This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 8 |
... is whether there should be a redirect from the old user talk of a renamed user to the new. But it looks like a page "dependent on a non-existent or deleted page", so perhaps the redirect should have been suppressed? Thanks for helping Stanglevine. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter, following your request for interface admin access, I've added this flag to your account. You may want to watch Wikipedia:Interface administrators' noticeboard and User:AnomieBOT/IPERTable for updates. Happy interface editing, — xaosflux Talk 20:41, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the help, but I was looking for a stronger consensus than is shown by 5+1⁄2–0 after only 30 hours (as I indicated in the opener). Perhaps we could wait until the thread is about to auto-archive due to lack of additional interest. ―Mandruss ☎ 07:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this again. Specifically, I'd like
((JCW-selected|FOOBAR))
((JCW-selected|FOOBAR|source=))
to give an output equivalent to
((JCW-selected|FOOBAR|source=Unknown))
i.e. when |source=
is not specified or empty, treat this as |source=Unknown
. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:18, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
A further tweak. Could you make it so that if 10 or more targets are provided, the sub-list would collapses? E.g. instead of the current
Something like
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:49, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
However, an improvement would be to have |source=
in (), and |note=
in []. E.g. have
((JCW-selected|FOOBAR|source=Source|note=This is a note))
give
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:10, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your help. I don't know why my edits are constantly filtered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:5800:13EB:8443:AA84:2738:3CF6 (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Inwant you to create the page Angelo Veno because he is an actor and you are deleting it omg. I put references and you still deleting it. Let’s delete everything if you want it so omgggg Nsnsisisb (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Galobtter. Thank you very much for the welcome, which contains some very useful advice, and for your help with the 10th millennium BC edit. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:36, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Galobtter. Thanks for helping me with my contributions to wikipedia. You have been a really big help. Swaghousebuoy (talk) 15:36, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello G. Sorry about the edit summary. I got caught in a drop down menu snafu while dealing with that troll. Looks like they've hit that article before so I'll add it to my watchlist and file a RFPP if needed. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 08:51, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, this page Singapore Management University seems to be plagued by advertisment writing. Could you be the judge on this? Whether Im doing this correctly?Seriouzscholar (talk) 06:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, user: Bluestsky99 has been repeatedly reverting parts of Singapore Management University to his/her version without discussing. I suspect there is Conflict of Interest involved.Seriouzscholar (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
I was looking at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 December 7#Template:Wikify which had a 3-2 to delete and then to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 September 22#Template:Wikify which had a 5-3 to delete and I really can't see how this is a "no consensus" when in both discussions, the majority of people involved were in favor of deleting it. If you don't think that a 3-2 is enough, I understand, but then re-list it. --Gonnym (talk) 10:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Hey Galobtter,
I got in contact recently about the Soundwalk Collective page, where you took down some edits I had made and re-uploaded the original. Some of my edits were restored, but not all. By reverting back to the original (is that what you did?) there is some information that is not currently valid, like who makes up the Soundwalk collective. In the edits I made, I outlined how the artist Kamran Sadeghi was not a core member and now he is no longer involved at all, yet it states on their page that he is. Is it possible to go back to my edit, or at least provide the real facts somehow?
Thanks as always.
Son Sonnenalle44 (talk) 11:55, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Sonnenalle44 (talk) 17:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter Thanks a lot for helping, I do feel like the description that is there now is far from the depth of work the collective is producing, I have been following them for years and I really think the page should have more information. I will avoid the bands own biography. Sonnenalle44 (talk) 11:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
SITH (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Tacyarg (talk) 12:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Re: this, as I'm basically a co-author of said essay, I can't pull the trigger, but you're free to TBAN them from anything involving race and intelligence or even an indef. They don't edit that frequently, so, imo, a longer sanction or block would be justified. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:02, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. [Username Needed] 13:09, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (February 2019).
Hello everyone and welcome to the third issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:
Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
We are three months in to this newsletter and everything is going great–keep on creating amazing new scripts!
|
Pending requests WikiProject Portals is looking for some help making scripts...
|
The ip you blocked is now evading their block with another ip and has returned to make personal attacks, which show zero attempts to understand why their edits are problematic. Valenciano (talk) 10:01, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter!
Thank you for all your help with Special:AbuseFilter/964! Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Re filter, a couple of modifications are needed.
