This user has bureaucrat privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user is a member of the Bot Approvals Group.
This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
This user is a global abuse filter helper.
This user is registered on the Access to nonpublic information policy noticeboard.
This user has been editing Wikipedia for at least ten years.

User talk:xaosflux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Talk


Feel free to leave a comment or greeting at the bottom of this page.


Contents


My Talk Archives:
Archive-01 ~ Archive-02 ~ Archive-03
Archive-04 ~ Archive-05 ~ Archive-06
Archive-07 ~ Archive-08 ~ Archive-09
Archive-10 ~ Archive-11 ~ Archive-12
Archive-13 ~ Archive-14 ~ Archive-15
Archive-16 ~ Archive-17 ~ Archive-18
Archive-19 ~ Archive-20 ~ Archive-21
Archive-22 ~ Archive-23 ~ Archive-24
Archive-25 ~ Archive-26 ~ Archive-27
Archive-28 ~ Archive-29 ~ Archive-30
Archive-31 ~ Archive-32 ~ Archive-33
Archive-34 ~ Archive-35 ~ Archive-36
Display all archives (very large)


BAG News[edit]

BAG News August 2016
BAG laurier.svg

Greetings Bot Approvals Group member!

  • Please take a moment to review and update your status at the membership page. If you have been semi-inactive, we would love to have you back in action!
  • If you have not already, you may want to consider adding Wikipedia:BAG/Status to your watchlist, it is a bot generated list of all in progress requests.

Thank you! xaosflux Talk 23:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future BAG Spam by removing your name from this list.)


Modulo:Citazione on it.wiki[edit]

Thanks for the message, I fixed it:Modulo:Citazione as requested, and I fixed also another module with the same problem (it:Modulo:Tracce), I will check it:Categoria:Pagine che utilizzano tag HTML auto-chiusi non validi for other template/module with this problem.--Moroboshi (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


Question concerning discretionary sanctions[edit]

I noticed that you stopped in to fix a stray tag marking part of a discussion about a dead gorilla who was being compared to a Presidential candidate's chances in the 2016 election. (Though this struck many as unencyclopedic and misleading, an administrator kept "accidentally" reverting it). This same administrator has recently redirected the "political positions of Ralph Nader" to Nader's bio page (without any discussion or reinstating references added), and called for the deletion of the article "political positions of Jill Stein". Is this normal behavior for a "neutral" administrator?

My question concerning discretionary sanctions (I have been banned from the topic Jill Stein by Nuclear Warfare) is: "Do I have the right to ask the question above (Is this normal behavior for a "neutral" administrator?)". My question concerning the problem of the page hack : "Is anyone looking into this?"

Thank you for your time. SashiRolls (talk) 12:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello SashiRolls, if you have concerns about an edit that I made, I will be happy to review any edit I made, if you can provide me the diff link. For this instance, even if the edit was related to your topic banned area I think it is OK for you to provide me the link, especially if it was related to an edit made in my capacity as an administrator. Prolonged discussion may not be available if against your topic ban but I will review and at least make a short reply for you. Regarding your other questions - most high profile pages are heavily watched by other editors, and most editors strive to maintain quality and neutrality. As your questions about the actions of the other administrator are specifically related to article content in the are you are topic banned from - you don't really get to follow up on it. Deletion discussions are also highly watched by many editors - and failed deletion nominations are common. I understand you are interested in these topics - but as you have active sanctions, if you wish to continue to help us build the encyclopedia I suggest you edit in other areas. — xaosflux Talk 15:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
It is just the fact that the process is supposed to be a process and not an administrator quietly deciding to redirect long-standing pages (related to Green political postions), as has been done for Political positions of Cynthia McKinney (a reasonably well-referenced page from what I see from the history, certainly not a redirect candidate) and Political positions of Ralph Nader (which did need better referencing, but could have been improved). This is the work of the same administrator that led me to add the faulty tag that you corrected here (diff). I've been editing in other areas, and am observing and will continue to observe the strictest silence on the pages in question. I'm waiting to see how this develops to formulate my appeal. SashiRolls (talk) 15:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the link, my edit was purely technical in nature, and I find no fault in whoever introduced the technical error (it is currently transparent to readers until a new software release that this is preparing for) - there have been thousands of these to clean up across all pages. As for your content and topic concerns - have faith that other editors will continue to care for pages in your absence from editing them and go in to any future appeal proceedings with a calm manner. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 16:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the sound of advice, xaosflux :) And thanks for your work, I've learned a lot from all this. SashiRolls (talk) 16:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


Changing content models[edit]

Hey xaosflux. Per wikitech-l all users with the move userright will be able to change the content model of pages (editcontentmodel) beginning 12 September. For us that means (auto)confirmed and page movers (and admins who already have it). A Phabricator task to change who is assigned the right can be created. I don't think it should be granted to page movers since it doesn't apply to moving pages. I'm not sure if (auto)confirmed should have it or not. I think MMS is a reasonable candidate if we revoke it from (auto)confirmed. Maybe template editors? Thoughts? Should an RfC or proposal be dawn up for discussion at a VPR? (I thought you would be interested.) — JJMC89(T·C) 20:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

