User talk:VegaDark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Thank you for visiting my talk page. I will use my best judgment as to if I should reply to comments here, on your talk page, or somewhere else. Occasionally I may dual reply both here and on your talk page. Please place new sections at the bottom of the page and sign all your comments by placing 4 tildes (~~~~) in a row. I will archive my talk page every 100 topics.
Archived Discussions
Archive 1 - December 13, 2005 - November 28, 2006
Archive 2 - November 28, 2006 - May 20, 2007
Archive 3 - May 20, 2007 - March 20, 2008
Archive 4 - March 20, 2008 - September 7, 2008
Archive 5 - September 7, 2008 - October 26, 2009
Archive 6 - October 26, 2009 - November 8, 2016

Contents

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins[edit]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers[edit]

Hi VegaDark.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, VegaDark. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Category:User en-0[edit]

Hey, I was hoping to see if you might recall a discussion about bots being able to use this category to filter out leaving messages on pages as an argument for usefulness of the category. I feel like it was discussed in depth, and ultimately dismissed, which was a contributing factor for why it was deleted, but I can't seem to find it in either of the old CfDs, here and here. Perhaps it was a talk page discussion or another similar category? Any ideas? Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 04:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, after a quick search, I found this. I'll see if I can find anything else. My vague recollection is that there was an userbox extension which auto-adds -0, but I don't remember if that was implemented in the end. - -jc37 04:20, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, that's helpful, although doesn't specifically discuss bots using the category and I could have sworn there was one where someone argued that usage and there was a discussion as to why that wasn't a good reason to keep it, but perhaps I'm misremembering things. VegaDark (talk) 04:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Found the extension discussion: mw:User_talk:RobertL/Archive_1#Babel-Extension - jc37 05:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Is this what you were looking for? - jc37 04:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
No, that was the discussion that was grounds for undoing the CfD which I did find. Basically I'm looking for arguments addressing this exact issue except I believe our previous consensus was this was not legitimate usage of the category. Kinda disappointed that venue was used to overturn a longstanding CfD decision as well. VegaDark (talk) 04:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
I have to say that this is quite the blast from the past. Just seeing ones like "Do you speak dolphin" lol
And wow at remembering the time invested in this. that ucfd page still ranks as my highest usage page in my edit history...
I'll keep looking, but besides that, How have you been? : ) - jc37 05:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
It's a good reminder of all the good work we put in to make the user category system actually work towards a collaborative environment instead of the cesspool it was before our intervention. Unfortunately it looks like not too many people have been policing them since I became less active - I've made a large number of nominations recently and there's plenty more to nominate in the future. I've been good, no real reason I haven't been particularly active other than just different hobbies taking up my time. The election results have re-invigorated me to do what I can to help with education, and I thought of Wikipedia and the work I've done here as a way to help with that, so perhaps I'll make an effort to be more active again. How about you? VegaDark (talk) 05:06, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
I understand. Wikipedia has a distinct value. Real life keeps me entangled of late, but I try to help as I can. Next year should be a bit freer, I think (famous last words : )
These days it's all I can do to unbury Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure, much less get back into cfd. And when I start to look at the mess in fiction-related pages in articlespace the task is just so huge, it just sometimes feels so overwhelming... - jc37 05:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Ugh, that looks like a contentious area. I'm glad users have picked their niche in needed areas or things would get backed up beyond belief. VegaDark (talk) 05:31, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Humour Hires.png The Barnstar of Good Humor
I give this on my behalf Paula William (talk) 00:40, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, VegaDark![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Joke user categories[edit]

I would like to have further discussion. I am not sure how to use Requests for comment. It appears you must start by attaching an RFC to an article. What could we attach it to?Rathfelder (talk) 10:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Mexican expatriates in Italy Category[edit]

Hello VegaDark, can you please undo the deletion of Category:Mexican expatriates in Italy? The Category should no longer be empty now. Thank you very much. Inter&anthro (talk) 23:37, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

The category has now been restored. Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 02:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirateSchwede66K6kaEaldgythFerretCyberpower678Mz7PrimefacDodger67
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg BriangottsJeremyABU Rob13

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Scale of justice 2.svg Arbitration

Nuvola apps knewsticker.png Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Ultra-Speedy deletions[edit]

Hi VegaDark

At about 3:40am today I was notified that a bunch of categories which I had created had been tagged for speedy deletion under WP:C1 ("empty"). They included Category:Argentine female archers and Category:Romanian female archers.