Firstly, please could Special:AbuseFilter/964 be forked into two (I'll explain why below), with one reading:
!"extendedconfirmed" in user_groups &
equals_to_any (page_namespace, 2, 118) &
added_lines irlike "((subst:submit))|((AFC submission\|\|\|" &
new_wikitext irlike "((mfd"
...and the other reading:
!"extendedconfirmed" in user_groups &
equals_to_any (page_namespace, 2, 118) &
added_lines irlike "((subst:submit))|((AFC submission\|\|\|" &
(
!new_wikitext irlike "<\s*ref|((official website|((efn|((listref|((named ref|((notefoot|((notelist|((notetag|((ran|((refn|((rma|((rp|((sfn|((source in source|((cite|((citation|((calflora|((der speigel|((efloras|((feis|((jepson eflora|((minnesota wildflowers|((silvics|((tropicos|https?://|www\.|issn|isbn" &
!"dmbox" in new_html
)
The reason this split is required is that, per the discussion above, we would like to trial using the warn feature of the abuse filter.
Secondly, please could you enable the warn function on the two filters and set the custom message for the first filter to User:StraussInTheHouse/afc-mfd and User:StraussInTheHouse/afc-ref for the second filter? I think they will have to be moved to the MediaWiki namespace (i.e. MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-AFC-mfd and MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-AFC-ref respectively), but I don't have the ability to do that.
Many thanks,
SITH (talk) 13:19, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't understand where you're coming from on your revert of my move to Aberdeen, Maryland, shooting. The state is essentially parenthetical there. It's an Aberdeen shooting. There's even a cited source that way. And essentially all English style and usage guides prescribe such matching commas. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] for examples. Dicklyon (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
For your help here. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC) |
Dear all. Recently, our community lost a dedicated user, Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk). Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of Abelmoschus Esculentus' scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.
Rollback / Vandalism | ||
---|---|---|
Editing | ||
Tools |
|
If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi G, as requested I am getting in contact with you now that I have put my first official page up, it is currently a 'draft' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stephan_Crasneanscki please let me know what you think Sonnenalle44 (talk) 13:15, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok, if I move across the information on soundwalk collective to soundwalk collective's page, what are the next steps for getting Stephan Crasneanscki's page online? Sonnenalle44 (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok I have done so, thank you. Looking forward to seeing how it is received. Sonnenalle44 (talk) 15:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC) Dear Golobtter, it seems there is some re-direction issues with Stephan's page, Wikipedia automatically directs someone who seaches his name to Soundwalk Collective. This message popped up when I tried to put the article up for editors review " Warning: The page Stephan Crasneanscki redirects to Soundwalk Collective. Please ensure it is not a copy or that this page is located to the correct title. " - The page is not a copy, the page has more information on Crasneanscki like his work in film and photography. What do you suggest I do? Sonnenalle44 (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Hey Galobbter, Ok thanks, will it be you reviewing the draft? Sonnenalle44 (talk) 13:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Your filter: Special:AbuseLog/23424745
Filter 614: Special:AbuseLog/23424744
(I don't know if this is the right place to post about this, but...) This was a good catch! If anything, Filter 614 was the one that messed up here (I think). This is just kind of a cool process tbh. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 22:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for this, it was a misclick - the javascript on my watchlist hadn't completed when I positioned the mouse, the page scrolled down one line so I clicked the wrong link. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:23, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter,
Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter, your recent BRFA (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Galobot 3) has been approved. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 12:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
We're hitting template expansion limits in WP:JCW/EXCLUDE. Could you refactor ((JCW-exclude)) to call Module:JCW-exclude which would do this
((JCW-exclude|Foobar|Barfoo))
if only two parameters are given, but
((JCW-exclude|Foobar|Barfoo1|Barfoo2|...|Barfoo-n))
when multiple Barfoos are given? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. The procedure has been noted. Red Director (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Surely too short and bland? He's a fringe Hidutva author, and he gets that neutral description. But if it must be, it must be. Doug Weller talk 18:00, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
((Short description|none))
exists. ∯WBGconverse 17:54, 23 March 2019 (UTC)Some Wikidata descriptions may be unsuitable, and if imported, must be checked for relevance, accuracy and fitness for purpose. Responsibility for such imports lies with the importer." ∯WBGconverse 17:55, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
((Short description|none))
should only be used on articles where there is no need for a short description (e.g lists with self-explanatory titles). Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
What the hell do you think you are doing moving stuff out of my user space? SpinningSpark 12:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
I'd appreciate some support here (concerning the publication of User:Headbomb/Crapwatch) if you think this is a good initiative. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:11, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Thank you for your contributions to The Wikipedia SourceWatch, an incredible initiative that helps editors address the use of questionable sources on Wikipedia. I really appreciate your work! — Newslinger talk 11:55, 30 March 2019 (UTC) |
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (March 2019).