JJMC89 I read the phab ticket, and they are usually worded a bit different then they are implemented. As far as enwiki goes, what I suspect will occur is that (editcontentmodel) permission will be added to the Autoconfirmed users and Confirmed users (they probably wont bother with page mover since it is an enwiki specific group). As rights are cumulative, unless enwiki makes a decision to not give this to (auto)confirmed users it is moot if it is actually also deployed to out custom pagemovers group. I don't think giving it to move enabled groups is a good idea - and have commented at phab:T85847. If the sysadmins decide too bad - this is our new default because something something flow something something - then we can poll enwiki and request that enwiki is different. — xaosflux Talk 00:50, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
It is being explicitly granted to page movers (extendedmover) per this commit (line 7788). I agree, I don't think it is a good idea – I don't think it is similar to moving. Users who are granted the right should be expected to know how and when to (not) use it. Deploying it to the masses is likely to lead to problems. — JJMC89(T·C) 01:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
JJMC89 please see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#restrict_changecontentmodel_permission. — xaosflux Talk 02:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Xaosflux, are you able to change the contentmodel of Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page? — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 02:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
It is able to be targeted, but I don't want to break that page - let me see if there is somewhere else to try. — xaosflux Talk 02:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Andy M. Wang Attempting to change to model on testwiki:Talk:ET43 fails with error The flow-board content model does not support direct editing. — xaosflux Talk 02:40, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. What about a direct topic like testwiki:Topic:T6442d08n4xqo3ia? — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 02:42, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Same The flow-board content model does not support direct editing. — xaosflux Talk 02:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Xaosflux. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png I was eating cookies when I got your mass email about the Extended page protection. Thanks for keeping everybody informed and your work on Wikipedia:Administrators/Message list itself. I share my cookies with you. Jason Quinn (talk) 20:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Question[edit]

I realise that there is no deadline, however my bot request has been open for 8 days, and counting. I know that bots such as JJMC8789 bot task 7 take a longer time to process, but mine is extremely simple and only affects a bit over 1,000 pages. Thanks, Dat GuyTalkContribs 09:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

I'll try to get to this in the next 2 days; I think most of the other WP:BAG guys are busy too. — xaosflux Talk 12:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Aand responded again. Dat GuyTalkContribs 14:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
And again. Dat GuyTalkContribs 05:43, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
And again, hopefully for the last time. Sorry if this is nudging you. Dat GuyTalkContribs 16:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Policies for dealing with new articles at NPP & AfC[edit]

HI. Following 5 years of unstructured discussion, a dedicated venue has been created for combined discussion about NPP & AfC where a work group is also being composed to develop recommendations for necessary changes to policies and related software. It is 'not an RfC, it is a call for genuinely interested users who have significant experience in these areas to join a truly proactive work group. There is some reading to be done before signing up. See: Wikipedia:The future of NPP and AfC. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-40[edit]

21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Right-patrol[edit]

Hi Xaosflux, I notice that when I use/hide the tool, the "Mark this page as patrolled" disappears/appears. I'm a bit shady on the technical details of (patrol), but I believe this right gives users the ability to "Mark this page as patrolled", as well as use the Page Curation tool to apply deletion tags, review pages, etc, right? If that is the case, perhaps MediaWiki:Right-patrol deserves a clarification? — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 01:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

(patrol) permissions are currently required to use the page curation tool; check out Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/RfC for patroller qualifications and lets see where that goes before expanding the definition - I'm fairly sure it is not changing and there is just a verbiage mixup going on at that page. — xaosflux Talk 02:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
I checked the core code myself and it's apparent that MediaWiki:markaspatrolledtext-file is related to (patrol) as well. While the NPP RfC has mostly focused on getting competent patrollers for new articles, its implications for non-admin file patrollers have not been discussed as far as I know. (reupload) needs repatrolling. It seems that the new right would need to be reassigned based on competence in article evaluation or competence in file patrolling, but that seems to be out of scope of the current RfC. Any thoughts? A potential workaround is to split file patrol from (patrol), but I don't know what the dev cost increase would be. — Andy W. (talk) 00:43, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
What kind of workload are we talking about here New Unpatrolled Files currently only has 1 file backlog, and of the last 5000 manual patrols performed, only 69 are to the File: namespace, and most of those look like they are from people who would fairly easily qualify for Patrol access. — xaosflux Talk 02:57, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

RfC for page patroller qualifications[edit]

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:51, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Self-closed tag pages keep drifting into the category[edit]

Category:Pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags is adding new pages all the time, despite its being nearly three months old, and based on some insource searches I have done, many thousands of pages have yet to be added. Examples: 3,777 pages, 223 pages, 173 pages, 118 pages, 133 pages (with some false positives, but mostly error pages).