As C1 notes, this criterion applies to categories that have been unpopulated for at least seven days. AFAIK, those categories had not been empty for more than a day or two, yet you deleted them both shortly after 7am today. That's only a little over 3 hours after they were tagged, rather than the usual 7 days.

Ordinarily I wouldn't mind much: if a category which I have created no longer serves its purpose of containing at least one article, then it needs to go, and I will often G7 speedy them myself.

But in this case, these categories are part of a larger series which have become empty as a result of the mass move to draft space of some 16,000 articles created by User:Sander.v.Ginkel.

As I wrote a few hours ago to the editor who applied the speedy tags:

I created categories which I promptly populated with existing articles. What I did not realise in doing this (I only learnt it this week) was that User:Sander.v.Ginkel had been mass-creating biogs of sportspeople using some sort of tools or unauthorised bot which created lots of errors. (When I went looking for what happened, I found for example WP:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941#User:Fram.)
As a result of that, some 16,000 articles have been moved to draft space, and therefore removed from categories. AIUI, they were mostly biogs of sportspeople, and that has emptied many of the categories which I created and populated ... and since the articles were not tagged with any warning, I was unaware that I was wasting hours of my time. Not my fault; I acted in good faith, creating valid categories which were promptly populated.

I don't know the ultimate fate of those 16,000 articles. I guess that there isn't the editor time to review more than a fraction of them, but I'm sure that at least some of them will be restored. If and when they are restored, they will need their original categories ... which have now been deleted.

There is a good reason for the 7-day delay on C1 deletions. It's to avoid ping-pong deletion/re-creation cycles which waste everyone's time. That's a good principle in general, but particularly so in this unusual situation.

So .. please you can respect the 7-day delay?

