User talk:Neveselbert/Archive 9
Disruptive edits to Template:Marriage
[edit]Your edits to {{Marriage}} are disruptive. I have now reverted your broken edits three times. This template is used in 42,000 pages. The template editor permission is a privilege that comes with responsibilities. Please discuss any proposed changes and demonstrate them in the sandbox and on the testcases page. Please do not edit the live template again until there is talk page consensus to do so. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: I'm sorry. Duly noted. --Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:36, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Re: Downscaling non-free images to <100k pixels
[edit]With regards to your request via email about downscaling your images, did you try asking its operator, User:DatGuy, first?
I may fulfill your request whenever possible, if time and bandwidth allows. Ntx61 (talk) 12:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Ntx61, DatGuy was notified about the issue here. --Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 13:00, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Done scaling down the images. Can I ask for your feedback on reduced images by the way? (Some may prefer automatic reduction, so I am requesting feedback.) I did the reduction manually, using the following steps:
- Ntx61 (talk) 13:58, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- The image to be reduced is opened in GIMP (version 2.8.18 is used). The color space is then converted to sRGB if prompted.
- As the images appear grayscale, the color mode is then converted from RGB to Grayscale to remove color information from exported images and minimize file sizes (save for File:William-Stanley-Shepherd.jpg, which had a color tint).
- The target image size is then calculated per WP:IMAGERES using a self-made tool, and its output is then entered in image scaling operation with cubic interpolation.
- The resulting image is then exported as JPEG with 95% quality, with most metadata removed (EXIF/XMP data not saved and comment blanked out).
Thank you Ntx61. I much prefer it your way. Best, --Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:04, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Ntx61: can you also reduce these 5 images, please, when you have the time? Thanks, ‑‑Neveselbert (mobile) (talk · contribs · email) 09:40, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Done reducing the images.
Not done for File:Leo Blair.jpeg: Image is small enough (82,243 pixels) to meet WP:IMAGERES. Ntx61 (talk) 14:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks again, Ntx. Can you also please look at these 4? Much appreciated, ‑‑Neveselbert (mobile) (talk · contribs · email) 12:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Done. This time, metadata has been carried over.Ntx61 (talk) 09:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Also, quality for some files have been adjusted to avoid going over the size of original images. Ntx61 (talk) 09:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Ntx61: can you possibly upload the higher quality versions of those files you mention? I don't see anything in NFCC policy that prohibits smaller versions going over the size of the originals. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Also, quality for some files have been adjusted to avoid going over the size of original images. Ntx61 (talk) 09:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks again, Ntx. Can you also please look at these 4? Much appreciated, ‑‑Neveselbert (mobile) (talk · contribs · email) 12:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
John Hume/Patricia
[edit]I have added a citation for your tag for his wife's name. I was suprised there was none in the article itself. Arnkellow (talk) 15:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
August 2020
[edit] Hi Neveselbert! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Pol Pot that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. You removed information on a marriage from the article without explaining why you did it, and you marked it Minor, which it certainly was not (but may have been, with proper explanation). — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 03:59, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry UncleBubba, I shouldn't have marked my edit as such and, especially in light of the sensitive subject matter of the article, I should have given a more proper explanation. As for why I hid the information (I didn't remove the code), it contains a deprecated value in one of the parameters. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 04:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Blair ministry
[edit]Hello. I think I've managed to disambiguate all the links to Blair ministry and get rid of all the {{dn}} tags but it might help if you could check. I've linked those which spanned two or three governments to Premiership of Tony Blair which, although more focused on the leader than the ministers, seems to be the nearest thing we have to a BCA covering the entire period. I see that an unusually high number of articles link through Blair ministry (disambiguation); I don't think either target is wrong. Certes (talk) 23:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Certes, all seems fine. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Help with disambiguation
[edit]Hi Neveselbert, at your tag on Mari Kim, I have replaced the disambiguation of Iron Lady with a link to Iron Lady at Thatcher's page....is it correct to do this? The artwork is a take on Margaret Thatcher as the Iron Lady. I'll depend on your expertise in this. Thanks--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 22:44, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Thatcher ministries
[edit]Could you explain why you keep reverting my edits? What I don’t understand is how can a ministry be dissolved on election day (11 June 1987) when people are still voting and no one knows who’s going to form the next government. Normally ministries are dissolved the next day when the results are all in: Explain! Ciaran.london (talk) 00:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ciaran.london, see page 412 of ASIN 0720123062, Facts About British Prime Ministers (1995), which has a subsection titled "Dates of Administration" (continued from page 411). If you're able to, you can buy the book and see the information for yourself. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 00:22, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
👍 Ciaran.london (talk) 00:32, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ciaran.london, you can borrow the book from here: [1] ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 06:23, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
The Signpost: 1 November 2020
[edit]- News and notes: Ban on IPs on ptwiki, paid editing for Tatarstan, IP masking
- In the media: Murder, politics, religion, health and books
- Book review: Review of Wikipedia @ 20
- Discussion report: Proposal to change board composition, In The News dumps Trump story
- Featured content: The "Green Terror" is neither green nor sufficiently terrifying. Worst Hallowe'en ever.
- Traffic report: Jump back, what's that sound?