Can you please run Fluxbot 6 through the current contents of the category to fix the easy cases? That will enable human editors to focus on the tricky ones. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:08, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Jonesey95 I sure will - likely in the next couple of days. The category slowly populates by the software for pages that are not actively edited. — xaosflux Talk 13:05, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
The pages listed here could also use a pass by the bot so that editing them doesn't clog watchlists. They have self-closed span tags within "includeonly" sections, so the pages themselves do not show up in the category, but pages that transclude them are in the category. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:57, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I see that the bot is plowing through the category. Nice work! Note that Category:User pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags has been split from the main category for some reason. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jonesey95 was just about to ping you, at start of current run there were 4291 pages, run 1 just finished lowering it to 2284; the split is good - we really should concentrate on Articles first - because they are most likely to impact readers. — xaosflux Talk 16:25, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! There are only four article-space pages in the category right now, at least according to a petscan search, and no templates. I'll see if I can fix those right now.
I did some null edits on the results of insource searchs to add about 3,000 pages to the category. I'll be off-wiki for a day or two, but I have a few more searches to do that will probably add a few hundred more pages. I may ping you for another run after that. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
This bot task is primarily fully supervised, if you find a very very explicit pattern with high use I may run it semi-supervised (spot check mode) on it. This has been good for cleaning up things like old broken user signatures, but the error rate is too high if the pattern is not very specific. — xaosflux Talk 16:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
We're making good progress. It looks like you got about 3,000 articles out of the category on your last bot run, and I got another 800 or so out over the last few days. I have added a few hundred more to the User/User Talk subcategory through insource searches and null edits, and both categories are ready for another pass. I have noticed that many of the errors in these pages are caused by editors' signatures. Here are a few patterns that have cropped up quite a bit, and their replacements:
  • \<b\/\>fan71\<nowiki\/\>fan71 (User Kornfan71)
  • \<\/sup\/\>\<p style=\"font\-family\<p style=\"font\-family'); (User Journalist)
  • pie\]\]\<sup\/\>\pie\]\]\<sup\> (User Illogicalpie)
There may be more editor sigs that you find, but these are the most common that I have found. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Anarchism sidebar[edit]

Consensus will never be reached because there are two intractable sides, at least one of which has resisted mediation. By locking the page you unilaterally have declared victory for one of the sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.221.197 (talk) 02:27, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Other than stopping an editing war, I have no specific interest in that template. If there is a change you would like to propose for that page, please list what you want it changed to and make an edit request on the talk page. For more information on resolving disputes, please see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. — xaosflux Talk 04:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary[edit]

Two years ago ...
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
speedy keep
... you were recipient
no. 998 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:27, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-41[edit]

20:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Motion picture rating system[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Motion picture rating system. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016[edit]

Tech News: 2016-42[edit]

16:43, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Phab task[edit]

Hey xaos, wanted to ask if you might have time to look over a draft for the phabricator task for the recent RfC on userpage protection. I'm still working at it, but not having a lot of experience writing these up before, I wanted to get a second set of eyes on it, and it seems like you have some experience in this area. If you're too busy or not interested, that's fine too, just let me know. Thanks, I JethroBT drop me a line 17:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I JethroBT To start with, all of the technical goals (not the programming code) need to be very clearly spelled out and attached to the RfC. These should be of the "one thing per line" type variety. This change is likely not of the "easy" variety for developers overall - however some portions of it may be able to be introduced in pieces. If you start drafting these line by line onwiki, I can help make sure they make sense prior to throwing this in to phab (and it may be in to multiple phab tickets). For an example, see the "Summary of under the covers technical changes" on Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/RfC_for_patroller_qualificationsxaosflux Talk 00:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: Thanks. I've started a draft in my userspace here. I've tried to keep it fairly simple, and pointed to settings that may need to change based on feedback in the RfC and a little of my own research on MediaWiki. I can see how these changes may not be simple, though I'm not sure how to break these up into more specific technical goals. Any suggestions? I JethroBT drop me a line 21:51, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

RevDel Request[edit]

Hello, Xaosflux. I would like to request revision deletion under R2 for this edit on my userpage. Also, if there is some alternative way that I'm supposed to use to request this that I didn't know about, I would be glad to hear about it. Thanks for looking at this request, Gluons12 | 19:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC).

Yes check.svg Done Gluons12 this is completed - you can also see Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#How_to_request_Revision_Deletion. — xaosflux Talk 19:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Gluons12 | 19:36, 17 October 2016 (UTC).