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I just found another one, while working through Wikipedia:Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories.
It is Category:Women's organisations in China, which you speedy deleted without tagging it or notifying the creator (me). It was empty because of a typo in a subcat. If notified, I could have fixed it easily, but instead I spent five minutes trying to figure out what happened.
Please don't delete empty categories unless they have been tagged for 7 days ... and if you are tagging them, Twinkle automatically notifies the creator. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:39, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Hi BrownHairedGirl, 100% of the deletions I performed were within policy, as I did wait 7 days for these categories being empty before deleting them. The way I delete empty categories is going through Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories, and looking at a revision at least 7 days old to ensure all entries I am deleting have been empty for at least 7 days. In this case, I used this 7-day old revision to find a list of categories that have been empty for at least 7 days. All categories you are concerned with should be listed in that report. So, while they may have been tagged only 3 hours before my deletion, they were empty for at least 6 days and 21 hours prior to being tagged. You will note that the C1 speedy deletion criterion does not mention a requirement for the category to be tagged, it only requires the category be empty. Recently the C1 criterion was actually increased from 4 days to 7 days to make sure stuff that was awaiting a migration wasn't affected, so it's very odd why these categories would be empty for so long in the middle of a migration. I'd offer to restore, but as an admin yourself and having notifications for these, you're better equipped to know which categories should be restored, although as a mater of practice I restore any category previously deleted as empty if it's been re-populated so I'll do that if I see any. VegaDark (talk) 01:23, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for a very slow reply, but here I am at last.
Thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed explanation. All the reasons you give above seem to me to be procedurally correct. I don't see any grounds for thinking you have exceeded the scope of C1.
However, it all sounds a bit mechanical, and I don't see any sign of editorial judgement being exercised. C1 permits deletion in certain circumstances, but does not require it. I think that before deleting an empty category, an admin should also ask why it's empty, and whether its likely to be capable of being populated with existing articles.
So if I encounter, for example, an empty category for a niche occupation in a small place (e.g. Egyptologists from the Falkland Islands, Biathletes from Palau, Death metal musicians from East Timor), I won't give much thought before deleting it, unless there was a cluster of them (as above). Chances are that if it ever had any content, the one or two article(s) were recategorised more appropriately or deleted. At the other extreme, if found an empty category of Russian poets I would want to know what's going on. I'd be asking myself surely we have some content for that?
This category was somewhere between those polar extremes. But even so, if you asked the question "are we likely to have any existing content which belongs in Category:Women's organisations in China?", I think it would be hard to say no ... and not hard to find content with which to populate it.
Fine if you don't want to put in the effort of populating it itself. But while an un-notified deletion is permissible, is it really a wise and helpful course of action? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:01, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
It's a lot of work to try and find out why a particular category may be empty, since the evidence that would explain why is generally on the pages that are removed from the category, so you can't really track them down. In my experience in the times that I have, it's often due to there being a different naming convention that has become standard and someone simply correcting the category on a page, or small categories that had their contents AfD'd. In the case of your example, I would have likely assumed that the category became empty due to a naming convention change where it didn't get properly processed after a CfD closure or something similar. Most vandalism is caught and reverted well before 7 days, so most of the stuff that appears in the empty category report are legitimately empty for one reason or another. For those that are not and it is not caught for the full 7 days, I think this makes up such a small proportion of the categories that it's rarely an issue. With how easy it is to restore a category I don't think it's particularly burdensome to have to do so under such circumstances, and I periodically go through Wikipedia:Database reports/Deleted red-linked categories to seek out categories deleted per C1 that have been re-populated in order to restore to minimize the impact. I hope that is a satisfactory explanation. VegaDark (talk) 08:35, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Umm, no, I don't think it really is satisfactory. Sorry.
Yes, sometimes the work involved is disproportionate. I noted those cases above where scrutiny is unlikely to be fruitful, and the work would be disproportionate to any benefits. I think we agree on that.
My concern here is not the ease of restoring a category, but the difficulty of identifying that it is missing. That can be much harder to track down.
In the case of Category:Women's organisations in China, that seems to me to be a clear instance of a category which we should have -- if not under that name, then under another title. If it's under another title, then the solution is more likely to be a redirect than deletion.
It's also quite easy to track. Shift-click to open the redlink in a new tab/window. Trim the URL back to Category:Women's organisations, and press enter. It's red, but there's a wp:engvar issue, so change one letter and try Category:Women's organizations. Bingo! A huge category tree. So why is China not on the list?
If you like, don't spend the time to answer that question. But having established that there is a gap in the category tree, leave the category there for someone else to investigate and/or populate. Empty categories don't have to be deleted. Sometimes they should be redirected, and sometimes they are much-needed categories just waiting to be populated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:57, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@BrownHairedGirl: - Well, I guess I will keep in mind what you have to say in part and we will have to agree to disagree in part. I'm not necessarily of the persuasion that going through categories in such detail outweighs a far slower process in dealing with these, when my understanding of the entire reason for the C1 deletion being a speedy criterion is because of the frustration it causes readers for finding and navigating into empty categories. Ultimately, If it were expected of me to go through that process with the majority of empty categories I'd probably go find another area of the encyclopedia to focus on altogether. But, with your examples in mind I will try and heed more on the side of caution when I see a category that seems like it shouldn't be empty. VegaDark (talk) 03:44, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi VegaDark, yes, I agree that doing doing that sort of check in the majority of cases would be too onerous. Sometimes, there is merit in the old saying that "the best can be the enemy of the good", as un-needed perfectionism can prevent ppl doing a good enough job for the majority of cases, causing a net loss. As we considered in other recent discussions, there is a balance to be struck here.
But I think we are in agreement that while most C1s should just be done on sight, some cases do require a bit of discretion, and I'm happy with that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