- Interview: Joseph Reagle and Jackie Koerner
- News from the WMF: Meet the 2020 Wikimedian of the Year
- Recent research: OpenSym 2020: Deletions and gender, masses vs. elites, edit filters
- In focus: The many (reported) deaths of Wikipedia
Descriptive edit summaries
[edit]Minor request: for heavily edited pages that are under intense scrutiny, please use more descriptive edit summaries that say what you're doing and why. (Example: say what it was you formatted.) ~Awilley (talk) 18:42, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'll be sure to keep that in mind if/when I edit such articles in future. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit]Duplicate parameter error
[edit]Hello, you've got an error in {{Infobox administration/sandbox}}. There are duplicate parameters for label3
and data3
, one for Monarch and one for President. Normally I'd fix it, but I'm not sure if you want to keep both or get rid of one of them. - X201 (talk) 08:31, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 November 2020
[edit]- News and notes: Jimmy Wales "shouldn't be kicked out before he's ready"
- Op-Ed: Re-righting Wikipedia
- Opinion: How billionaires re-write Wikipedia
- Featured content: Frontonia sp. is thankful for delicious cyanobacteria
- Traffic report: 007 with Borat, the Queen, and an election
- News from Wiki Education: An assignment that changed a life: Kasey Baker
- GLAM plus: West Coast New Zealand's Wikipedian at Large
- Wikicup report: Lee Vilenski wins the 2020 WikiCup
- Recent research: Wikipedia's Shoah coverage succeeds where libraries fail
- Essay: Writing about women
Cite Unseen update
[edit]Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. The script recently received a significant update, detailed below.
- You can now toggle which icons you do or don't want to see. See the configuration section for details. All icons are enabled by default except for the new
generally reliable icon (described below).
- New categorizations/icons:
Advocacy: Organizations that are engaged in advocacy (anything from political to civil rights to lobbying). Note that an advocacy group can be reliable; this indicator simply serves to note when a source's primary purpose is to advocate for certain positions or policies, which is important to keep in mind when consuming a source.
Editable: Sites that are editable by the public, such as wikis (Wikipedia, Fandom) or some databases (IMDb, Discogs).
Predatory journals: These sites charge publication fees to authors without checking articles for quality and legitimacy.
- Perennial source categories: Cite Unseen will mark sources as
generally reliable,
marginally reliable,
generally unreliable,
deprecated, and
blacklisted. This is based on Wikipedia's perennial sources list, which reflects community consensus on frequently discussed sources. Sources that have multiple categorizations are marked as
varied reliability. Note that
generally reliable icons are disabled by default to reduce clutter, but you can enable them through your custom config. A special thanks to Newslinger, whose new Sourceror API provides the perennial sources list in a clean, structured format.
- With the addition of the new categorizations, the
biased source icon has been removed. This category was very broad, and repetitive to the new advocacy and perennial sources categorizations that are more informative.
If you have any feedback, requested features, or domains to add/remove, don't hesitate to bring it up on the script's talk page. Thank you! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:23, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a user of Cite Unseen. If you no longer wish to receive very occasional updates, you may remove yourself from the mailing list.
The Signpost: 28 December 2020
[edit]- Arbitration report: 2020 election results
- Featured content: Very nearly ringing in the New Year with "Blank Space" – but we got there in time.
- Traffic report: 2020 wraps up
- Recent research: Predicting the next move in Wikipedia discussions
- Essay: Subjective importance
- Gallery: Angels in the architecture
- Humour: 'Twas the Night Before Wikimas
Margaret Thatcher
[edit]The protection log indicates that the reason the page was given semi-protection was because of vandalism. Geminin667 (talk) 04:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Deletion of an image
[edit]Hello, I wanted to ask why you deleted the image I added showing Margaret Thatcher during a visit to Israel? It is a relevant picture to the "foreign affairs" chapter. --DoritG (talk) 09:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- Hi DoritG, I moved the image to Premiership of Margaret Thatcher § Foreign affairs. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:10, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Townshend ministry (disambiguation)
[edit]If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Townshend ministry (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
- disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
- disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
- is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Premiership of Winston Churchill (disambiguation)
[edit]You requested deletion of this redirect on G14 grounds. While I suppose you're entitled to request G7 deletion as the sole contributor to the page, G14 doesn't quite apply as the current target is a disambiguation page. If you still think it should be deleted, I'm happy to act on this as a G7 case, but was hoping to hear your reasoning as well. signed, Rosguill talk 22:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
The Signpost: 31 January 2021
[edit]- News and notes: 1,000,000,000 edits, board elections, virtual Wikimania 2021
- Special report: Wiki reporting on the United States insurrection
- In focus: From Anarchy to Wikiality, Glaring Bias to Good Cop: Press Coverage of Wikipedia's First Two Decades
- Technology report: The people who built Wikipedia, technically
- Videos and podcasts: Celebrating 20 years
- News from the WMF: Wikipedia celebrates 20 years of free, trusted information for the world
- Recent research: Students still have a better opinion of Wikipedia than teachers
- Humour: Dr. Seuss's Guide to Wikipedia
- Featured content: New Year, same Featured Content report!