Hello everyone and welcome to the fourth issue of the new Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:
Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
|
|
mw.loader.getScript
has been added to mw.loader
, closing a feature request from 2010. It allows users to load a script via URL (like mw.loader.load()
) and specify a callback function (like mw.loader.using()
). See mw:ResourceLoader/Core modules#mw.loader.getScript for more.
Enjoy your April Fool's, --DannyS712 (talk) 18:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for reverting those moves. There certainly is a case for an RM, but until that happens, do you think the talk page of Mainland Southeast Asia could be moved back so it's in sync with the title of the article? – Uanfala (talk) 13:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I do not appreciate your vandalism on removing my idol from the wikipedia page 1889. The following revision was removed, although accured and should be kept: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1889&diff=891540689&oldid=891528716 Next time you dare to remove this you will be reported to the owner of wikipedia. Hes my dad.
Menacingly, Sven R. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.1.242.78 (talk) 08:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
I have a minor request for User:Galobot/report/Articles by Lint Errors. If you could make it so that the table, when it is updated, is sorted by Linter error count first, then by the page title (alphabetically), it would help the diffs to be a lot cleaner so that I could more easily see new articles appearing on the list. Right now, the page titles sort in semi-random order with each update, so titles jump around. If it takes you more than five minutes, please don't bother. Thanks for continuing to update this list daily; I've been chipping away at it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonesey95 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there. I certainly agree with your assessment that the draft is not notable. I had placed it under review because I am using it as a teaching tool and was surprised to see you didn't ping me about it before deciding to go all the way to rejection. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that. Cheers, Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 20:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
We're expanding WP:JCW to cover something new, so a tweak to the template would be nice.
Basically, it needs to do the same thing as ((JCW-selected))/((JCW-selected-source)) already do, but when it's on User:JL-Bot/Publishers.cfg or Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/Publisher1 (or .../Publisher2, .../Publisher3, ...), it should behave as if |source=
isn't a thing and simply suppress the output of that parameter if given or missing.
Can you help? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
|source=
? Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
|source=
even if I removed |source=
from ((JCW-PUB-rank)). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
A wild Rebestalic showed up again in your home jungle.
(imagine that, a bear meets a gorilla! interesting)
Anyway, I know this was quite a while ago, but why was the article on Turkey under full protection?
I'm aware it might be for a rather sensitive reason, in which case I'm happy to not know
That's that for me, have to catch some salmon you know
Rebestalic[dubious—discuss] 21:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
The reversion you made was wrong. The article is wrong because AFSCME reported 94% retention. Also, those people who still had to pay agency fees still had to vote on whether there is a union or not and if there is under 50%, then the union cannot exist. So if they had 2-6% retention, then the union did not have 50% support and is legally not recognized. The Reason article also said "Given the choice of no longer paying to support unions they didn't want to join in the first place, lots of public sector workers took it." That means, they were in the union. Therefore, the article should not be cited as it does not properly state the law or the numbers correctly. Capriaf
Hi, since Ymblanter says you consulted with him, I wanted to request your input on the issue of ARBPIA-protecting Airbnb. Here's what I said to Ymblanter:
Ijust wanted to let you know that I've asked Arbcom for a little clarification here. I don't think everything with tiny Israel-Palestine coverage should count (it seems a bit extreme to consider Sea level related, merely because File:Israel Sea Level BW 1.JPG appears near the top), so at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment I said basically "Ymblanter and I interpret things differently, so would you please tell us which of us is holding the interpretation you intended". As I said there, This is not some sort of complaint/argument/etc. Just trying to get an authoritative statement on this decision's scope. Please let me know if I've said anything that can be interpreted as hostile, because I'm not unhappy and don't intend anything to sound as if I am.