ANI discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Bishonen | talk 11:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I wish[edit]

... that the Categories for discussion discussion had not been closed already, because I feel I need to respond to your comment. English is not my first language, so I may have had trouble making myself understood, or understanding you. When I said "it IS personal", I didn't mean that it is related to a missed person, but that it is a personal expression of the one adding the category. I sadly miss several users, too many to have individual categories, but for others, such a category where they can find each other may be the right thing, no? I am sad someone left us today and express it differently, top of my talk. The project got darker, again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

A couple of links in matters relating to category deletion discussions[edit]

I would draw your attention to the sub headings below, and invite your comments;

Categories for discussion#After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors While it quite clearly states that notifying interested parties is optional, the fact that it is a heading title and provides a rationale for doing so it may be concluded that notifying such is optimal. No amount of WP:ILIKEIT is going to win over good policy reasons for deletion, so the argument that infesting CfD discussions with pride wounded editors is no reason for not notifying them. Moreover, as the nominator you do not need to wade through the morass of non policy orientated objections - that would be for the closing admin. Obviously, if anyone gave an objection rooted in an understanding of policy then you may wish to present counter arguments or even attempt to reach a consensus within the discussion - but you need only deal with the signal and not the noise.

Canvassing#Inappropriate notification I have reviewed this and find that only the opening paragraph/sentence of the guideline is at odds with your apparent disinclination to notify interested parties of your nominations - simply, a comprehensive and neutral notification of all effected is most likely to lead to a sound consensual decision rooted in policy. The sub heading linked to has a listing of inappropriate actions regarding notification, one of which is "secret". In this instance it refers to the improper use of non project space to notify other parties. I intend to start a discussion on the guidelines talkpage about including within that inappropriate action the lack of notification as a means of disallowing a wider discussion than might be achieved. You obviously have a view on that, and might wish to contribute.