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2020
- Obituary: Flyer22 Frozen
February 2021
[edit] It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. You must notify all previous participants not just the ones who agreed with your viewpoint. DrKay (talk) 22:42, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
DrKay, I'm under no obligation to notify everyone. I'm free to notify those who have previously supported my rationale, you're free to notify those who supported yours. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
"Teresa May"
[edit]I've reverted your change to the Teresa May page. "Teresa May" is not a correct use for Theresa May; arriving at this disambiguation should prompt people to fix any incorrectly-spelled links. Note that search engines are not confused by this- if anything, the presence of this disambig provides information that helps them do the autocorrection correctly. -- The Anome (talk) 14:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- @The Anome: please see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 9#Teresa May. You may nominate the redirect at WP:RFD but you cannot change the target until there is consensus. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing out the discussion, which I didn't see before making the revert. That seems fine to me. -- The Anome (talk) 18:23, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- OK Anome, but still feel free to nominate the redirect at WP:RFD. WP:Consensus can change and it's been nearly four years since the last discussion. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:46, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing out the discussion, which I didn't see before making the revert. That seems fine to me. -- The Anome (talk) 18:23, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
MOS:SEAOFBLUE
[edit]Hi Neveselbert. I would like to ask why you inserted 'hsp' [2] instead of 'br' [3] to avoid a MOS:SEAOFBLUE. MOS:SEAOFBLUE is a great style guide but I am not sure how 'hsp' solves the issue at hand; 'br' would seem a more intuitive solution. --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
On the other hand, it is common practice to avoid a line break between honorifics. Actually, 'hsp' is a better idea. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 February 2021
[edit]- News and notes: Maher stepping down
- Disinformation report: A "billionaire battle" on Wikipedia: Sex, lies, and video
- In the media: Corporate influence at OSM, Fox watching the hen house
- News from the WMF: Who tells your story on Wikipedia
- Featured content: A Love of Knowledge, for Valentine's Day
- Traffic report: Does it almost feel like you've been here before?
- Gallery: What is Black history and culture?
Edit warring over RfD closure
[edit]I have reverted your involved relist of this RfD and restored CycloneYoris' close. Instead of furthering an edit war, discuss the closure with CycloneYoris or bring it up at DRV. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 05:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- OK J947, will do. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 06:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Linking to a redirect for a non-notable song
[edit]Hi. For somebody who questions others where their edit summary is, I find it a little bit of a double standard that you didn't leave one beyond "restored revision" (to a prior edit by me). What is the purpose of linking to a redirect here? If you think there's potential to expand the article, then by all means go ahead and create it before linking to it, but I'm debating that in my summary (I clearly meant to say "I don't believe the song is notable", not "don't believe the song is not notable"). I don't see extensive independent coverage of the song and it did not chart, so what do you expect an article to be made on? If it's the reason why you reverted my removal of it, I don't believe links to redirects encourage editors to create them, especially if the song is debatably even notable in the first place. If the song had charted, it would most likely have an article on it already, just like the prior single. By that same token, you could link to all songs by London Grammar that don't have articles yet. Ss112 04:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Ss112: understood. I still think there is time for the song to chart in time for the album's release. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Edit war
[edit]Please halt your attempts at edit warring immediately. There is no justification or basis for it, given the edits are stylistic improvements to article ledes only. Not appropriate for you to attempt to mass remove these based on nothing. Vaze50 (talk), 22:00, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- @Vaze50: Surely then, why not justify your improvements on the talkpage, rather than ramrodding them throughout, without any input from other contributors? Per WP:BRD, the onus is on you to begin a discussion and reach a consensus. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Neveselbert: As you know full well it is definitely not the standard approach to begin discussion and reach consensus on moving several sentences around within a lede so that the structure of the paragraphs flow better. It is not the addition of new information, it is not removing existing sourced information, it is arranging a lede to read better than it currently does. That is done right across this website on countless articles all of the time, and it is absurd to suggest starting a discussion on talk pages around it. If I was trying to add or remove controversial or sourced/unsourced information then I would completely agree and would do so. Why is it you are trying to stop improvements to lede structure exactly? Can you explain, please? Let's have that discussion you're so keen on. Vaze50 (talk), 22:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- I don't agree that your changes are improvements, frankly. Anyway, make your case at the respective talkpages, in accordance with WP:BRD please. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Neveselbert: You think that on a page where in the very first paragraph it is made clear that the subject holding all four Great Offices of State is significant, that the same page should then hide said offices in the infobox? Can you justify that view please? Vaze50 (talk), 22:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- @Neveselbert: Anyway, super clever man, I'll take them to those talk pages and unless there's disagreement, will revert to the obvious improvements put there by me. Thanks for the guidance. Vaze50 (talk), 22:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- Neveselbert, this user has had three editors reverting them on this edit. I’ve given them the standard 3rr warning. They’ll be blocked if they revert again. DeCausa (talk) 23:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @DeCausa: This edit has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with what you were engaged in, so you can get lost. Take your bigotry elsewhere, and stop trying to crawl up the backside of other people, it's nauseating to watch. Vaze50 (talk), 23:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- Your contribs are there for all to see. A 3rr warning means you can be taken to the EW noticeboard (and be deemed to understand 3rr) for any edit-warring. You don’t get to say on which talk pages I post. DeCausa (talk) 23:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @DeCausa: Carry on screaming into the void there, Anglophobe. Vaze50 (talk), 23:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- Your contribs are there for all to see. A 3rr warning means you can be taken to the EW noticeboard (and be deemed to understand 3rr) for any edit-warring. You don’t get to say on which talk pages I post. DeCausa (talk) 23:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @DeCausa: This edit has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with what you were engaged in, so you can get lost. Take your bigotry elsewhere, and stop trying to crawl up the backside of other people, it's nauseating to watch. Vaze50 (talk), 23:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- Neveselbert, this user has had three editors reverting them on this edit. I’ve given them the standard 3rr warning. They’ll be blocked if they revert again. DeCausa (talk) 23:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Neveselbert: Anyway, super clever man, I'll take them to those talk pages and unless there's disagreement, will revert to the obvious improvements put there by me. Thanks for the guidance. Vaze50 (talk), 22:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- @Neveselbert: You think that on a page where in the very first paragraph it is made clear that the subject holding all four Great Offices of State is significant, that the same page should then hide said offices in the infobox? Can you justify that view please? Vaze50 (talk), 22:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
- I don't agree that your changes are improvements, frankly. Anyway, make your case at the respective talkpages, in accordance with WP:BRD please. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Neveselbert: As you know full well it is definitely not the standard approach to begin discussion and reach consensus on moving several sentences around within a lede so that the structure of the paragraphs flow better. It is not the addition of new information, it is not removing existing sourced information, it is arranging a lede to read better than it currently does. That is done right across this website on countless articles all of the time, and it is absurd to suggest starting a discussion on talk pages around it. If I was trying to add or remove controversial or sourced/unsourced information then I would completely agree and would do so. Why is it you are trying to stop improvements to lede structure exactly? Can you explain, please? Let's have that discussion you're so keen on. Vaze50 (talk), 22:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC).