Nyttend (talk) 01:27, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Please create a "Conspiracy Theories" subject further down the page rather than describe this on his initial brief introduction. I'm not reverting "my version of what the page should look like" (but you are). It's common sense, and gives more credibility to the content on what someone is about to read about the man, instead of reading someone's personal opinion right off the bat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RLove79 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Whatever you did in here, it seems to have broken some stuff.
|source=
is not displayed in User:JL-Bot/Publishers.cfg, which is good. But that also seems to have suppressed its display in User:JL-Bot/Questionable.cfg, which is bad. |source=
should be displayed in that case. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:23, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter, thank you for restoring one of my posts the other day on the Allopathy talk page. as I'm only gradually learning my way around & have an unusual issue I'm wondering if it's appropriate for me to ask if you can point me in the right direction? Allopathy is a word regularly used by practitioners of alternative therapies to describe (broadly speaking) western mainstream medicine. in normal everyday circumstances it is not used by 'mainstream' doctors to describe themselves or each other or the principles of their work. In other words it's just not a word they normally use (unless they happen to practice in more than one discipline). The Oxford English dictionary (for example) will be looking at all sources to determine the usual usage & meaning of this word and it's logical to assume they could not be discriminating against sources from alternative practitioners (or the clients or prospective clients or ex-clients of alternative or complementary practitioners). Wikipedia on the other hand will (it can be presumed) not be listing as a "reliable source" any source coming from the viewpoint of any alternative practitioners (because as I see it the followers of Jimmy Wales don't like any of them.) The outcome is that the current wikipedia article misrepresents most alternative practitioners (& their clients) in its opening line by stating unequivocally that allopathy is a pejorative term. This is not supported by the Oxford English Dictionary (who are looking at usual general usage). A possible reason for such a discrepancy it seems to me will be that the only mentions in Wikipedia "Reliable" sources are likely to be when an argument between mainstream/alternative has been documented by the mainstream side. So wikipedia's view does not represent the normal everyday situation in 2019. That's one point. A broader point would be my opinion that if this is unresolvable because wikipedia really doesn't like these subjects & can't produce balanced articles then they just shouldn't have them at all. It's very wrong now in 2019 for anyone doing an internet search to get as a top result a totally misleading result from wikipedia - and as I pointed out the other day on Apple you just use "Look Up" & get this propaganda treated as fact now. So the ramifications go way beyond the choices wikipedia is entitled to make. Thanks for listening - what do you think I should do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.15.235 (talk) 14:54, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
P.S. I forgot to say that my attempts to discuss this & related issues on article talk pages are disallowed because not a forum 86.148.15.235 (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (April 2019). Hello everyone and welcome to the 5th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:
Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
|
Until next month, --DannyS712 (talk) 00:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
thanks for doing the needful | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 1916 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
You are aware that the media sources you are going by on this entry are biased and do not accurately represent the group, not to mention blatantly referring to Antifa rioters, who are in video attacking these group members, merely as "counterprotestors", right? I have to question whether you are biased to this topic or not. Are you? There is literally video of Antifa rushing them at a peaceful gathering, protected by Patriot Prayer's constitutional rights. So, how do we get this on there, and correct the opening entry.
Issues like these are why wikipedia is thoroughly unreliable. Biases sources and blind eye enforcement of their points of view. Please show me something better than this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.13.222.58 (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
LOL!!! So, you are telling me that proven biased liberal "news" sources like Al Jazeera and their opinion pieces are reliable, and neutral? lol Really? Have you actually investigated these situations? Watched the actual video evidence that runs counter? You are aware that news media in america slants one direction of the other, and these mainstream media sources are the worst of the worst in this article? I'm free to edit this article with Fox news sources, and any biased source I can find in print in order to change this entry, then?
Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
user:Beetjuicelover420 appears to be a vandalism-only account. I would like to seek a block. CLCStudent (talk) 18:04, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chutia people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indo-Chinese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter. Per this discussion I've just had, would it be possible to flag the edits adding the short description with your script as minor? Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 10:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter,
Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:
Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.
Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter. Thank you for reviewing my page Mintos. Unfortunately, my page Mintos was deleted from Wikipediua and I would like to restore it and explain my position. Mintos is European largest peer-to-peer lending platform. I am creating the article not in the marketing purposes. There are similar articles on Wikipedia about different peer-to-peer lending companies like Funding Circle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_Circle), Lending Club (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LendingClub) or others. I am hired by the company to create content and am being rewarded for it. I have rewritten the text and deleted the marketing related information leaving the basic information about the company. My relationship with User:Sparklz2048 are professional - this is a previous project manager for this project. this user no longer works on this project. Can you plase update me and explain how can I create a new Mintow Wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ik158 (talk • contribs) 08:46, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
The thing is that there is alredy a page of Mintos in Italian Wikipedia (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mintos) created by independent editor and i wanted to make it available also in English. Is this possible? I have also disclosed my relationships with the company on my profile page.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is MOS:ETHNICITY on articles about Polish Jews. Jayjg (talk) 20:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hey, I see you're doing editfilters now. I have a question if you don't mind. Is it possible for an edit filter to detect if a page has a certain template on it, or if the page is in a particular category? Not asking for any action, I just want to know if it's technically possible. The context is this. ~Awilley (talk) 18:38, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
((Ds/aware|topic = ap))
doesn't mean someone should be prevented from added e.g ((subst:Ds/alert|topic = e-e))
so you'd have to detect the topic code. But that should be technically possible. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
((Ds/aware|topic = foo, ap, ee))
on a page (ex. User:Galobtter/sandbox3), and then add "Testing of Ds/aware abusefilter" to see the warning message (provided by 953). I did this by using a lua module (Module:Sandbox/Galobtter/Ds-aware) to check if the page has the template and add a message if that is the case. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Guys, I just tried editing User:Galobtter/sandbox3, and nothing happened. Did something break since you wrote this? It's a relatively urgent problem because Awilley just told arbs to try it…[9] — JFG talk 19:14, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter! Was this user created by you as a test account? I noticed it from the response made here that seems to indicate that it is. I just wanted to ask you in order to be sure... Let me know. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:39, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (May 2019).
Hello everyone and welcome to the 6th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:
Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
|
Enjoy your summer, --DannyS712 (talk) 23:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
I tested the sandbox example, and it worked. Hopefully, it was not that difficult a task for you to put together. Again, thank you. Atsme Talk 📧 16:27, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
INSPIRE shows her at PCTS, the PCTS website has not been updated for a year, moreover, 'rising' is a term of art at Princeton meaning offered, accepted but NOT started yet, similar to a 'rising Senior' in high school who is really just a junior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.234.189.34 (talk) 15:42, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
PCTS are Principal Investigators, the other 90% of PDs are not at Princeton, Harvard shows her address as New York not New Jersey, PCTS PIs do not start until September 1st of each year. Inspire does not have a PI designation, and Junior implied faculty position — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.234.189.34 (talk) 17:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
A Princeton Principal Investigator is a person allowed to seek outside funding, a Post-Doc cannot hire staff and fund grad students as can a PI. Most people don't know that PCTS means PI, so until they do, both should be included for clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.234.189.34 (talk) 17:41, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Can you edit Special:AbuseFilter/614 to replace chung[ue]s with chung[uea]s? I caught this as getting through. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 23:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Optional_RfA_candidate_poll#Shut this down?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
For all your work with the edit filters and other Wikipedia stuff Abote2 (talk) 18:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC) |
Hello Galobtter!
You closed the TfD about Infobox Finnish municipality as NC. But it says:
Seems the result would be "Replace (subst:) and (then) delete"? Not?
I today outsourced all the data code from the infobox to Category:Data Finland municipality templates, which is inside Category:Data templates. Cf. also Category:Template:Metadata Population. Now infoboxes or other pages can retrieve the data stored in the data templates indepent from the infobox. The replacement could start soon.
Could you adjust your closure? TerraCyprus (talk) 13:28, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:Infobox Finnish municipality. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TerraCyprus (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Dude, can I just give the image to you and bestow upon you all ownership? I will revoke my ownership and write anything you want to make the image yours, and then YOU can put it up and I never worry about it again? Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MinimumMax (talk • contribs) 16:14, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter, thanks for pointing out mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Prefer-recent to me. However, I don't seem to be able to get it to work. For example, if I want to search for my posts on RSN, I might go to the noticeboard and enter sunrise prefer-recent:1,7
in the search box, but the results aren't actually ordered by date like I want. I'm guessing the problem is the suggestion in the instructions that it only works in highly refined search results
. I've also been looking at mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Explicit_sort_orders without success. Do you know anything more about this? Sunrise (talk) 00:17, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
I've been editing since 2004, but I think that the ability to create a named account is at the heart of most of what's wrong with Wikipedia, so I edit without one. Best, 73.92.193.211 (talk) 16:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
To all interested parties: Now that it has a proper shortcut, the current events noticeboard has now officially opened for discussion!