Generally, I would like to understand why you have acted in such a way regarding Wikipedia:CfD in that you have opened discussions without advising those who have edited or populated categories. Other than policy and guidelines above indicating it is not mandatory, are there others or discussions where a consensus arose that notifications need not be sent resulting inan improvement to the encyclopedia? The enormous advantage of establishing consensus in such matters is that a fresh one needs to be found before the earlier can be overturned, whereas simple practice and custom is far more easily disregarded. I trust you see the benefit of opening up a discussion over these matters. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I have opened the above mentioned discussion here. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @LessHeard vanU: I hope you will forgive me for butting in here, but I think I can shed light on this.
First off, most CFDs are poorly attended these days. That's despite every category page being tagged with a deletion notice, and most of them being notified through the article alerts system. Take a look, for example, at WP:CFD 2017 February 10#Subcategories_of_London_Boroughs, where I propose renaming almost 600 categories relating to one of the world's major cities. It is listed at WP:WikiProject London/Article_alerts, and I also left a note on WT:LONDON. Every one of the 596 categories was promptly tagged. Yet despite all that notification there were still only 6 commentators in 7 days, and that's above average these days.
I used to diligently do WikiProject notifications for each nomination, but I gave up a few years ago because most of the time they attract nobody other than regular CFD participants. So in most cases, I conclude that effort is disproportionate to the results, and don't bother. I reserve project notifications for big changes, such as those proposed for London. AFAICS, most CFD nominations take a similar approach.
As to notifying everyone who edited a category, that has never been CFD practice in the 11 years I have participated there. It sometimes happens at AFD (I think when a bot does the job), but I have never seen an AFD nominator criticised for failing to notify anyone other than the article creator who is auto-notified by WP:Twinkle. Nor I have I seen it happen at TFD, where participation rates are even lower than CFD. The guideline you link to doesn't reflect actual practice, because it places more emphasis on notification than is routinely required.
As to notifying those who populated categories, that would be massively muchly far too onerous. It would require a revision history search of each page in a category, which could easily takes many hours for a larger categories. In 11 years at CFD I do not recall ever seeing that done, just as I don't recall from sporadic visits to TFD any sign of nominations accompanied by systematic notifications of those who applied a template to pages.
So it's unfair to reproach VegaDark for following routine practice.
As to notifying users who are themselves members of the category, that's not covered in the guidelines. User categories have rarely come to CFD in recent years, so it is an understandable omission. You make a case for such such notifications, but I am not persuaded that inviting a bunch of heated ILIKEIT commentary helps achieve a consensus. Increasing the noise-to-signal levels rarely helps to produce better or more stable decisions.
But something deeper troubles me. The ANI thread was in effect a protest against an editor who was acting firmly within a reasonable interpretation of a long-standing guideline derived from hundreds of discussions at WP:UCFD. A few editors who were unaware of those guidelines found that they disliked them in principle when made aware of them, and then decided to try using the ANI as a sort of virtual lynch mob for someone acting within the framework of a stable guideline. That was not a pretty sight, and the conduct of those baying for VegaDark's blood seems to me to retrospectively add weight to Vega's judgement that they would bring more heat than light.
I respect the view of those who want to keep this type of category. But they should have gone straight to RFC rather than to an ill-founded and ill-conducted ANI. And while it's genuinely nice to see you back, LHvU, I think that your reproaches would be better directed at those who have misused ANI. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:27, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm glad I held off on responding to this, because I could not have put it any better than this. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl. VegaDark (talk) 08:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
I have responded at Wikipedia_talk:Canvassing#Inappropriate_Actions_.2F_Secret, for a wider participation. I would suggest, however, if it has become custom and practice to more limit the extent of notification provided in the less visited area's of WP then perhaps an RfC is the best way of having the guidelines altered to make this obvious to those unfamiliar with these places (or those considering taking up some of the strain - it might even lead to more recruits). "Appropriate notification" may be a useful term, where it signals comprehensive notification in matters where it is expected to have a considerable response and a severely limited one in more desolate venue. As ever, the views of those working the neglected areas can only be part of the discussion and the expectations of the wider community needs to be engaged - before some postering throwback of a former contributor starts making malarkey (again) over sweeping up dead leaves. LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
LHVU, I have replied to you at Wikipedia_talk:Canvassing#Inappropriate_Actions_.2F_Secret. As I noted there, there is no evidence of a wider problem to justify the measures you seek, which appear to be based wholly on an attempt by you to extrapolate from the single incident involving the almost unique case of a category relating you personally — a conflict of interest which you failed to disclose when launching the discussion at WT:CANVASS.
Your own personal category has been kept. Be happy about that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:55, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
It was never my category, as I did not create it, subscribe to it, or have it in my userspace. It contains my contributors name. I am happy it was kept, because it appears to satisfy a group of contributors who I value for their continuing efforts to improve a project I was once extremely involved in. I do not care for your tone, BHG, and urge you to consider that you might be needing a break to enable you to AGF the motives of people who have been away from the culture found here. You were one of the stars that I believed could continue to guide this enterprise through the troubled future I knew I was leaving - I only hope that it is my long absence from the realities of providing assistance to these pages that has left me feeling disappointed in your comments about my motives and concerns. I am, very much so, glad that this has taken place on the talkpage of a third party editor, rather than a public arena. I intend to respond, courteously, on the guideline discussion page in the near future. I expect to be given the same manner of response. LessHeard vanU (talk) 02:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
LHVU, I too am disappointed. I was genuinely pleased to see your return, but I have been saddened by this little saga, and am also glad it has not taken place in a more public forum. I wish that VegaDark had been afforded the same courtesy, and that before rushing to ANI, your friend who was concerned about VegaDark's action in respect of a category about you had taken heed of the notice at the top of the ANI page: before posting a grievance about a user here, please consider discussing the issue with them on their user talk page. It would also have been nice if that ANI discussion had opened without the bad faith assumption that the CFD responses were from people who're against social interaction between Wikipedians, on principle.
I stand by my comment about the COI aspect of this, because although you had no part in creating or populating the category, it is all about you personally. I also stand by my observation about the error of assuming that one highly unusual case indicates a wider problem with XFD, when you have offered no evidence that this is the case. That is the fallacy of hasty generalization. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:49, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I came here to offer a 'beer', or some other pictorial commiseration but find that most of what I would have said has already been better said by BHG. The 'lynch mob' mentality was not only unfair to you (how were you supposed to know what the category was?), it also prevented any serious discussion as to what the underlying purpose of usercats is. Sorry. Pincrete (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, it came as quite a surprise. Out of all the user categories I nominate, the particular one that prompted this I would have expected to be one of the least controversial and a near certainty of a successful nomination at the time - just some run of the mill user category cleanup I do from time to time. To arrive on my talk page to discover an AN/I notice along with a slew of comments that somehow agreed I had done something inappropriate was similar to stepping into the twilight zone. I will second the above in that I wish someone had come to my talkpage to discuss this prior to making a clearly inappropriate AN/I thread. It also very much assumed bad faith as opposed to considering my actions run of the mill cleanup work and that I had some sort of underhanded genda I was trying to achieve by getting this category deleted. VegaDark (talk) 04:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories[edit]