Thanks...[edit]

for the barnstar. I would have cleared it the other day but Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Raging Fire (band) confused me. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Culture by city[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Category talk:Culture by city. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
9 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Litipara (Vidhan Sabha constituency) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
28,026 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B World War I (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
108 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Arabic verbs (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
30 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Reading Is Fundamental (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
393 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Wig (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
917 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B China Airlines (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
47 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Turkey fryer (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
82 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Criticism of the Federal Reserve (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
286 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Oktoberfest celebrations (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
69 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Air rage (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
3,958 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Poseidon (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
65 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start EU–US Open Skies Agreement (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
198 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Standby (air travel) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
116 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Evacuation slide (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
93 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Gate (airport) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
841 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: GA Yelp (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
302 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Airline reservations system (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
1,066 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Confederate States Army (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
5 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Gordon Penrose (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
79 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B Criticism of eBay (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
1,843 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Gender role (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
7 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Algeria, History and Civilization (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
3 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA A. D. Roy (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
5 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Ali Al Numairy (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
50 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Hair roller (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
16 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start The Dolphins of Pern (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
91 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Dolos (mythology) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
10 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Growth of knowledge (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
6 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Eurotrochilus (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
7 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Unended Quest (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:57, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-43[edit]

17:39, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-44[edit]

16:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian new page patrollers[edit]

Could you please empty the Category:Wikipedian new page patrollers of patrollers, I don't know how to do it. There is no need to delete the cat itself. These are the ones that remain after deleting the userbox templates that were transcluded but not subst'ed. I've explained at WT:PERM why this needs to be done. It's so tat I can send the mass message to all former 1,800 users on the list you made so that if they are still around (roughly 50% of them are/were never genuine patrollers, and many others are simply no longer editing),I can send the mass message encouraging those who might still be around to apply for the new right. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:48, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@Kudpung: there is no "simple" way to empty a category - it requires going to everywhere it is in use and removing it - if it is in a template (like a userbox) it can be updated in one place (and it looks like it may have been) - but for everyone who just slapped the category on their page usually a bot needs to go do it - and there are bots that will do this following a WP:CFD. I created the CFD for you, please enter the rationale here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_1#Category:Wikipedian_new_page_patrollers. If you want the existing members of the category removed, "delete" is fine - if you want them moved to a new category change this to "rename". — xaosflux Talk 12:24, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I've just completed the deletion rationale. I suppose for everyone who just slapped the category on their page a bot will be needed to go do it.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Xaosflux. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dat GuyTalkContribs 12:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Xaosflux. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers.
Message added 01:17, 2 November 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:Klaatu[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Klaatu. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Admin newsletter[edit]

I've suggested that here should be a regular newsletter for admins (see details at User talk:MusikAnimal#PERM). Would you be interested in being part of a small editorial team? I see you have recently created an admin mass mailing list. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

'Crat question[edit]

Hey, I am thinking about trying for an RfA again. (Yeah, I know...) My question is how things have changed since last fall in terms of who monitors !voter and comment behavior and other supervision of the process -- My understanding is that it is the 'crats. During my previous RfA there was a fair amount of chaos. In general, I was just wondering about the changes in policies that govern RfAs and if you had any suggestions for how to keep things a bit calmer than they were last year if I throw my hat in again. I know where isn't anything more to be done about things like this or the off-wiki doxxing that occurred, but I am wondering how the RfA world could handle round two of me trying for RfA. Montanabw(talk) 08:56, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Montanabw, RfA is still contentious and as you had the second most opposed (by !votes) application in the last 3 years (2014, 2015, 2016) you may expect to get a lot of scrutiny and be prepared to address any concerns that were raised last year. Civility enforcement on the RfA page is ultimately maintained by 'crats and most of us do watch the pages - but we try not to get involved with anything that may steer the results. There is a recent discussion about moving certain discussions to the RfA talk pages you may want to look at as well. — xaosflux Talk 15:18, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Fascinating, and thanks for the link. I commented. Oh, I do expect scrutiny next time around. My concern is, the concern about steering the results by inconsistent action ... in my case, all sorts of people were moving and deleting other people's stuff, and in one case, a !voting admin was selectively removing some comments of other people -- arguably, anyone who !voted should not be allowed to do any of that. It would be useful if one can point to consistent rules about WHO can alter comments! In addition, I was VERY troubled by the things that wound up revdeled after the AfC closed (which should have been struck by a neutral "traffic cop" at the time), and things like the person (a now-indef blocked editor) who kept altering their comments without using strkeout or other indicia so people knew that that editor had done so, thus creating a false record of the discussion. My primary concern is that I am unclear how to handle such things if they happen this year and would be interested in a better understanding of what is a 'crat issue, what might be an oversighter issue and what is a "any random person can do this-- except the candidate" situation. I need to stay above the fray, but there times when I really wanted to say something last year (mostly the items I pointed out here). I am actually saying this not only for myself, but other controversial candidates. Montanabw(talk) 20:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Montanabw, going right back to the reform project I led at WP:RFA2011 the community has formly rejected the introduction od any official mechanism for clerking' the RfAs. Bureaucrats have not been given any additional powers and the right (or more accurately, the possibility) for absolutely anyone to mess with the process whether constructively or disruptively still remains. And whether those interventions are constructive or disruptive also remains very much open to debate. The spite, nastiness, and disingenuous voting that pervades RfA still continues unabated, and with total impunity. The recent (Dec 2015) round of reforms did nothing to improve the situation - leaving the question: What was the ultimate purpose of those reforms? They certainly have not encouraged more candidates of the right calibre to come forward. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Correct, not much "powers and rights" - I agree it is still a messy area. Wikipedia:2015 administrator election reform/Phase II/Clerking RfC was the closet that came regarding "clerking" by 'crats - though no crat is required to do this. — xaosflux Talk 02:42, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Kudpung's comments about the problems are spot on. The messiness of the process is a barrier to people becoming candidates at RfA. It is an issue and over the long term, a concern. If the community can police itself, that would be a good thing to see. I think a very simple solution would be to either have uninvolved, non-voting admins who agree to clerk, or perhaps have one supporter and one opponent to agree to !vote and then work together to fairly and equally supervise the process. Montanabw(talk) 08:05, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