WP:CEN came about as an idea I explored through a request for comment that closed last March. Recent research has re-opened the debate on Wikipedia's role in a changing faster-paced internet. Questions of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:Recentism are still floating around. That being said, there are still plenty of articles to write and hopefully this noticeboard can positively contribute to that critical process.
Thank you for your participation in the RFC, and I hope to see you at WP:CEN soon! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter,
More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.
Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.
The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.
NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.
Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.
Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.
School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.
Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (June 2019).
Hello everyone and welcome to the 7th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:
Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
|
Having published 6 issues of this newsletter, I decided it was time to move it out from my user space. It is now located at Wikipedia:Scripts++. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 11:45, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
JLYK the watchlist-related userscript you recently added to WP:USL doesn't work when "Live updates" is enabled. I tried on Opera; probably won't work with other major browsers. Caught my attention 'cause I'd made a similar script some time back. —RainFall 10:12, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Galobtter! Is there a way to use Shortdesc helper on a Wiki where it isn't installed (e.g. by adding something to common.js)? I would like to use it on hr.wp to preview short descriptions from Wikidata (the Croatian Wikipedia doesn't have a local short descriptions policy) above an opened article. I would use it just to preview short descriptions, but not to edit them.
P.S. great gadget ;) --Hmxhmx 08:48, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Was really glad to see your comment there. If you have any potential candidates in mind, please let me know - I've been asking around about this for months now. Would be glad to provide a co-nom. Thanks, GABgab 19:41, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Just wanted to say Thank You for your help and participation regarding my DS alert proposal. Awilley & JFG helped get my alert up and running on my UTP. If you get a chance, check it out by trying to post a DS alert. Atsme Talk 📧 00:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
the user-page-image help in any manner, as to your's being an angry guy? We shall never know:( ~ Winged BladesGodric 15:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (July 2019). Hello everyone and welcome to the 8th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter: Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
|
|
Hope everyone is having a good winter (or summer, for those in the northern hemisphere). Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 02:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | ||
Just saw Template:Ds/aware and it's such a great improvement that I'm surprised no one had thought of it before! Thanks for the contribution! Wug·a·po·des 23:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC) |
Hi, thanks so much for developing this! As discussed at the WiR talk page, here are a few names of men who have come up in the bot results. It's not a large number, so won't be a big deal if the bot can't be refined to leave them out without leaving the drafts we want out too. There was actually one biography of a man I got interested in, and worked on the draft, so that ended up being a plus! RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:08, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Just wanted to re-ping you on whether you'd like to collaborate on an RFA nom. If so, just email me GABgab 14:27, 3 August 2019 (UTC) |
Hello Galobtter; this is in response to your decision to ban me from editing the Toby Young article. You said I could come here in the first instance, and so I'm doing so. I'd like you to think again about the ban and to consider the following points. I'm not very good at finding and linking to things on here, but I believe you'll find, if you are able to click back around the controversy over the relevant sentence, that what I say below is true.
1. All my edits to the relevant sentence were made with reference to Wikipedia's policy on maintaining a neutral point of view. I consistently tried to change the phrase 'misogynistic and homophobic Twitter posts' to something like 'Twitter posts that some/many have seen as misogynistic and homophobic.' My view has been that we don't need to take sides in the controversy - we simply need to inform readers of it. Readers can then make their own minds up. (Note that my aim has not been to insert language asserting that the tweets were definitely NOT homophonic and misogynistic.) 2. The record will show that I made repeated good faith attempts at compromise, from watering down my language (even to something like 'tweets that were widely seen as homophobic and misogynistic') to agreeing to keep that phrase as is but adding a reference to Young's defence of himself in Quillette right afterwards. All these attempts at compromise were rejected out of hand. 3. I several times referred the matter to various fora. On these occasions, several other Wikipedia users agreed with me that the phrase as stands could use some re-working to abide by the neutral point of view policy. In fact, it's my recollection that it was nearly always the majority of users who supported a change to the language, with a small number of insistent and active opponents (e.g. Fae) refusing to change it. At any rate, there was very clearly never any consensus against my view. 4. Through the course of the controversy I have always been unfailingly polite, never resorting to speculation about my interlocutors' motives. This has been in striking contrast to Fae, for example, who repeatedly accused me of bad faith, and made groundless insinuations about me. 5. It's true that I have made a good number of reverts and changes to the phrase in question, but that's also true of Fae. I may have stepped over a line in Wikipedia policy that I'm not familiar with, but if it was just my reverts that drew the ban, I fail to see why my reverts should draw a ban but Fae's shouldn't, especially considering that I was the one defending Wikipedia policies, and I had the support of the majority of those who commented on the controversy. 6. I have a pretty clean record on Wikipedia, mainly contributing sections of articles on Greek history. I think this is the first big controversy I've been involved in. Fae, by contrast, is apparently often involved in controversies of this sort - in fact I happened to notice that there is currently a complaint against Fae for what looks like highly partisan activism on the article about the Yaniv affair. 7. I'm also, as I noted above, not incredibly clued-up technically. I've struggled a little bit to put my case against Fae and a few other highly active and motivated partisan accounts, all of which seem much better connected with administrators. I also have a full-time job so can only spend time here once every few months. (This, by the way, has definitely undermined my faith in how serious Wikipedia takes political neutrality, and meant that I'm now less willing to spend any significant amount of time contributing.)