The Signpost: 28 March 2021
[edit]- News and notes: A future with a for-profit subsidiary?
- Gallery: Wiki Loves Monuments
- In the media: Wikimedia LLC and disinformation in Japan
- News from the WMF: Project Rewrite: Tell the missing stories of women on Wikipedia and beyond
- Recent research: 10%-30% of Wikipedia’s contributors have subject-matter expertise
- From the archives: Google isn't responsible for Wikipedia's mistakes
- Obituary: Yoninah
- From the editor: What else can we say?
- Arbitration report: Open letter to the Board of Trustees
- Traffic report: Wanda, Meghan, Liz, Phil and Zack
"President Walker Bush" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect President Walker Bush. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 18#President Walker Bush until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 21:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
"President Herbert Walker Bush" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect President Herbert Walker Bush. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 19#President Herbert Walker Bush until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 01:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
"Henry Bannerman" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Henry Bannerman. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 20#Henry Bannerman until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 23:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 April 2021
[edit]- From the editor: A change is gonna come
- Disinformation report: Paid editing by a former head of state's business enterprise
- In the media: Fernando, governance, and rugby
- Opinion: The (Universal) Code of Conduct
- Op-Ed: A Little Fun Goes A Long Way
- Changing the world: The reach of protest images on Wikipedia
- Recent research: Quality of aquatic and anatomical articles
- Traffic report: The verdict is guilty, guilty, guilty
- News from Wiki Education: Encouraging professional physicists to engage in outreach on Wikipedia
User talk:80.189.225.48
[edit]Hi, just thought you might like to know this is an LTA vandal. Violates WP:OVERLINK and WP:NOTBROKEN, mainly British poitics and children's TV programmes and presenters. Comes from Portsmouth. Can be reverted on sight and reported to AIV. All the best, DuncanHill (talk) 23:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 June 2021
[edit]- News and notes: Elections, Wikimania, masking and more
- In the media: Boris and Joe, reliability, love, and money
- Disinformation report: Croatian Wikipedia: capture and release
- Recent research: Feminist critique of Wikipedia's epistemology, Black Americans vastly underrepresented among editors, Wiki Workshop report
- Traffic report: So no one told you life was gonna be this way
- News from the WMF: Searching for Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: WikiProject on open proxies interview
- Forum: Is WMF fundraising abusive?
- Discussion report: Reliability of WikiLeaks discussed
- Obituary: SarahSV
John Major
[edit]Hey! Around two weeks ago you reversed my edits to John Major as they were unsourced. All of the information about styles was sourced and included in the rest of the article, so would a section on styles require sources or not? I'm happy to add them if they would be, but I assumed not as the information was in the rest of the article. Thanks for your time and have a nice rest of evening! FollowTheTortoise (talk) 22:34, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi FollowTheTortoise! DrKay previously removed such a section in 2019, and personally I wouldn't restore it without also including inline citations. Best, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 01:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- That's really useful. Thanks! FollowTheTortoise (talk) 13:03, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
{{Infobox administration}} changes
[edit]Hello! I see that you've been working on the {{Infobox administration}} template. It appears that your changes have broken the link that is attached to the image on some pages. It appears that the link parameter, {{ns0|[[{{Remove first word|{{PAGENAMEBASE}}|sep=of}}]]}}
is not getting the name of the officeholder, but it is only getting the last part of the name - to see examples, see Alex Salmond, Philip Hammond (where the link is to nd) and Carwyn Jones (where the link is to nes). -Niceguyedc (talk) 02:15, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Niceguyedc, thanks for the message. It should be fixed now. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 02:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- The link is now to the image file, but the tooltip is still the name fragment. -Niceguyedc (talk) 02:24, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Fixed. Thanks again, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 02:26, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- The link is now to the image file, but the tooltip is still the name fragment. -Niceguyedc (talk) 02:24, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Template:Infobox administration/seal is transcluding itself
[edit]Template:Infobox administration/seal is populating Category:Pages with template loops with the bios of a lot of important politicians. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry wbm1058, I've split the template to resolve this. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 02:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- So now I'm looking at Clement Attlee in preview mode, and "Page exceeded the expansion depth"
Highest expansion depth 41/40
– wbm1058 (talk) 03:00, 13 July 2021 (UTC)- I'm not sure why that is. I've prevented the templates from transcluding themselves. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 03:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- The bios that were in "template loops" have now moved to Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded. "This category is populated automatically by the MediaWiki software. It contains pages where MediaWiki has detected that the expansion depth limit of 40 levels has been exceeded. If the limit is exceeded then parts of the page can fail to render or be rendered incorrectly. A solution may require to omit or edit a template used on the page. See more at meta:Help:Expansion depth and Wikipedia:Avoiding MediaWiki expansion depth limit." – wbm1058 (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Do you know of a way that might fix this? ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 03:09, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, I haven't tried to figure out what you're trying to do. It seems complicated. You could try WP:VPT. wbm1058 (talk) 03:11, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- User:Primefac might be able to help. In the meantime, I'll try my best to diagnose the problem myself. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 03:12, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- It seems that there may be too many "if then else" instances, which may or may not cause some issues according to the help pages. As far as I can tell, looking at the categorised pages, there doesn't appear to be any immediate rendering issue. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 03:43, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, I haven't tried to figure out what you're trying to do. It seems complicated. You could try WP:VPT. wbm1058 (talk) 03:11, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Do you know of a way that might fix this? ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 03:09, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- The bios that were in "template loops" have now moved to Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded. "This category is populated automatically by the MediaWiki software. It contains pages where MediaWiki has detected that the expansion depth limit of 40 levels has been exceeded. If the limit is exceeded then parts of the page can fail to render or be rendered incorrectly. A solution may require to omit or edit a template used on the page. See more at meta:Help:Expansion depth and Wikipedia:Avoiding MediaWiki expansion depth limit." – wbm1058 (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why that is. I've prevented the templates from transcluding themselves. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 03:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- So now I'm looking at Clement Attlee in preview mode, and "Page exceeded the expansion depth"
The Signpost: 25 July 2021
[edit]- News and notes: Wikimania and a million other news stories
- Special report: Hardball in Hong Kong
- In the media: Larry is at it again
- Board of Trustees candidates: See the candidates
- Traffic report: Football, tennis and marveling at Loki
- News from the WMF: Uncapping our growth potential – interview with James Baldwin, Finance and Administration Department
- Humour: A little verse
Premiership of William Pitt moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Premiership of William Pitt, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Less Unless (talk) 20:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Less Unless, I've submitted the draft for review. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Premiership of William Pitt has been accepted
[edit]Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Bkissin (talk) 22:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Nomination for deletion of Template:2017 United Kingdom parliamentary election
[edit]Template:2017 United Kingdom parliamentary election has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
"Sleepy Eyes" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Sleepy Eyes. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 26#Sleepy Eyes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Cielquiparle (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 August 2021
[edit]- News and notes: Enough time left to vote! IP ban
- In the media: Vive la différence!
- Wikimedians of the year: Seven Wikimedians of the year
- Gallery: Our community in 20 graphs
- News from Wiki Education: Changing the face of Wikipedia
- Recent research: IP editors, inclusiveness and empathy, cyclones, and world heritage
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Days of the Year Interview
- Traffic report: Olympics, movies, and Afghanistan
- Community view: Making Olympic history on Wikipedia
Nomination of Living prime ministers of the United Kingdom for deletion
[edit]A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Living prime ministers of the United Kingdom, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Living prime ministers of the United Kingdom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
- A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
The Signpost: 26 September 2021
[edit]- News and notes: New CEO, new board members, China bans
- In the media: The future of Wikipedia
- Op-Ed: I've been desysopped
- Disinformation report: Paid promotional paragraphs in German parliamentary pages
- Discussion report: Editors discuss Wikipedia's vetting process for administrators
- Recent research: Wikipedia images for machine learning; Experiment justifies Wikipedia's high search rankings
- Community view: Is writing Wikipedia like making a quilt?
- Traffic report: Kanye, Emma Raducanu and 9/11
- News from Diff: Welcome to the first grantees of the Knowledge Equity Fund
- WikiProject report: The Random and the Beautiful
Administrators' newsletter – October 2021
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
- Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
- Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
- DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.
- A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
- Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
- The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
- Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
- The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
The Signpost: 31 October 2021
[edit]- From the editor: Different stories, same place
- News and notes: The sockpuppet who ran for adminship and almost succeeded
- Discussion report: Editors brainstorm and propose changes to the Requests for adminship process
- Recent research: Welcome messages fail to improve newbie retention
- Community view: Reflections on the Chinese Wikipedia
- Traffic report: James Bond and the Giant Squid Game
- Technology report: Wikimedia Toolhub, winners of the Coolest Tool Award, and more
- Serendipity: How Wikipedia helped create a Serbian stamp
- Book review: Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality
- WikiProject report: Redirection
- Humour: A very Wiki crossword
Administrators' newsletter – November 2021
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).
- Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
- Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.
- GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
- Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.
- The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit]The Signpost: 29 November 2021
[edit]- In the media: Denial: climate change, mass killings and pornography
- WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2021
- Deletion report: What we lost, what we gained
- From a Wikipedia reader: What's Matt Amodio?
- Arbitration report: ArbCom in 2021
- Discussion report: On the brink of change – RFA reforms appear imminent
- Technology report: What does it take to upload a file?
- WikiProject report: Interview with contributors to WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers
- Recent research: Vandalizing Wikipedia as rational behavior
- Humour: A very new very Wiki crossword
Administrators' newsletter – December 2021
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
- Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
- The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)
- Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
- The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.
The Signpost: 28 December 2021
[edit]- From the editor: Here is the news
- News and notes: Jimbo's NFT, new arbs, fixing RfA, and financial statements
- Serendipity: Born three months before her brother?