MassMessage[edit]

Well, to be honest, I've tried mass-message, and have not been pleased. It doesn't work at all as well as I'd like it to - I returned to using AWB because it allows me more control over what pages I hit with the message. I know there's supposed to be a way that I can create a list of pages and use mass-message to target those, rather than a category, but I haven't been able to make it work yet. If you could point me towards a tutorial, or explain to me how I could do something like that, I'd be happy to return to the mass-message function. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Mass-messaging with categories is problematic. I send messages for the Guild of Copy Editors using a list of user names that lives on a page, and it works well for me. These are the short instructions another editor made for me.Jonesey95 (talk) 03:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
OK. I've figured out what I need to do to make mass-messaging work, I think. Should be OK from here on out. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Good deal! — xaosflux Talk 02:18, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-45[edit]

23:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

NPR phases[edit]

Hi Xaosflux, wanted to follow up on the second phase separately. I believe the ~41 remaining users listed at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers/List3 accorded should be evaluated "eventually" (a week or two if really need be). It may be seen as unfair that some editors are not evaluated on that list based on their alphabetical positioning.

Side note: as one who suggested the phased approach on the RfC and on the ticket, and despite support from devs on the ticket, didn't mean to overcomplicate this stage if it did... was a good faith suggestion to help with the technical permissions transition, since it involved a revocation. Didn't mean to step out of my purview if I did, and apologies that I myself am unable to help with the list. — Andy W. (talk) 01:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't bother me any, I'm just trying to get a feel if the community thinks we have satisfied or not satisfied the RfC closing provisions. — xaosflux Talk 02:03, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Andy M. Wang, there are no rules on Wikipedia about the order in which items on a list should be addressed. I abandoned the list because (not in order)
  • nobody else was prepared to help with the list in spite of asking
  • nobody could find a way of creating a proper list anyway, despite the presence of some seasoned IT geeks on this particular project
  • There was no proper sequence or coordination of the various items to be carried out before the right was rolled out, categories created, and PERM going live.
  • For the work on the NPP project I started 4 years ago and dedicated 1000s of hours to and finally got consensus for, when I pointed out all the above issues, I was told that I was no longer required.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Confirmation status[edit]

Thank you so much!

Actually I lied, this is not my account at all, I just found it on BugMeNot. (And it wasn't that easy either BTW -- did you know that Wikipedia is still available on it (and similar sites) under wikipedia.com or alternate domain components such as xx.wikipedia.org or wikipedia.xx? (I'm telling you that because I hope that you -- meaning, Wikipedia -- won't be able to prevent *all* combinations on *all* such sites anyway...))

Though still, the reason I obtained this account and asked for the permission *was* in good faith. I was hoping to (I just didn't get to owing to lack of time) use it to tell a certain admin who has semi-protected his talk page that he's being a harmful clown for blanket-removing a certain edit of mine.

And no, that edit was not insulting at all. It was about reinstating a certain simple good faith template I made. It was completely apolitical (didn't use a single word of human language), using #exprs, CSS border radii, et c., and removed only because of (another admin's) technical incompetence.

Why not give it a look and restore the template (or give other users feedback if it's unfitting the wiki for any reason, if you feel like it)?

Regards! ~~~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiktoria14 (talkcontribs)

  • Blocked, locked. However will follow up with admin with spp talk page. — xaosflux Talk 03:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
    • Target talk page is no longer locked from editing, was a short term temporary measure. — xaosflux Talk 03:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Damn[edit]

Oops, I figured I'd screw something up. Thanks for fixing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:50, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow :) — xaosflux Talk 18:51, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

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) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Mailing2[edit]

I have just completed a triage of this list (which took several hours), but suddenly it no longer displays its content. Its edit history is intact and the content is there when viewed from the 'edit' mode. Why is this? Is there anything you can do? I believe it happened when I created the talk page for the list.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Checking right now, I'll fix it one way or another! — xaosflux Talk 03:49, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
@Kudpung: Yes check.svg Done I think there is a bug of some kind in that extension, possibly related to copy pasting that may include invisible right-to-left text markers. — xaosflux Talk 03:54, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks:) I'll just finish a second quick triage run then get the newsletter out. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Newsletter sent to just under 1,500 users. I didn't realise until too late that the debug tweaks you made restored all the users I triaged out of the list (I was working on a backup list on my hard disc). Never mind, around 50 of them were indef blocked, while the vast majority of the rest were either users whose only edit (or one of their first 5 or so edits) was to add the userbox to their user page never to edit again, users who have not edited for many years, or users with extremely low edit counts. All as I anticipated (mainly based on the complex NPP survey I designed and ran a few years ago) in which the total list came to 3,937 users having patrolled new pages, excluding blocked editors. Of the non-blocked users:
  • 2,504 came from Scottywong's list of patrollers;
  • 1,300 self-identified with a “new page patroller” userbox;
  • 133 self-identified with a “this user uses Twinkle...” userbox.