That's all for now. Thanks for your time, and I hope you'll reconsider the ban. I should add that I'm still very willing to work towards a reasonable compromise with respect to the phrase in question. Cleisthenes2 (talk) 06:03, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
I thought this was a sock account that someone has started in order to poke Eric. I'm dumbfounded to see that not only is this a legit account, but one that carries sysop permissions. Quite extraordinary. CassiantoTalk 07:51, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Galobtter. You really shouldn't be both the filer and an "uninvolved admin" at the Eric Corbett AE. Several admins have said so. I don't know if my ping about it worked, so I'm asking you again, here, to move your comment from the "uninvolved" section up to "Additional comments by editor filing complaint". It's both confusing and weird for you to shapeshift like that. Bishonen | talk 20:56, 11 August 2019 (UTC).
See User_talk:109.145.100.228 - TP history and edits demonstrates unwillingness to change their bad habits. Atsme Talk 📧 15:32, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
I'm pretty proud of my, ahem, wholesale stealing of your adminhighlighter caching . Enterprisey would be pretty disappointed in my js "programming" but hey, I learned how js objects worked today, so it all works out! Anyway, I wanted to drop by and express my appreciation for your scripts! Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 01:39, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
A request for comment is now open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. You are receiving this message because you were listed as a user who would like to be notified when the 2019 RfC begins. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
This is a neutral notice to all registered editors who have contributed to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film over the past year (Sept. 15, 2018-present) that a Request for Comment has been posted here. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:49, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
In August 2019, the Arbitration Committee resolved to open the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case as a suspended case due to workload considerations. The Committee is now un-suspending and commencing the case.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Updates associated with DannyS712's Global watchlist script:
sco.wiktionary
refers to a site that doesn't exist, it is considered valid, because sco
is a valid language code (sco.wikipedia
is a working site) and wiktionary
is a valid project.*.*.org
(like 'en.wikipedia.org' or 'meta.wikimedia.org'), deprecated in version 1.7.5, will be removed soon; all sites should now be saved as *.*
(like 'de.wikinews' or 'fr.wikisource')window.GlobalWatchlistSites
, deprecated in version version 1.11.11, will be removed soon; all settings should be stored in the window.GlobalWatchlistConfig
objectVersion 4.0 should be released in around a week. It will include the new features mentioned above, as well as removal of backwards compatibility for settings and sites.
I've sent this first message to users that participated in the discussion at m:Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Watchlists/Revive Crosswatch tool or otherwise shown interest in the script. To subscribe or unsubscribe from future updates, see the distribution list.
Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 16:03, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
News and updates associated with user scripts from the past two months (August and September, 2019).
Hello everyone and welcome to the 9th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter: Scripts Submit your new/improved script here
Sorry for falling behind a bit. Please let me know if I missed any new scripts. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 01:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
You are invited to comment at discussion currently taking place at Relationship of Articles for Creation and New Page Reviewer for pre-opinion on the combined functions of Articles for Creation (AfC) and New Page Review (NPR).
This mass message invitation is being sent to subscribed members of the work group at the project The future of NPP and AfC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
The workshop phase of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case will be extended to November 1, 2019. All interested editors are invited to submit comments and workshop proposals regarding and arising from the clarity and effectiveness of current remedies in the ARBPIA area. To unsubscribe from future case updates, please remove your name from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)