- In the media: The past is not even past
- Arbitration report: A new crew for '22
- By the numbers: Four billion words and a few numbers
- Deletion report: We laughed, we cried, we closed as "no consensus"
- Gallery: Wikicommons presents: 2021
- Traffic report: Spider-Man, football and the departed
- Crossword: Another Wiki crossword for one and all
- Humour: Buying Wikipedia
Kenneth Arrow’s students
[edit]Why is Alain Lewis not listed with the other doctoral students? 2600:1700:1C64:C090:F840:D338:CF70:B354 (talk) 04:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Arthur Power.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Arthur Power.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Sandboxing
[edit]Hi. Just letting you know I reverted this change because it broke the wikilink on many articles. You can preview on Phua Bah Lee for debugging. I also noticed you frequently self-revert on that template (eg [4][5] [6][7], etc). I'd recommend testing changes in the sandbox before deploying them on widely transcluded templates; better to be extra safe. I find the User:Jackmcbarn/advancedtemplatesandbox.js script can be useful to preview changes on live articles, too, especially if you don't have all the right testcases. Hope this helps. Cheers, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry about that ProcrastinatingReader, I wrongly assumed the change would be foolproof going by the documentation of {{Linkless exists}}, which I had hoped would be a quick fix to an issue brought to attention at Template talk:Infobox officeholder/Archive 24#Suspect this template is causing lots of incorrect Wanted Pages. Thanks for letting me know of that script, I'll be sure to download it shortly. All the best, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 16:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Fixed {{Trim brackets}} caused a piping loop in the particular parameter on Phua Bah Lee that contained a piped link, having removed the bookending brackets only. I've replaced both instances of said template with {{delink}}, which displays without issue. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).
|
|
- Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.
- Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.
- Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.
- The functionaries email list (functionaries-en
lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Talk:Thatcherism
[edit]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Thatcherism
I opened the news section.--Storm598 (talk) 06:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Knighthoods
[edit]Hello. Could you kindly direct me to where it has been established, either by editor consensus or anywhere else, that knighthoods should be included within an honorific prefix section of an infobox, rather than being part of a name? Many articles do not use this format, and I would be grateful if you could clear this up for me. Many thanks. Vaze50 (talk) 19:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Vaze50, see MOS:SIR. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Jack Dromey
[edit]On 9 January 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jack Dromey, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 January 2022
[edit]- Special report: WikiEd course leads to Twitter harassment
- News and notes: Feedback for Board of Trustees election
- Interview: CEO Maryana Iskander "four weeks in"
- Black History Month: What are you doing for Black History Month?
- WikiProject report: The Forgotten Featured
- Arbitration report: New arbitrators look at new case and antediluvian sanctions
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2021
- Obituary: Twofingered Typist
- Essay: The prime directive
- In the media: Fuzzy-headed government editing
- Recent research: Articles with higher quality ratings have fewer "knowledge gaps"
- Crossword: Cross swords with a crossword
Administrators' newsletter – February 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).
- The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.
- The user group
oversight
will be renamedsuppress
in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections. - The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.
- The user group
- Community input is requested on several motions aimed at addressing discretionary sanctions that are no longer needed or overly broad.
- The Arbitration Committee has published a generalised comment regarding successful appeals of sanctions that it can review (such as checkuser blocks).
- A motion related to the Antisemitism in Poland case was passed following a declined case request.
- Voting in the 2022 Steward elections will begin on 07 February 2022, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2022, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Voting in the 2022 Community Wishlist Survey is open until 11 February 2022.
Attlee followup
[edit]Hello. At first I misunderstood your criticism on my edit then I realized that it was I who was fully in the wrong. Tony Blair did serve more years as Prime Minister while leading the Labour Party however Attlee did serve as party leader longer despite Labour not being in power. I apologize for the misunderstanding, there is no need for me to insert outside sources because you are correct. Thank you for your time. FictiousLibrarian (talk). 15:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
CSV template
[edit]Hi, you changed the hlist templates in Clive Sinclair's infobox to csv. Can you point me to any documentation regarding one format over the other? For example does the csv template work as well as hlist for accessibility with screen readers (per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility. Sciencefish (talk) 22:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Sciencefish,
{{cslist}} is recommended by the {{Infobox writer#Parameters}} (rather than {{csv}}), so I'll replace the template to that one.I think the use of a comma-based template is preferable to {{hlist}} in terms of punctuational flow after preceding text ("Founder/Inventor of"), as opposed to bullets that appear less continuous. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 12:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC) - Striking out my previous comment; {{cslist}} is a block template, {{csv}} an inline one. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 12:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 February 2022
[edit]- From the team: Selection of a new Signpost Editor-in-Chief
- News and notes: Impacts of Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Special report: A presidential candidate's team takes on Wikipedia
- In the media: Wiki-drama in the UK House of Commons
- Technology report: Community Wishlist Survey results
- WikiProject report: 10 years of tea
- Featured content: Featured Content returns
- Deletion report: The 10 most SHOCKING deletion discussions of February
- Recent research: How editors and readers may be emotionally affected by disasters and terrorist attacks
- Arbitration report: Parties remonstrate, arbs contemplate, skeptics coordinate
- Gallery: The vintage exhibit
- Traffic report: Euphoria, Pamela Anderson, lies and Netflix
- News from Diff: The Wikimania 2022 Core Organizing Team
- Crossword: A Crossword, featuring Featured Articles
- Humour: Notability of mailboxes
Administrators' newsletter – March 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).
|
|
- A RfC is open to change the wording of revision deletion criterion 1 to remove the sentence relating to non-infringing contributions.
- A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.
- The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (T296645)
- Special:Nuke will now allow the selection of standard deletion reasons to be used when mass-deleting pages. This was a Community Wishlist Survey request from 2022. (T25020)
- The ability to undelete the talk page when undeleting a page using Special:Undelete or the API will be added soon. This change was requested in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. (T295389)
- Several unused discretionary sanctions and article probation remedies have been rescinded. This follows the community feedback from the 2021 Discretionary Sanctions review.