Of the users asked to fill in the survey, only 1,255 responded which after removing the nonsense responses only 304 were left. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Wow lot of work there! Good job! — xaosflux Talk 05:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm about to send a newsletter to all admins informing them of the new user right. Could you please check it out. It's here. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:19, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Kudpung It seems OK, there is a mailing list here: Wikipedia:Administrators/Message list. — xaosflux Talk 13:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Competing bots?[edit]

This looks odd. - Brianhe (talk) 05:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Brianhe The robot wars have begun! Actually, that was a run of User:Fluxbot#Task5 for Special:PermaLink/749415268#Bot_mistake_help, rollback of a malfunctioning bot. — xaosflux Talk 05:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Also, looks like I didn't the the bot assert to work with rollback since it didn't have admin (markbotedits) access - apologies for any recent changes flood. — xaosflux Talk 06:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Bot war[edit]

GreenC bot appears to be in an edit war with Fluxbot, as indicated by these edits:

DonFB (talk) 05:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@DonFB: Please see the section right above this one. — xaosflux Talk 05:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
I've noticed a few situations lately where you've jumped in to help with a challenging task. Just want to make sure you know it isn't going unnoticed — thanks S Philbrick(Talk) 18:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-46[edit]

19:18, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers[edit]

Hi Xaosflux.

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)

Messasge List[edit]

Hi. I've spent an hour trying to create a message list at Special:CreateMassMessageList but either the instructions are not clear or I'm missing something (probably the latter). Within the New Page Reviewer project I need a list called Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants message list. The list to import is here. Can you help? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done @Kudpung: the list has been made, it can be tricky. There are two entries on your import list you may need to review and add if they are needed: user talk:** {{user3|JJBers Public ; user talk:**{{user2|Sandgem Addict. — xaosflux Talk 15:17, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up about those two. Sandgem was a false positive, but I have removed JJBers from the list and from reviewing drafts at AfC. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Main page[edit]

Yes, that was legitimately me. — xaosflux Talk 03:20, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Extended content
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Yes, that was legitimately me. ~~~~

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Encryption Desktop 10.3.1 (Build 13100)
Charset: utf-8

wj8DBQFYK9CS1FANkJA0rpgRAvAAAJwOmFm/4sBW2SFua5AbLU2Pac6HNACfWyFT
1dJIdvqffjeOZKCaQwF8YmA=
=ixfD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Legobot (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Watchlist notice[edit]

Hi Xaos, hope you're well. I'm a little concerned we're still seeing admin accounts compromised - do you think a watchlist notice urging users to change passwords would be appropriate? -- samtar talk or stalk 13:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Not yet, this is being discussed on the mailing list - as far as admins go we already mass messages all of them. If this is to the point where we want to encourage all editors to act we should do a sitenotice, not a watchlist notice - but I think it is premature right now; we can discuss on VP if you'd like to get more input. — xaosflux Talk 14:28, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Worth noting I boldly created the edit request for it, which was done - I agree discussion is needed to deal with the long term solution, but with account compromises as recent as hours ago I think now is the time to get people resetting passwords or enabling 2FA -- samtar talk or stalk 14:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
It won't hurt - the massmessae should have gotten ahold of the admins already - but if we need all the editors, then sitenotice-logged-in is the way to go. — xaosflux Talk 14:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, is this being tracked anywhere on phab/elsewhere? I'm sub'd to T150605 but I would imagine (hope?) there is incident documentation going on -- samtar talk or stalk 14:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
FWIW, I read the mass message, followed up on what to do, found it terribly complicated and/or needing paid subscriptions to external services, that I gave up on it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
@Kudpung: you may find the simple guide which Ritchie and I have written useful -- samtar talk or stalk 21:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
We have updated the help page considerably over the last few days - you should not need to purchase any subscription services, but you will need generally need a tablet or smartphone. — xaosflux Talk 22:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer[edit]

