Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8 /Archive 9 /Archive 10 /Archive 11 /Archive 12 /Archive 13 /Archive 14 /Archive 15 /Archive 16

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

This is Swarm's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Swarm
Home —— Talk —— Email —— Contribs —— Awards —— Dash

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

@ This user can be reached by Wikipedia email.

~~~~ Swarm signs their posts and thinks you should too!

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

Talk This user used to think having too many talk page messages was a bad thing and now doesn't mind them.

This user does not understand mean people. Please be nice.

I had reached out to you three months ago here regarding an issue that I had been having regarding an IBAN. I was already considering then if it was time to end the IBAN and I wanted to wait to see what happened with the climate between the two of us. In the more than three months since I had reached out to you, I have studiously avoided the other editor and there appears to be no conflict regarding either of us.I thought that three months after the most recent incident was an appropriate point to consider ending the IBAN once and for all. Can you point me in any direction as to how to best start the process of ending the IBAN? Alansohn (talk) 22:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the time is right for an appeal to end the IBAN and just wanted to see if you had any guidance to offer. Thanks in advance. Alansohn (talk) 05:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I started a request at WP:AN to end the IBAN that you had extended about 18 months ago. I hope that I have demonstrated a good-faith effort to abide by the terms as you had laid them out and would appreciate any response that could help me better understand what I can do to best gain community consensus to end the IBAN once and for all. Any assistance in pointing me in the right direction would be most helpful. Alansohn (talk) 04:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have a feeling that TarzanBoy24 (talk · contribs) (formerly named JoshuaIsTheFalco (talk · contribs)} is subject to a topic ban, something to do with ethnicity. Where is that ban recorded, what are the details? I ask because recent edits by JoshuaGuest96 (talk · contribs) to Brownhills railway station, Pelsall railway station and South Staffordshire line are very much the kind of thing that JoshuaIsTheFalco was doing; and looking back through the contribs of JoshuaGuest96, I find this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:34, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:ER/UC, "indefinitely topic-banned from the area of racial demographics, broadly construed" ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 04:47, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors 2019 Annual Report Our 2019 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Overview of Backlog-reduction progress (a record low backlog!); Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Automated archiving of requests; Membership news and results of elections; Annual leaderboard; Plans for 2020. – Your Guild coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007 (talk) 19:53, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi. i was wondering if it is possible for you to adopt me, under the Wikipedia program to do? I could really use your help and input. I appreciate it. thanks!!! --Sm8900 (talk) 14:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do my editing restrictions include editing templates? Because I noticed a problem with template:uw-pblock where the template wording is awkward. Aasim 00:46, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user User:อัลเบิร์ is trying to make an edit war and I explain about the Wikipedia policy to him but I argue to block anyone who blames to edit in content that this user only thinks he is true. No one can edit on the page that the user was overseer. I need you to tell him to understand the rule and don't make another misunderstanding in Wikipedia rule, especially I need you to BLOCK him to resolve the problem that this user make.

Thank You Ministerboy (talk) 05:09, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me but are you, Ministerboy, the IP that are constantly making reverts on those pages? If you are, I believe that you are the one that are violating the rules and try to put your faults into the other's hand. The other user is asking for a discuss with you but you don't do it. Your version of edits cannot be accepted because it came later and the other user is not consenting with you. So you have to discuss first but you choose not to do it and instead, committed warring edit violation. อัลเบิร์ (talk) 05:11, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:อัลเบิร์ That another IP is my friend that sits behind me, I work for Wikipedia Thai football for 4 Year and I was work for Thai FA for 2 years until now. Why you delete the honor content of every Thai team and why you delete the history of every Thai team. All the information I find with my ability with my Wikipedia user friend for 4 year and you came here to delete and tell me to talk with you first. That was absurd and can't accept. STOP doing this action for the better way of finding the information from Wikipedia. Ministerboy (talk) 05:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ministerboy, don't you see the reasons I have written after making edits deleting the history and honors content and so on? They are just not necessary and made these articles a mess. It's simple. We will discuss further if you want, in your user's talk page. I have left a message there and we will talk there only. I have watched your talk page. There's not need to disturb others, including admins.อัลเบิร์ (talk) 05:28, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As info, I blocked all 3 users for 24 hours for edit warring. Didn't realize Ministerboy had left this same message to 6-7 admins. -- ferret (talk) 14:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have mostly stayed away from WP:AN/RFC for almost a year now, but I think I have sufficient relevant experience to resume closing RFCs again. I mean, there are 49 open requests right now, and it isn't going to get better.
What do you think? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:56, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page stalkers are welcomed to respond as well. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:58, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
• A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

• Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
• The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.

---