- The 2022 appointees for the Ombuds commission are Érico, Faendalimas, Galahad, Infinite0694, Mykola7, Olugold, Udehb and Zabe as regular members and Ameisenigel and JJMC89 as advisory members.
- Following the 2022 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AntiCompositeNumber, BRPever, Hasley, TheresNoTime, and Vermont.
- The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey results have been published alongside the ranking of prioritized proposals.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- Joy, is there any particular reason why you cannot nominate the redirect at WP:RFD? Per WP:3RR, I won't revert again but I'd really appreciate if you could just nominate the redirect there for others to chime in. Talk:Milošević isn't watched by many people at all so there really isn't much point in discussing there. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:09, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've posted a WP:RM because that fits in better with the policy (the redirect mechanism wasn't necessarily proper in one of these solutions), and notices should get cross-posted by bots to the noticeboards about page moves, the disambiguation and other wikiprojects, etc. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:08, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
[edit]Happy Birthday! Have a good rest of the day and happy editing. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 15:26, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you Tim! ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:33, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 March 2022
[edit]- From the Signpost team: How The Signpost is documenting the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
- News and notes: Of safety and anonymity
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Kharkiv, Ukraine: Countering Russian aggression with a camera
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Western Ukraine: Working with Wikipedia helps
- Disinformation report: The oligarchs' socks
- In the media: Ukraine, Russia, and even some other stuff
- Wikimedian perspective: My heroes from Russia, Ukraine & beyond
- Discussion report: Athletes are less notable now
- Technology report: 2022 Wikimedia Hackathon
- Arbitration report: Skeptics given heavenly judgement, whirlwind of Discord drama begins to spin for tropical cyclone editors
- Traffic report: War, what is it good for?
- Deletion report: Ukraine, werewolves, Ukraine, YouTube pundits, and Ukraine
- From the archives: Burn, baby burn
- Essay: Yes, the sky is blue
- Tips and tricks: Become a keyboard ninja
- On the bright side: The bright side of news
Template:Infobox cricketer
[edit]Hello. You made some edits to Template:Infobox cricketer at the beginning of March which, I think, might have done something that isn't necessarily what we'd want. But I'm not sure.
In the past, removing the name field from the infobox meant that no name was displayed above it. At all. I **think** that your edits stopped this from happened - i.e. forced a name to be displayed at all times. In some cases I'm not sure we need to do that - for example, where the infobox is used not he same page as another infobox - so, pages such as Everard Blair, Sidney Boucher and Archibald Harenc. To my mind, with two infoboxes it looks a bit off to have the name above the cricket one (but I could be wrong). There are only 43 pages where the name field is not included - most of them deliberately (see Category:Pages using infobox cricketer with no name parameter (91)).
Firstly, I assume it was your edit on 5 March that did this. It might not have been! Secondly, do you think there's mileage in undoing it to allow for the very occasional case where it's seen as desirable to deliberately avoid displaying the name? Thanks. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Blue Square Thing, feel free to revert my edit if necessary, admittedly I should've done more testing. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:12, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've reverted my edit. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:13, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I don't think it was necessarily a testing problem - only 40-odd out of the 30,000-odd articles that use it do that, so I doubt it would have been found. I think it was probably just one of those things that couldn't necessarily have been expected. Thanks for reverting it - not sure I could have done. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:15, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
- An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.
- Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the
deletelogentry
anddeletedhistory
rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928) - When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)
- Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
- A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
- A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.
"Eden family" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Eden family and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 17#Eden family until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:14, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
just a question
[edit]Nice to meet you. Are you aware of the discussions for Beethoven and Sibelius? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:30, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Harrison Birtwistle
[edit]On 20 April 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Harrison Birtwistle, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 04:13, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 April 2022
[edit]- News and notes: Double trouble
- In the media: The battlegrounds outside and inside Wikipedia
- Special report: Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary (Part 2)
- Technology report: 8-year-old attribution issues in Media Viewer
- Featured content: Wikipedia's best content from March
- Interview: On a war and a map
- Serendipity: Wikipedia loves photographs, but hates photographers
- Traffic report: Justice Jackson, the Smiths, and an invasion
- News from the WMF: How Smart is the SMART Copyright Act?
- Humour: Really huge message boxes
- From the archives: Wales resigned WMF board chair in 2006 reorganization
Administrators' newsletter – May 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).
|
|
- Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
- Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.
- The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
- A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.
- Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.
The Signpost: 29 May 2022
[edit]- From the team: A changing of the guard
- News and notes: 2022 Wikimedia Board elections
- Community view: Have your say in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Board elections
- In the media: Putin, Jimbo, Musk and more
- Special report: Three stories of Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war
- Discussion report: Portals, April Fools, admin activity requirements and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject COVID-19 revisited
- Technology report: A new video player for Wikimedia wikis
- Featured content: Featured content of April
- Interview: Wikipedia's pride
- Serendipity: Those thieving image farms
- Recent research: 35 million Twitter links analysed
- Tips and tricks: The reference desks of Wikipedia
- Traffic report: Strange highs and strange lows
- News from Diff: Winners of the Human rights and Environment special nomination by Wiki Loves Earth announced
- News from the WMF: The EU Digital Services Act: What’s the Deal with the Deal?
- From the archives: The Onion and Wikipedia
- Humour: A new crossword
Lester Piggott
[edit]Dear friend, your recent edit to the above list of major wins has removed many very significant races, like the 1000 and 2000 Guineas in France, and the Irish Derby and Irish Oaks. May I respectfully recommend that you undo that very good faith edit, as I feel it would be wrong to do so myself? Of course, it can go to Talk, although my recent comment there about Piggott's List of significant horses went unanswered. Regards, Billsmith60 (talk) 22:41, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello again, please ignore the above ramblings. I'm braindead tonight...! regards, Bill Billsmith60 (talk) 22:47, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).
|
|
- Several areas of improvement collated from community member votes have been identified in the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines. The areas of improvement have been sent back for review and you are invited to provide input on these areas.
- Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
- The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.
- Remedy 2 of the Rachel Marsden case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to delete or reduce to a stub, together with their talk pages, articles related to Rachel Marsden when they violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
- An arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been closed.
The Signpost: 26 June 2022
[edit]- News and notes: WMF inks new rules on government-ordered takedowns, blasts Russian feds' censor demands, spends big bucks
- In the media: Editor given three-year sentence, big RfA makes news, Guy Standing takes it sitting down
- Special report: "Wikipedia's independence" or "Wikimedia's pile of dosh"?
- Featured content: Articles on Scots' clash, Yank's tux, Austrian's action flick deemed brilliant prose
- Recent research: Wikipedia versus academia (again), tables' "immortality" probed
- Serendipity: Was she really a Swiss lesbian automobile racer?
- News from the WMF: Wikimedia Enterprise signs first deals
- Gallery: Celebration of summer, winter
ITN recognition for Deborah James (journalist)
[edit]On 3 July 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Deborah James (journalist), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 08:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2022
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).
|
|
user_global_editcount
is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)
- An arbitration case regarding conduct in deletion-related editing has been opened.
- The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.
MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE
[edit]I see we are adopting the style of suboffice for Shadow Cabinet posts for people in ministerial offices. I am happy to go about making this change per consensus but I have a few questions:
- How shall we make this change for serving members of the Shadow Cabinet or people whose most senior role has been to serve in the Shadow Cabinet?
- Should we be doing the same for members of the SNP and Lib Dem frontbenches?
- Lastly, is there a template I can place on pages requesting updates to succession boxes? I feel we should be updating those in lockstep with these changes but some succession boxes are woefully out-of-date.
Many thanks. Alex (talk) 12:16, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Alex B4, I think it would be wise to consult Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom on this issue. My personal view would be to discuss any changes to individual articles on the individual talkpage, though per WP:BOLD you could try implementing such changes yourself and discuss afterwards. I'm not sure if such a template exists myself, though Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization may be of assistance. All the best, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 07:29, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Commons talk
[edit]Please don't send me inappropriate template messages on commons. Saying an image is crap is not uncivil. Polyamorph (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Polyamorph, please read WP:AGF and familiarise yourself with the guideline. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:39, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean? Where have I not assumed good faith? Where have I been uncivil? Making such accusations is in itself uncivil.
Please stop. Polyamorph (talk) 17:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- You're obviously implying that PawełMM set out to make the image look like "crap", which was clearly not his intention and yet you're implicitly assuming bad faith. I haven't said anything out of line, you just need to treat other people with more respect than you're doing. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- I implied nothing of the sort. Maybe read what was written at the commons helpdesk. The mistake PawełMM made was replacing the existing image that was in use across multiple wiki's instead of as a derivative copy. Pointing out that fact and asking them not to do it again is not uncivil, not assuming badfaith, and not disrespectful. If you're unhappy with me discribing the blurring as "crap", LordPeterII described it as looking "absurd", Alsoriano97 described it as "weird" and "horrendous". PawełMM's mistake needed to be rectified, hence why I opened the commons helpdesk discussion. Then X201 kindly fixed it. Frankly PawełMM should have acknowledged his mistake rather than implying I was rude because I called the blurred version "crap". Polyamorph (talk) 18:01, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- You're obviously implying that PawełMM set out to make the image look like "crap", which was clearly not his intention and yet you're implicitly assuming bad faith. I haven't said anything out of line, you just need to treat other people with more respect than you're doing. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean? Where have I not assumed good faith? Where have I been uncivil? Making such accusations is in itself uncivil.
Shinzo Abe
[edit]“Per John F Kennedy” is not really a reason to revert (see WP:OSE). A cause of death is the actual medical cause found on a death certificate, not something like “murder” or “assassination”, which is manner of death. --IWI (talk) 15:13, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
- I meant WP:OTHERCONTENT, sorry. --IWI (talk) 15:15, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi ImprovedWikiImprovment, thanks for the feedback. I've made this edit to {{Infobox officeholder}} so that the label will display "Manner of death" in circumstances where the subject was assassinated and there is no further context beyond "Assassination". ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:11, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- I don’t think that is appropriate because the medical cause is what is intended to be displayed, but it does solve the issue on a technical level, which is better than nothing. But I don’t think we want to see manner of death being encouraged; it’s not specific enough. Best, --IWI (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- I mean, in reality, the manner of death is more properly “homicide”. --IWI (talk) 19:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- That's a mostly American term though, whereas "assassination" is more commonly used. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- No it's not, it's a legal term. --IWI (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- See Manner of death. --IWI (talk) 17:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, in the US. It is not a term used in the UK, where I'm from. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:09, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- No it's not, it's a legal term. --IWI (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- That's a mostly American term though, whereas "assassination" is more commonly used. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- I mean, in reality, the manner of death is more properly “homicide”. --IWI (talk) 19:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- I don’t think that is appropriate because the medical cause is what is intended to be displayed, but it does solve the issue on a technical level, which is better than nothing. But I don’t think we want to see manner of death being encouraged; it’s not specific enough. Best, --IWI (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
ITN recognition for David Trimble
[edit]On 26 July 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article David Trimble, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 09:18, 26 July 2022 (UTC)