qedk

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Looks like a side effect of the recent 1050 changes were that reverts made by Drmies are no longer themselves revertable by non-confirmed users. Any ideas? I figure we may want to fix that, although on the other hand this might not be the worst idea. Enterprisey (talk!) 00:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Enterprisey: Good catch! I added a simple regex so system undos (non-confirmed cannot use rollback) will still go through. If you feel it was some use, feel free to restore. --qedk (t 愛 c) 05:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

QEDKbot is currently mass tagging category redirects (for example, Category:Argentines) as empty, which they should be. Regardless of whether this was intentional or merely a side effect, please make it stop, as these redirects now flood the maintenance category. Glades12 (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Glades12: That is the bot's function, it sorts categories with no apparent use into the maintanence category (that I made). You can find the BRFA and related discussion on the userpage. :) --qedk (t 愛 c) 13:15, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have misunderstood me. This is not about actual, non-redirecting categories; it is about category redirects. Template:Category redirect specifically states that they are meant to be empty, and they should under no circumstance be deleted for that reason alone. Glades12 (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Glades12: I am aware they are supposed to be empty, hence the "with no backlinks", basically weeding out redirects that serve no usage. They can deleted with G6, hence the patrolling category. --qedk (t 愛 c) 13:23, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consider me an objector to that practice. Glades12 (talk) 13:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that's understandable, I was just clarifying that the bot is not malfunctioning but functioning under its mandate. --qedk (t 愛 c) 13:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't think of a better section title, so I went with this exaggerated one. Sorry for that. Glades12 (talk) 13:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No pressure! Good day. :) --qedk (t 愛 c) 13:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As requested on IRC Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 15:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well-received. --qedk (t 愛 c) 15:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, QEDK. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, Chris troutman. --qedk (t 愛 c) 20:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Death of George Floyd discussion was about a specific proposal, what does it mean that it is about ? now? Thanks. —DIYeditor (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DIYeditor: I reverted myself in a minute, probably saw it betweent that. --qedk (t 愛 c) 15:20, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The bot changed the template on the article to ?. I reverted it, then reverted myself, because I thought you were accomplishing something by doing it. —DIYeditor (talk) 15:21, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. Facepalm --qedk (t 愛 c) 15:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For your help finally modernizing the Main page for mobile users across the world everywhere. This page has been seeing around 3 million hits a day on mobile web and thanks to your work pushing for the technical change these millions of users can finally enjoy the content that has been deprived of them for more than 8 years. May this be the start of many changes in the mobile-sphere! Jdlrobson (talk) 04:27, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdlrobson: Thank you for all the work you put in. --qedk (t 愛 c) 09:17, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/QEDKbot 2 has been approved. Happy editing! --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 06:12, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TSD, that was quick. :) --qedk (t 愛 c) 06:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
• The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

• A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

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) 18:33, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, QEDK,

Another thing about your bot. It needs to skip dated maintenance categories that have just been created but have not been used yet. Examples are Category:Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files as of 2 June 2020 or Category:Proposed deletion as of 3 June 2020. These dated categories do not show up on Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories so that bot has found a way to skip them.

For me, it would be ideal if the bot tagged maintenance categories that are empty AFTER their date because then they would be eligible for deletion as unused categories. But before the date, they could still be used.

Thanks again for your bot! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: The issue is that these categories don't use any standard templates to signify that it can be empty (such as ((Pec))) which is not a good way to create these categories. If it's created and not meant to be deleted, it should possibly be signified, I'll hack a fix ofc but this is just an idea. Also another note, the bot now informs category creators on tagging. --qedk (t 愛 c) 19:28, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, QEDK, I am concerned with all of the empty WikiProject cats that QEDK bot tagged over the last week; many of these are part of established article sorting structures (the mainy thousands in the "by importance" and "by quality" category families being the most important); these are of course critical to WikiProject functionality even though they may be empty part or most of the time, and until now, WikiProjects have not needed to put the ((empty cat)) template on any of them to prevent deletion. Any way that you could please roll back these tags by the bot before these cats are deleted and many, many WikiProject problems ensue? I am also VERY concerned that there is not any page that logs the pages to which the bot applies speedy tags, similar to User:UnitedStatesian/CSD log that I use for such tracking and to other pages used by many users (including you!), and am concerned that the bot is not notifying the creator of each category it tags. (pinging @Liz: so these are on her radar screen too), UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: I'll set up a fix but again, you have to understand none of these categories have any proper documentation, they don't even need the ((empty cat)) template, if the use the word WikiProject or use the classbar, it ignores them too, these were categories that were mass-produced without there being a need for them. I can get you a list of edits made but there's no way to revert automatically without using specific tools. --qedk (t 愛 c) 06:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed Code is fixed, I'll try to revert most of it manually. I had deployed the notification code (it only recently passed the BRFA for that and it's not allowed to make edits in User talk: namespace otherwise), so it should behave normally from the next run, somehow the deployment did not stick. --qedk (t 愛 c) 06:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How about the logging of the bot's speedy tags, do you plan to implement that? And your manual reverts are quite urgent because the categories the bot tagged seven days ago are now being deleted. UnitedStatesian (talk) 06:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: I plan to do it soon, yes but it's not being logged yet, a wikilinked log of all the pages edited is available but it got wiped when I fixed the bot last time. I've now manually reverted all bad deletion tags (importance/quality related) I've come across. --qedk (t 愛 c) 09:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here - the bot is routinely adding a speedy delete template to a category that does not meet criteria for speedy delete. Kingsif (talk) 16:56, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsif: I've fixed it for you, redirects don't work like that in the Category namespace, so the bot was doing fine, yeah. --qedk (t 愛 c) 16:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would it be possible to have QEDKbot avoid tagging daily maintenance categories like Category:Replaceable non-free use to be decided after 10 June 2020? These categories are all created with the ((Maintenance category autotag)) template, so they will automatically be up for speedy deletion under G6 once they are emptied. ƏXPLICIT 23:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit: Thanks for letting me know, Explicit, this has been fixed in a later update, I'm not sure how many categories were affected but I've reverted the ones (and this one, now) I've come across. --qedk (t 愛 c) 05:46, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi QEDK. I noticed your bot is nominating featured topics categories for C1 (e.g. 1). If I'm not mistaken, featured topics categories are exempt from C1. -FASTILY 06:55, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fastily:  Doing... On a fix. --qedk (t 愛 c) 07:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fastily:  Fixed --qedk (t 愛 c) 07:07, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is still happening, [1].--十八 03:16, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Juhachi: Fixed now, it was a goddamn stupid typo in a regex. --qedk (t 愛 c) 20:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