Hi, i just view the request reply by you on Event cordinator which stating that is for what on, not contacting people. But for sure i know that, but i really think you should consider this permission for me because it is so important for me hosting an event in my geographical community. (F5pillar 15:51, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I contact you from am official source and I wondered about how we can go about keeping the page updated with the right information. I believe the block on the page came about as many people have been updating it with the wrong info I am told. We were talking to someone about managing that for us but they cannot do this with the block. Can you advise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NobbiesHobbies (talk • contribs) 14:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hope all is well, Swarm. Haven't heard from you in months. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 16:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this person that you gave rollback privileges too reverted some parts of my talking points in the article 2020_coronavirus_outbreak_in_Washington_(state). I personally believe that he/she is misusing it since I was only talking about possibly adding a map to improve the article information-wise. If, however, I am in the wrong please tell me so. I really don't want to look like some uneducated guy who is complaining for no reason. Thank you. StickyKeys (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In 2018, you offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has now accepted that request for arbitration, and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas³ (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Respected sir, I applied for Pending changes reviewer. I kindly request you to kindly go through my application and promote me to Pending changes reviewer if you feel that I'm eligible. Thanking you Sri Harsha 191817 (talk) 10:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that I'm not eligible, please mention the reason sir so that I can improve myself to become Pending changes reviewer Sri Harsha 191817 (talk) 10:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 21:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2019. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2020, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. Election results: There was little changeover in the roster of Guild Coordinators, with Miniapolis stepping down with distinction as a coordinator emeritus while Jonesey95 returned as lead coordinator. The next election is scheduled for June 2020 and all Wikipedians in good standing may participate. January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work, completing 215 copy edits including 56 articles from the Requests page and 116 backlog articles from the target months of June to August 2019. At the conclusion of the drive there was a record low of 323 articles in the copy editing backlog. Of the 27 editors who signed up for the drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. February Blitz: Of the 15 editors who signed up for this one-week blitz, 13 completed at least one copy edit. A total of 32 articles were copy edited, evenly split between the twin goals of requests and the oldest articles from the copy-editing backlog. Full results are here. March Drive: Currently underway, this event is targeting requests and backlog articles from September to November 2019. As of 18 March, the backlog stands at a record low of 253 articles and is expected to drop further as the drive progresses. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Help set a new record and sign up now! Progress report: As of 18 March, GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests in 2020 and there was a net reduction of 385 articles from the copy-editing backlog – a 60% decrease from the beginning of the year. Well done and thank you everyone! Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you recently denied my request for Rollback. I believe you were misguided by the bot. at the time I made the request, my account was 1 edit away from the minimum threshold. since the bot left that comment, I have edited more, and that comment is now incorrect. If you wouldn't mind, I would love if you reviewed my request again, as I think I am fit for the permission. if your opinion still stands, that is also fine, I will accept it and I will try and get more experience and resubmit. thanks for considering. :) Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 21:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Scaledish: On the contrary, I'm not worried about something like being 1 edit below the edit count requirement, that's just silly. We simply don't grant extended positions of trust to brand new users. Edit count is irrelevant, in fact, oftentimes it's a red flag if a brand new user seems to be racking up edits too fast (not saying that applies in your case, just saying). We don't "rubber stamp" requests based on edit count. It takes time to fully understand the many areas rules, practices and norm's of Wikipedia. There's no sugarcoating it, it's a massive, confusing project. It's unrealistic to expect a new user to be a basically-competent editor within their first few months, much less to start granting them special positions of trust within the community. Also, on top of that, trust has to be earned. I don't mean anything crazy by that. Just that we need to be able to review your editing history and see that you're a trustworthy, competent, good faith editor who has not and will not cause any problems. You have to have sufficiently establish yourself as such before we can possibly even begin to do that. Anyone can game the system by racking up an edit count. We look at the bigger picture. Hope you understand that it's nothing personal. I'd be happy to reconsider a request from you in the future. If you want my advice, just give it another couple of months and focus more on simply contributing to and learning the ins and outs of Wikipedia. That should be your priority as a new user. Best, ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 20:59, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

• There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

• The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

---

I didn't think it belonged at the other page so I decided to just share the thought here: the 2-4% death rate is of course not evenly distributed: in crowded habitations and facilities it raises, it also does in the elderly and fragile population; lastly, many do need medical assistance to survive (even some relatively young and healthy people, some immunosuppressants are also being evaluated because part of the damage is done by the overwhelming immune response). Meaning that the toll also raises dramatically whenever medical supplies and services can't cope, which is what most measures are attempting to mitigate (by slowing down transmission as possible instead of ending up selecting who to treat and who must die). There also are concerns about potentially more deadly future mutations (moreover we can't even vaccinate yet). My apologies if I'm stating the obvious, —PaleoNeonate – 22:20, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you please remove me from New page reviewers, that you originally granted here. I have become tired of getting grief and even abuse over it, but the final straw is not being backed by an administrator.[1].

Thanks. --John B123 (talk) 17:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @John B123: Damn, I'm sorry to see you've been discouraged so quickly. Given the dismal state of the NPR backlog, this is truly unfortunate. Still, I understand completely, maintaining your sanity is more important. I'll go ahead and remove the flag, and note in the log that it should be regranted without prejudice should you ever want that (of course you can come directly to me as well). Thanks for all the work you did put in during the past month. I'm extremely concerned by the abusive edit you received and will be issuing the user a formal warning. Regards, ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 19:45, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your understanding. Best Wishes. --John B123 (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at this sort of agressive behaviour on Ivan Gundulić [2], calling out another respected senior admin [3] + calling another senior admin "a clown"[4]. and general slurs and lack of WP:Civility [5] [6]. Please note that this is an older editor, who has previously waged a full crusade over the same issue, some 5 years ago and than again ( WP:BATTLEGROUND). Naturally, there is no consens for the version which is pushed by the same user, which can be seen from the TP. Thank you kindly, Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 00:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]