This is a notice that a discussion you participated in, either at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 8 has resulted in a Request for comment at Wikipedia talk:User categories#Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:39, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg AmortiasDeckillerBU Rob13
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg RonnotelIslanderChamal NIsomorphicKeeper76Lord VoldemortSherethBdeshamPjacobi

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
  • Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
  • A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Art+Feminism @ Portland Institute for Contemporary Art (March 18, 2017)[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Art+Feminism edit-athon, which will be held at the Portland Institute for Contemporary Art (415 Southwest 10th Avenue #300, Portland 97205) on Saturday, March 18, 2017 from 10:00am – 5:00pm. For more information, visit Eventbrite.

Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed XnualaCJOldelpasoBerean HunterJimbo WalesAndrew cKaranacsModemacScott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon @ PNCA Library (April 29, 2017)[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Art+Feminism edit-athon, which will be held at the Pacific Northwest College of Art (PNCA) Library at 511 NW Broadway on Saturday, April 29, 2017, from 11am to 4pm. For more information, visit the Facebook event page.

Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added KaranacsBerean HunterGoldenRingDlohcierekim
removed GdrTyreniusJYolkowskiLonghairMaster Thief GarrettAaron BrennemanLaser brainJzGDragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Meetup Invitation[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Asian Pacific American Heritage month edit-athon.

This will be held on the first floor of the Knight library at the University of Oregon.

For more information please see: Wikipedia:Meetup/Eugene/WikiAPA, a Facebook event link is also available on the Meetup page.

  • Date: Friday, May 26, 2017
  • Time: 12:00 pm – 4:00 pm
  • Location: Edminston Classroom, Knight Library, Room 144
  • Address:1501 Kincaid Street, Eugene, Oregon, 97403-1299

Hope to see you there!

(This message was sent to WikiProject members via Wikipedia:Meetup/Eugene/WikiAPA/MailingList on 23:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC). To opt-out of future messages please remove your name from the mailing list.)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017[edit]

ANEWSicon.png

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug BellDennis BrownClpo13ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusBYandmanBjarki SOldakQuillShyamJondelWorm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride at PNCA: Tuesday, June 27[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Wiki Loves Pride edit-athon, which will be held at the Pacific Northwest College of Art (511 NW Broadway) on Tuesday, June 27, 2017, from 5–8pm. For more information, visit the meetup page or Facebook event page.

Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017[edit]

ANEWSicon.png

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

added Happyme22Dragons flight
removed Zad68

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
  • A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
  • Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added AnarchyteGeneralizationsAreBadCullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
removed CpromptRockpocketRambo's RevengeAnimumTexasAndroidChuck SMITHMikeLynchCrazytalesAd Orientem

Guideline and policy news

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added NakonScott
removed SverdrupThespianElockidJames086FfirehorseCelestianpowerBoing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
  • Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
  • In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

  • Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added Boing! said ZebedeeAnsh666Ad Orientem
removed TonywaltonAmiDanielSilenceBanyanTreeMagioladitisVanamonde93Mr.Z-manJdavidbJakecRam-ManYelyosKurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
  • A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who play RPGs[edit]

This deleted category has been repopulated. Can we delete the entries from the user pages?

NB you don't need to alert me to the proposed deletion of silly categories. I only create them so they can be removed. Rathfelder (talk) 08:14, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

  • For red categories that are populated, and have been previously deleted via either CfD or speedy deleted via a G4 speedy deletion (for being too similar to a previously deleted category), I would consider it non-controversial if people checked the pages that are in the category to see if they have ever been removed. If they have never been removed before, then I think it is 100% appropriate to remove them (citing the CfD in question) like we would after the conclusion of a CfD. If they have been removed before and then re-added themselves, unfortunately there is no consensus what to do with this situation. I personally would advocate a policy that allows us to remove users from such categories, just like we would from a mainspace category if that were deleted, but that is a discussion that still needs to be settled. As for notifications I'll try and remember not to notify you from now on. VegaDark (talk) 08:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Roman Limes in the United Kingdom[edit]

Hi, You recently deleted a number of categories around Roman Limes or Walls under the C2 rule. While they were empty, this is only because they were emptied out of process. I thought that I had lodged appeals against their speedy deletion but must have missed a couple of categories. I was leaving time for the deletor to respond to my queries. I've received no reply so I was going to re-populate them. Can you please restore the categories? Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:48, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi @Laurel Lodged:, Yes, the categories in question must have been empty for 7 or more days, and I did not see any reason not to delete them. For any categories you wish for me to re-create, just feel free to repopulate those and I will happily restore the categories as no longer empty. I don't usually pre-emptively restore categories before they become re-populated, however. VegaDark (talk) 23:10, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

In a twisted way ...[edit]

... this is kind of funny. :)

Sorry, my friend, that you caught the flak on my behalf. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I foresaw this coming when you made this nomination, based on the experience I had last time. I thought it wouldn't be directed towards me though since I wasn't the nominator! I really wish the guideline would be respected. I can't imagine a group of users bum-rushing a discussion overriding any other guideline successfully. So few care about user categories that this somehow gets overlooked. I'm glad the keeps haven't bled much into the other discussions, at least, unlike the last time around (a few of those could probably renominated successfully now). VegaDark (talk) 05:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes, that's always a risk when there are multiple nominations in one day. However, except for the subset of editors who want to scrap the guideline and make user categories an extension of userspace, I think most editors broadly agree with the guideline. It's just that some editors seem to develop selective blindness when "their" category is being discussed. :) -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I wanted to share with you that I won't be nominating any user categories for a few days, until the issue with MP is resolved (first the civility issue, then the category issue). It does no good to delete a category if it's not depopulated. I think a pause would be good, but I'm hoping to hear your thoughts as well. -- Black Falcon (talk) 06:02, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