qedk, I have a question. Is it against the rules of Wikipedia for a user to monopolize and article and make too many edits? See: [2]. What do you think? Israell (talk) 21:43, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to report user BrotherTimothy. See: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8].

All those reverts made today with no discussion on Talk page. Besides, he's decided to monopolize the article. He’s reduced Jackson’s awards to 200 something from over 800 with no prior discussion. I think he should be blocked. Israell (talk) 23:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Israell: I dropped a message on their talk page, let's see. --qedk (t 愛 c) 20:36, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On another note: [9]. User Banananasas has just accused me of edit-warring on the Charles Thomson page when I did not edit that page since Dec. 17th of last year... If that's not baiting, I'd love to know what that is. I am pinging Woody here since he did alert Banananasas a few times (about edit-warring and the General Sanctions on Michael Jackson articles). Israell (talk) 00:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, Charles Thomson (journalist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is another article that needs to be under the Jackson sanctions. If these editors keep edit warring across the Jackson articles, I endorse a block for all of them. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:14, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've sanctioned Banananasas for 6 months and warned TruthGuardians, protecting the articles won't do much at this point, so I've let it be. As for what you can do, @Flyer22 Frozen, Israell, and Woody: is to add the ((MJ sanctions)) template to talk pages of articles related to the topic area, while it's not what an awareness notice counts as, it lets editors know they are liable to be sanctioned (you can also inform editors using ((subst:Gs/alert|topic=mj))). Thanks for letting me know about this disruption asap. Best, qedk (t 愛 c) 08:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello QEDK,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

• A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
• Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
• A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
• Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

I want to know how long the ban is? Arsi786 (talk) 21:29, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Arsi786: It's indefinite, and can only be appealed to the community. See WP:UNBAN - I recommend you wait for a minimum of 6 months with no infractions before appealing. --qedk (t 愛 c) 20:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so for six months avoid making such edits but does this mean I can revert vandalism on topics related to these stuff or no? and after six months do I go back to the administrator page noticeboard and then make the appeal or is it in another page I have to go? Arsi786 (talk) 21:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Arsi786: All the exceptions are listed in WP:BANEX, I recommend you do not tread down the path of reverting "maybe" vandalism edits and just edit a different topic area, you can appeal your ban at either WP:AN or WP:ANI. Finally note that the ban is indefinite, 6 months is just a general appealable time period. --qedk (t 愛 c) 20:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you for the help I also made a repeal at ANI Arsi786 (talk) 22:22, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you could please help me regarding this matter.

User: 186.34.188.183 has been making several disruptive edits even after being warned several times by various users.

• In Bustamante Park: He renamed the link to the article of Plaza Baquedano with "Plaza Dignidad"[10]. "Plaza Dignidad" was a name used refer to Plaza Baquedano by some protestors during the 2019–2020 Chilean protests, the name "Plaza Dignidad" is in no way official.

• In Lawrence Vigouroux: When refering to the citizenship of said person he replaced "English-born Chilean" with "British"[11]. In his edit summary he stated that the reason for this was that "British. He got a Chilean citizenship through his father, who has Chilean descent. Chile it's known to give citizenship to good footballers". In which way is that relevant?, even if he acquired citizenship just because "he is a good footballer" does that make him less of a Chilean?.

• In Afro-Chileans: He removed naturalized people from the list of notable Afro-Chileans[12][13][14], stating in his edit summary the following:"People who only hold Chilean citizenship on paper because they were "bought" in adulthood by the Chilean ANFP (Chilean football federation) in complicity with the Chilean government". I created a section on the talk page of said article with the goal of discussing this, but he ignored it.

Best regards, AtomsRavelAz (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AtomsRavelAz: I blocked them for WP:POV-pushing. Let me know if there's anything else to do! --qedk (t 愛 c) 21:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. If he continues with this sort of behaviour after the period of 72 hours should I report him in an specific place like Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring or Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents? or should I just let you know?. Best regards, AtomsRavelAz (talk) 21:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AtomsRavelAz: You can do either. :) (although WP:AIV might be better suited) --qedk (t 愛 c) 05:44, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]