Star Mississippi 01:58, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Vu
Template:Vu has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I do not know if you're having a bad day, but accusing editors of "attempting to hide all evidence of good faith" by a blocked editor in a deletion discussion, especially without evidence, is the kind of stuff that caused WP:AGF to be written. To quote from WP:SNOW - "If a process only has a snowball's chance in hell of success, use common sense and don't follow the process all the way to the end, just for procedural sake. But if there are any doubts, do not terminate the process prematurely." This sort of language is incivil at best. DarmaniLink (talk) 01:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Not a bad day. It’s my standard challenge to anyone wanting to delete content that I consider to be a good faith attempt to contribute, on the basis that the user was later blocked. And where there is no connection between the block and the content to be deleted.
- I don’t think you should take it personally. You are doing what many have done before you. The consequence of the deletion would be to remove the best edits form the user’s edit history, and if they try to return, that makes them look worse.
- I don’t mean that you are attempting to make them look worse, just that you are attempting to have a page deleted, and there is a bad unintended consequence. I don’t think you have considered other perspective on the outcome of this deletion. As I’ve said, I don’t think their edit history is that bad, and I think NOTHERE doesn’t hold up to scrutiny for their block. If they are serious, I think they can make a good unblock request, and an obvious good thing they could do is declare an intention to improve their draft.
- Did I say “all evidence”? I shouldn’t have. The one liner new article on a band is a small bit of evidence. I support its immediate draftification. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- for what its worth, I only reported them to UAA, not AIV since the name was arguably disruptive. I was just expecting a name change. DarmaniLink (talk) 03:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- I noticed the username.
- I’ve been editing the draft, but am frustrated by my mobile device losing my edits when I switch between tabs. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- In that case, I'll retract it. :) DarmaniLink (talk) 03:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- for what its worth, I only reported them to UAA, not AIV since the name was arguably disruptive. I was just expecting a name change. DarmaniLink (talk) 03:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:
- Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
- Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
- Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
- Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
- Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
- Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
- Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
- Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
- Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
- Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
- Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
- Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
- Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
- Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
- Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
- Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
- Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.
To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Where is Kate? for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 12:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello SmokeyJoe,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Reminders:
- You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
- Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C
- You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
On behalf of the UCoC project team,
RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:
- Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
- Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
- Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
- Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
- Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
- Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
- Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
- Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed
See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
hi
Hi @SmokeyJoe Can you help me to create notable topic about Translator and journalist hi, you can see the news on google in Arabic and Turkish and English Thanks for your time. Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but first, show me three existing articles that you have improved. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- thank you @SmokeyJoe for your feedback, for articles i don't have yet as you asked me can you start the draft of the article and i will give you all details that i have ,i don't have yet as you asked me , but i think you will like my work Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Have you seen multiple news sources in several languages and extensive coverage on the topic? Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Do not try to create a new article until you have some experience improving existing content. If you do, you’ll waste your time, and others’ time. Making an acceptable new article is hard to do, with no experience.
- To get you started, what are three articles that your new topic might be worth a mention in? Add the mention there, in the context of the existing article. If you can’t do this, then probably your topic is not notable and will never be accepted. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Have you seen multiple news sources in several languages and extensive coverage on the topic? Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- thank you @SmokeyJoe for your feedback, for articles i don't have yet as you asked me can you start the draft of the article and i will give you all details that i have ,i don't have yet as you asked me , but i think you will like my work Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Prolific sock User:علي_أبو_عمر blocked again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't want to distract from the closure review, hence why I'm posting this here, but you've retained "he" in your comment whilst correcting "him", and you may want to fix that. — Qwerfjkltalk 13:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
"Sangerpedia" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Sangerpedia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 31 § Sangerpedia until a consensus is reached. (Notification being sent to all who participated in the DRV.) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Did you mean to just copy my comment?
At Special:Diff/1228665092 you've just copied my comment verbatim and added nothing else? Is that what you intended to do? Thryduulf (talk) 14:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- User:Thryduulf, I don’t think you are looking carefully. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Subtle, but a fair point. Thryduulf (talk) 15:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)