  • I agree the issues with MP need to be resolved. I'm glad you brought it to AN/I and I will be adding my .02 cents shortly. As for not nominating categories for a bit, that's fair. Personally I think dealing with the 99% of categories that will be successfully depopulated is worth the nominations. Even if we can't get consensus to force users to respect decisions by not punishing them for repopulating categories I would still consider the category work worthwhile as it's a small minority who won't respect the decisions and you have had good luck with {{fmbox}} solution for everyone but MP so far. VegaDark (talk) 07:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
  • @Black Falcon: After the really poor close at AN/I and the poor response on the closer's talk page, the only thing I can think of is starting a discussion on the CFD talk page or an RfC. We already had an RfC as you know, but it wasn't focused to this specific issue and instead was more on user categories in general. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
    You have my agreement/support if you choose to proceed, but to be honest, I don't think it's worth it at this particular time. There's still a lot of less-controversial cleanup to be done, and I worry that an RfC would distract from that. This does need to be addressed eventually, but I think we can have a more productive discussion when tempers have settled a bit and nerves are not quite so frayed. -- Black Falcon (talk) 06:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
    Perhaps a good idea. VegaDark (talk) 06:20, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming Wikipedia edit-a-thon dedicated to artists of color - Thursday, Oct. 26 at PNCA[edit]

On Thursday, October 26, a Wikipedia edit-a-thon dedicated to artists of color will be held from 4–8pm at the Pacific Northwest College of Art (511 NW Broadway). Learn more at Facebook. Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added LonghairMegalibrarygirlTonyBallioniVanamonde93
removed Allen3Eluchil404Arthur RubinBencherlite

Technical news

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed EricorbitPercevalThinggTristanbVioletriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, VegaDark. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded AnetodeLaser brainWorm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added None
removed BlurpeaceDana boomerDeltabeignetDenelson83GrandioseSalvidrim!Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added Lourdesdagger
removed AngelOfSadnessBhadaniChris 73CorenFridayMidomMike V
dagger Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon: Jewish Women Artists (March 8, Oregon Jewish Museum)[edit]

On March 8 (International Women's Day), the Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education and artist Shoshana Gugenheim will be hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon to create and improve Wikipedia articles about Jewish women artists. Click here for more information. You can also express interest or suggest articles to create or improve here. This event is free and open to the public, and will serve as both a public art action and a public educational program. Participation is welcome in person and remotely (for those outside of Portland). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon (March 10, Pacific Northwest College of Art)[edit]

On Saturday, March 10 (11am to 4pm), the Pacific Northwest College of Art (PNCA) will be hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon to create and improve Wikipedia articles about art, feminism, and women. You can read details on the Facebook event page, or this Wikipedia meetup page. Tutorials for new editors, reference materials, childcare, and refreshments will be provided. Bring your laptop, power cord and ideas for entries that need updating or creation. For the editing-averse, you're welcome to stop by to show your support! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added 331dotCordless LarryClueBot NG
removed Gogo DodoPb30SebastiankesselSeicerSoLando

Guideline and policy news

  • Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
  • Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
  • The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
  • The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

  • A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon (April 13, University of Oregon)[edit]

On Friday, April 13 (3pm to 6pm), the University of Oregon will be hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon to create and improve Wikipedia articles about art and feminism. You can learn more at the Dashboard page, or our Wikipedia meetup page. Tutorials for new editors, reference materials, and snacks will be provided. Please bring your laptop, power cord and ideas for entries that need updating or creation. For the editing-averse, we urge you to stop by to show your support and have snacks! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added None
removed ChochopkCoffeeGryffindorJimpKnowledge SeekerLankiveilPeridonRjd0060

Guideline and policy news

  • The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
  • A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

  • AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
  • When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
  • The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
  • There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added None
removed Al Ameer sonAliveFreeHappyCenariumLupoMichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
  • There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
  • It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

  • A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:00, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added PbsouthwoodTheSandDoctor
readded Gogo Dodo
removed AndrevanDougEVulaKaisaLTony FoxWilyD

Bureaucrat changes

removed AndrevanEVula

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.

Technical news

  • Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
  • Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon (Codemirror-icon.png) in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.

Miscellaneous

  • Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added Sro23
readded KaisaLYmblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
  • Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added None
removed AsterionCrisco 1492KFKudpungLizRandykittySpartaz
renamed Optimist on the runVoice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

added AmorymeltzerMr. StradivariusMusikAnimalMSGJTheDJXaosflux

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

Technical news

  • Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
  • Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
  • Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:23, 2 September 2018 (UTC)