Hi Xaosflux. I noticed that my new page feed has become different (the yellow highlighting is absent now on unreviewed pages), probably because of the New Page Reviewer right addition. I noticed at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers that there is a Grandfather clause: "Users who made at least 200 uncontested patrols between 1 January 2016 and 6 October 2016 will be accorded the right by administrators without the need to apply at WP:PERM." I have 200 plus uncontested manual patrolled edits between these dates. Would you please be able to accord the said flag to me? I have read the tutorial and have a clean CSD log with only two rejections in all my CSD tags till date, both which got eventually deleted. Thank you. Lourdes 06:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Lourdes I did a quick check of your [31]log for the grandfathering status, there may possibly be a database issue but it looks like you were just short of the automatic requirement (only patrols of "new articles" were in the count and the "automatic" patrols don't count). I don't normally do a lot with NPR, so may be missing something. I suggest you drop a request over at WP:PERM, they have been getting resolved fairly quickly. If you mention your prior CSD log and that you have already reviewed WP:NPR and Wikipedia:Page_Curation/Help (which is a newer new-page patrolling utility that you may find greatly helps-it takes a little getting used to but is better for dealing with the non-speedy deletion type new pages) I don't think you should have any issue getting set up. — xaosflux Talk 12:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Sure do. Thanks for the reply. Will apply at perm. Lourdes 13:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again. Applied and got the flag. Would actually assist me at NPR. Thanks. Lourdes 01:49, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Good deal, if you haven't take 5 mins to explore the Curation hoverbar - you might like it! — xaosflux Talk 02:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I actually had used it before. The new updated version is definitely better. Thanks for the nudge :) Lourdes 13:21, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Xaosflux. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 01:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tech News: 2016-47[edit]

15:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Xaosflux. 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)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
252 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B First class (aviation) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
284 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Narrow-body aircraft (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
222 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Double-deck aircraft (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
4,539 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Global Positioning System (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
8 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start The Yellow Crucifixion (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
245 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Hair clipper (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
110 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Black Canary in other media (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
28 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Sandia High School (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
76 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Shenandoah (beard) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
961 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Airbus A300 (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
200 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Flight dispatcher (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
3,468 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Yahoo! (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
3,282 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: C Computer keyboard (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
374 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Star City (comics) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
307 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: Start Aircraft seat map (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
13 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C ZNAP (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
49 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Comlux (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
1,638 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Markdown (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
8 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Edris Rice-Wray Carson (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
5 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Impression (Dragonriders of Pern) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
131 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Regional jet (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
12 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Samantha Greenberg (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
5 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Mangrove Care Forum Bali (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
2 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Jean Stuart (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
119 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Nestlé Chunky (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
14 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Velvet-purple coronet (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
170 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Alexander Nylander (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
8 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Roc-A-Fella Billionaires (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
47 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Landing card (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
5 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Rock-A-Bye (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:11, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

One quick request again[edit]

Hi Xaosflux :) One quick request again. In September, I had requested and you had helped me by unchecking the auto patroller and reviewer flags. Katie has been kind enough to give the rollback bit. Might I request you to please add back the reviewer and auto patrol bit? Thanks and cheers. Lourdes 02:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lourdes: - Yes check.svg Donexaosflux Talk 03:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Oh thank you so much. Lourdes 03:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

NOINDEX in mainspace[edit]

I was reading through the latest NPP RfC and related threads and noticed something I'm apparently confused about. I figure you'd probably know :) Much has been made of the possible dangers of "bad" new articles getting indexed by search engines. Speedy tags apply {{NOINDEX}}, but is it actually the case that new articles are not indexed until patrolled? I don't believe that was true last year (last time I had a reason to notice), but I may be behind. WP:NOINDEX seems to be out of date. I tried to test it by creating an article with my sock, but was lucky enough that it was patrolled quickly. (Yet the article still isn't indexed on google, and others I created today with my main account are... unfortunately I don't have enough articles stored up for any more sampling :) Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:59, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

@Opabinia regalis: (no)indexing isn't always an exact science. Since October 2016 (c.f. phab:T147544) new articles get an html attribute applied <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"/> until they are patrolled (or until 90 days go by, I haven't tested that). This attribute is also applied if the article contains a deletion tag such as {{speedy}}. Note, this is similar, but not identical to the behavior that __NOINDEX__ uses. There is a configuration parameter $wgExemptFromUserRobotsControl that prevents the INDEX, NOINDEX magic words from overriding the namespace default (which for Namesapce:0 (Article) is set to INDEX). This is to prevent vandals from NOINDEX'ing random pages out of search. The noindex meta tab is merely a request to web crawlers - Google generally honors these - but some search engine may not. Finally, being available for indexed doesn't require or "push" a notice to all of the search providers of the world - it is up to them to fetch and index a page - sometimes this is fast, sometimes it takes a long time. Hope this helps. — xaosflux Talk 14:06, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I know it's not a push notification that pops up immediately; it's just very noticeable that I created three articles yesterday on very similar topics, and the two created by this account were indexed immediately, but the one that needed "patrolling" is still absent. Hardly statistically significant, but I hadn't given it much thought because most of my articles are on very obscure topics and they usually pop up in google searches for the title near-instantly. I suppose we'll have to at least update the boilerplate for autopatrolled - the conventional wisdom is that the user right doesn't benefit the holder, but does benefit others by saving them some work; that's clearly no longer true if we assume that people create new articles because they want others to find and read them.
Anyway, thanks for the phab link, that's what I was looking for. Opabinia regalis (talk) 20:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Opabinia regalis I can't find the documentation - but I hear that google does follow our new pages feed - but that non-autopatrolled page (autopatrol is included in your sysop group) would have been skipped - so now it would have to wait to get spider-indexed. I'm assuming you are referring to New Jersey polyomavirus. I pulled the source on it, and it is not (now) flagged for noindex. I made a minor edit on it, that may help kickstart indexing on an external site. Please note, none of this behavior has changed due to removing the patrol behavior from autoconfirmed users - non-autopatrolled editors woudl still have needed someone else to mark their page as patrolled. This indexing behavior is likely different due to the October software update. — xaosflux Talk 20:49, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Opabinia regalis FYI - I used google webmaster tools to submit a request to crawl that page now - and now it is the #2 search result: google-result-here. — xaosflux Talk 20:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
p.s. google has massive caches - I got it to show me that result, but when reloading its not up - their index will take a little time to replicate. — xaosflux Talk 20:57, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Ahhh, if google is directly following the new pages feed then that would make sense. Thanks, I see it now! (The other two articles are MW polyomavirus and STL polyomavirus, which were autopatrolled and indexed right away.) Opabinia regalis (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer - RfC[edit]

