Click here to leave a new message, LINK to any article you want me to look at

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by ‎Lowercase sigmabot III.

In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (90% probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives, the meaning of life is not to be found there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Ali_Kasi

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

Tamzin

Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

• Ragesoss
• TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

• The WMF is working on making it possible for administrators to edit MediaWiki configuration directly. This is similar to previous work on Special:EditGrowthConfig. A technical RfC is running until November 08, where you can provide feedback.
• There is a proposed plan for re-enabling the Graph Extension. Feedback on this proposal is requested.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
• Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
• Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
• Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
• Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
• Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
• An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous

• The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

Administrator changes

• Ganesha811
• JPxG

• Ajpolino
• Lourdes
• Mairi
• RockMFR
• Somno
• WilyD

Beeblebrox → Just Step Sideways

CheckUser changes

• Beeblebrox
• Opabinia regalis

Oversight changes

• Beeblebrox
• Opabinia regalis

Guideline and policy news

• Following a talk page discussion, the Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
• The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
• Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes

Clovermoss

Dennis Brown

• Julia W
• Marasmusine
• PBS

CheckUser changes

• Aoidh
• HJ Mitchell
• Sdrqaz
• Spicy
• ToBeFree
• Vanamonde93
• Z1720

Maxim

• Enterprisey
• Izno
• SilkTork

Oversighter changes

• Aoidh
• Firefly
• Sdrqaz
• ToBeFree
• Z1720

Maxim

• Enterprisey
• Izno
• SilkTork

Arbitration

• Following the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Cabayi, Firefly, HJ Mitchell, Maxim, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720.
• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
• The arbitration case Industrial agriculture has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,000 unreviewed articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

Thanks, security upgraded. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Saw that you put an orphan tag and self published tag on the page. I'm not a member of the government, so I don't think the self published tag is appropriate, but agree that it lacks sources. If you read the talk page, you'll get a better sense of how long it may be until more sources are generated. I' interested in improving the page, but not sure what can be done. This is a very important operation as it relates to the law enforcement community as it will result in 100s of arrests, but it's still very early.eximo (talk) 08:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jiwhit01: thanks for reaching out. Writing a completely new article is one of the most challenging things in all of Wikipedia. It is also a process of continual improvement, so stick with it.

Neither of those tags is a problem; more like guidance for editors where the article needs work. The "self published tag" was removed (I don't recall whether it was by you), and I replaced it with a "single source". That can obviously be removed when additional sources are added.

The "Orphan" tag simply means that no other articles have links to this one. Wikipedia articles don't stand alone; they link together. So that can't be remedied on this article; it's a matter of identifying other articles that should mention this operation, and updating them to link to it. Once that is done, this tag can be removed, too.

One final comment: it is not necessary to put a ref on every line of sections like "Participating groups...". It is a matter of editor's choice. To make it simpler, and still be clear where the source is, one easy way is just to add a lead sentence along the lines of:

The following organizations are involved in the operation:[ref goes here]

Wikipedia is a collaborative venture, so please feel free to reach out with any questions if I can help.--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:11, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gronk Oz:Thanks for the notes and explanation that helps. What to cite and what not to cite is a balance that I personally am working on, but I appreciate the guidance. I'm working an overall project to publish all of the HSI and FBI international operations, but I think some sort of template should be developed for them; there is a common set of information that any reader should/would want to know about an operation. Any interest or do you know who would be interested? eximo (talk) 18:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jiwhit01: that sounds like a very worthwhile exercise. There are certainly groups of editors who have a particular interest, skills, and renounces in areas like this. My first thought was to look for a WikiProject that covered this area, and a good candidate seems to be Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Government. Start by describing your proposal and your work to date on the Talk page, and ask for expressions of interest. If you use a Watchlist, you can add that Talk page to it so you catch the latest. And it is good to "join the project" by adding yourself to the list. I don't know how active that project is, but it is a good place to start and meet other editors with an interest in the topic. If that doesn't pan out, you can use the WikiProjects search box near the top of Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory to find a suitable group. It's not my area of expertise: I am not American, and I don't have much interest in any government (particularly what, to me, is a foreign government). I am happy to advise and help where I can in a general way, but you might find more specific help from the folks in a suitable WikiProject. --Gronk Oz (talk) 23:53, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just noticed that there is also Wikipedia:WikiProject FBI, but it does not appear to be active - it only has one current member. By all means contact them via the WikiProject's Talk page, but I think the broader US Government group might be more help to you. (I could be wrong there, of course - I often am!)--Gronk Oz (talk) 23:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MOS:LAYOUTWORKS does not say to add "List of" to its recommended headings of "Works" or "Publications". Skyerise (talk) 11:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Skyerise: - Okay, I will go along with that. I guess I got misled because that section of the MoS is named "Lists of works".--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Generally, it is a bad idea to go on projects making changes which are only preferred by the MOS. It's a general principle that the original authors of the article choose the referencing style which includes the choice of heading in the end matter. See WP:REFVAR: "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style, merely on the grounds of personal preference or to make it match other articles, without first seeking consensus for the change." Technically, you should be going to the talk page of each article first and asking whether there are any objections to the change and waiting for responses before making the change. Skyerise (talk) 11:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Skyerise: - Sorry if I am being thick, but I am not clear what you are referring to; you seem to be conflating two different things. I changed the heading "Bibliography" in line with the MoS statement that "Bibliography" is discouraged because it is not clear... So I boldly fixed the problem, as I normally do with problems I see on any article - not all changes need to go to the Talk page first. I accept that it should have been "Publications" without the "List of...". I already apologized for that. If you think there is a reason to go back to the other way, then you're welcome to change it back, or to make the case on the Talk page.

However, I have not changed the citation style of any articles. I often fill in bare URLs, but as it says in the same WP:REFVAR that you refer to above: ...citations in an article consist of bare URLs, or otherwise fail to provide needed bibliographic data – such as the name of the source, the title of the article or web page consulted, the author (if known), the publication date (if known), and the page numbers (where relevant) – then that would not count as a "consistent citation style" and can be changed freely to insert such data. But I have not even done that lately. So I am not clear just what you are referring to, nor what you would like me to do about it.--Gronk Oz (talk) 12:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm just saying that most of the MOS is optional, and that while improving things in articles that you just happen to be editing isn't a problem, many "projects" that editors make up are about things which the MOS does not actually dictate. So going about seeking out "problems" for matters which fall under WP:IAR is frequently discouraged - just as much or more so than using the heading "Bibliography" is discouraged. Two wrongs don't make a right. Skyerise (talk) 12:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Skyerise: - it seems we have slightly different interpretations. I try to take the MoS as it is described in its own header: It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. To me, that reads that it is the preferred, and broadly accepted, style guide. Of course, no such guidelines can cover all situations, but my interpretation is that the MoS should prevail unless there is a reason otherwise. This is how articles across Wikipedia aim to have a consistent presentation for readers, rather than each editor making up their own. But that's me.--Gronk Oz (talk) 12:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, but they are only guidelines, which are allowed to be intentionally ignored; not policies, which may be enforced. Therefore they are subject to an implied consensus of previous editors, which is why it is polite to ask first on the talk page and wait a few days before making the change. It's possible that the former editors of the article used a particular heading on purpose... WP:IAR (ignore all rules) is, some think paradoxically, itself a policy rather than a guideline. Skyerise (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Administrator changes

• Red-tailed hawk
• Robertsky

• Ameliorate!
• Ancheta Wis
• Anthony Bradbury (deceased)
• Cobi
• Ev
• Moondyne
• Worm That Turned

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

• Enterprisey
• Izno

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with ((Unreferenced)). You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!