I'm largely inactive / 99% retired. There are more important things in life. If you're an admin looking to ask about a block or delete I made, feel free to reverse it. If we would grant each other the presumption that we are acting in good faith, we could dispense with some of the drama and long ANI threads. Please don't use the ((talkback)) template - if you have something to say, say it. If you are asking me to review a situation, please provide links to articles and diffs to the edits in question — I cannot read your mind to figure out what you are talking about.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Merry Christmas B


Hi B, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
May next year be prosperous and joyful.
   –Scopecreep ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 10.43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Please would you kindly delete the first upload on the above filepage? It is too large for a non-free image, and was uploaded in error. (Note: the second upload is valid - please preserve that one). Thank you. Storye book (talk) 11:09, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• This is done. --B (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you. Much appreciated. Storye book (talk) 18:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Non-free use rationale 2/doc has been nominated for merging with Template:Non-free use rationale. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 09:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi B! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Scouting | May 2024 Notes for May: Looking for something to work on? Try looking at, Category:Scouting articles needing attention. Some important articles that need help: The Scout Association, NAYLE, Philmont Training Center, BSA Leadership Training, COPE We are working to develop a featured portal, look here if you want to help. Looking for a new project? perhaps authoring an article on Aids to Scoutmastership Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage | Help us plan future events Become a member | Opt-out of notifications | watch

--evrik ^(talk) May 22, 2024

2023-03-01

Just wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about your bot, in case you didn't get a ping. Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#malfunctioning_bot?. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 15:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

B-bot seems to be still looking for ((OTRS pending)), which was renamed to ((permission pending)) a while ago. The result of this is the bot whining regularly at User:B-bot/Event log. Could you fix this please? Thanks. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I had fixed that years ago ... but the problem is it would date the tag correctly (if needed), but then not find the dated tag. --B (talk) 13:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

I don't know if you know that your entry leads the list ;) - Your edit notice makes me point at Talk:Gerhard Klingenberg where a reviewer and I can't agree yet, and I hope for independent eyes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:56, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. Please see WP:3O for a process for requesting a third opinion. Unfortunately I do not have the time to devote to this at the moment. --B (talk) 21:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]