Hi Xaosflux. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:30, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Module:Shortcut/Sandbox[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Module:Shortcut/Sandbox, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Module:Shortcut/Sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Module:Shortcut/Sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pppery 18:44, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

bot on pl.wiki[edit]

Your bot are destroyng references: [40], [41], [42] and some other. Malarz pl (talk) 07:45, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Replied to you at w:pl:Dyskusja wikipedysty:Malarz pl. — xaosflux Talk 13:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Fluxbot request[edit]

Can Fluxbot please make a run through Category:User pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags? It looks like it is stable and not adding new pages via the job queue, and it has a lot of bot-fixable tags. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: I'm not getting many hits in there with my current replace options (and I'm running about 40 of them at once) - do you see any specific patterns that are highly repeated? — xaosflux Talk 16:50, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm seeing lots of p/ and some h2/ and some /br and a little span/. Those are all bot-fixable. Others require manual oversight, which I can do. I was hoping you could clean out the easy ones for me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: I got some, the /br's are broken, but they are not causing this categorization; the h2's should be good; the p's are a mess because it is not a simple <p/> replacement to something, sometimes it should be removed, sometimes swapped to </p> and sometimes replaced with line breaks or with <p></p>. I've run in to a few problem with the span regex I'm tweaking a bit more. — xaosflux Talk 17:49, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Get what you can. I'll chip away at the rest. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:50, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Lists[edit]

Sorry to bother you but I wonder if you could make a list for me again (I really need to learn to do this myself, but the instructions are too vague to follow. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Kudpung Not a bother at all! List created here: Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter list. You can create a blank list using: Special:CreateMassMessageList and if you have a list of names like you did you can use 'Edit' on it to dump them in. The MMS content pages are a bit fragile, they don't like much in the description and can break with some users with certain special characters in their names. — xaosflux Talk 15:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:35, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

New Page Review - newsletter[edit]

Hello Xaosflux,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
Breaking the back of the backlog
We now have 285 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.
Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.


Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

Tech News: 2016-48[edit]

21:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Royal free city[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Royal free city. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Rollback[edit]

Hello! I just wanted to know if it's okay to add a comment like the one I did to a user's rollback request, the one you just marked as not done. Adotchar| reply here 22:41, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Adotchar: It isn't normally necessary - closing admin typically go through those type of stats - it is "okay" in that there is no policy against it; if you have specific information that is not obvious from statistics (like 'this diff shows user X vandalized article Y) that type of information is usually welcome. Happy editing, — xaosflux Talk 22:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I get bored sometimes and do some quick checks for people and just state it, instead of having admins go through his stats. Adotchar| reply here 00:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
If you were to look at my account now, would you say I would qualify for rollback permissions? I don't have it yet, and I need it for STiki. Adotchar| reply here 00:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
replied at User_talk:Widr#Rollback. — xaosflux Talk 01:06, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Infobox_television[edit]

Your edit on the television infobox [47] is causing problems in cases like this and this where information about the second title is in parenthesis. Is there a way around this? Could you revert it if there isn't? Grapesoda22 (talk) 06:49, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Bureaucrat chat[edit]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Godsy/Bureaucrat chat

I would be grateful for your input in the above discussion. Many thanks, WJBscribe via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:33, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-49[edit]

18:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

MusikBot II[edit]

What's the procedure for getting the bot/admin bits? Should I post at WP:BN? No rush, just curious :) I know you're super busy! And actually expect an email from me soon... :) MusikAnimal talk 18:51, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

If it isn't action after another day or so, post at BN for someone to review the closed BRFA for flagging. I would only do it if it was posted at BN and all the other crats ignore it - since I was the BAG approver. Note: dealing with the onhold RFA is a bit more priority for crats today :D — xaosflux Talk 19:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Video game content rating system[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Video game content rating system. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

You were mentioned at ANI[edit]

I've pinged you to this thread as it relates to CAPTAIN RAJU's NPP right which you granted, just to let you know -- samtar talk or stalk 14:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, replied there. — xaosflux Talk 15:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)